|
|
Post by Bill Harper (Tigers) on Jan 3, 2013 12:55:54 GMT -5
Ok, the owner wanted to hurt himself by adding the additional amount. Shame on him that he should have done it your way and saved a million. With the way the rules have been circumvented this is the last thing we should be concerned about. I'd be more concerned with offers of 10 years that have no opportunity to be fulfilled. That's the rule I hope is changed. That has caused more damage than this issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakland Athletics (Brad Gray) on Jan 7, 2013 15:24:49 GMT -5
Athletics - 8 yr/136M- $17M/YR
|
|
|
|
Post by fperric (Royals) on Jan 7, 2013 21:22:38 GMT -5
i'm with you bill. the way i read it was and still is, once u increase yrs, the amount of increase is completely up to the bidder. otherwise, to me, it's just playing semantics with the letter of the rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thomas (Blue Jays) on Jan 10, 2013 12:48:28 GMT -5
8 years 160 million (20/yr)
|
|
|
|
Post by Zona D-backs on Jan 23, 2013 16:53:02 GMT -5
Zona 10yr $200m ($20m/yr)
|
|
|
|
Post by Zona D-backs on Feb 7, 2013 8:16:12 GMT -5
bidding closed
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Dreyer (Rangers) on Feb 7, 2013 22:47:57 GMT -5
The bid was legal. He increased the years from 7 to 8. He also decided to increase the amount. He didn't have to do that, but chose to. Sorry I am a little late on the ruling. Just trying to catch up.
|
|
