The dispute between MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred and Phillies Star Bryce Harper It was reported that the MVP had “nose” with the commissioner and told him that he could “get [expletive] Come out of our club” If he is going to talk about implementing the salary cap (according to ESPN’s Jeff Passan). Manfred held his annual meeting with Phillies players at Citizens Bank Park.
Passan and Jon Heyman and Joel Sherman of the New York Post differed in the confrontation. Passan wrote that Harper sat quietly for most of the sessions, for more than an hour, and then tensions boiled, he contacted the commissioner. By contrast, Heyman and Sherman wrote that his comments were “about five minutes,” Manfred’s opening remarks. Regardless of some of the differences, it is obvious that although Manfred never mentions the salary cap directly, Harper believes it is implied. He felt strong enough to claim that the players were “not afraid to lose 162 games” in the battle with the hats (every Passa). He also questioned what Manfred once did to “benefit the players” (Per Heyman and Sherman). Despite Harper’s comments, Manfred continued to end the meeting, in Passa’s words, “the importance of business threats to Major League Baseball and the way the game grows.”
Afterward, Harper’s teammates Nick Castellanos Describing ESPN’s ordeal as strong and enthusiastic, he seems to confirm that it is two-way. “Specialist [was] To Bryce and Bryce [was] Return it to the Commissioner.” He explained.
Afterward, Manfred declined to comment on ESPN or the New York Post, and Harper later told reporters (including Bob Cooney of NBC Sports Philadelphia): “You guys saw what was in the article. But I don’t know what happened, how I felt or anything like that… I just wanted to worry about baseball… Everyone saw the words and everything that happened. I don’t want to say anything.”
Harper continues: “I’ve talked about labor, and I did it somehow I don’t think I need to talk to the media about it…I’ve been speaking out, just that there’s no way people can see it.”
However, yesterday, Manfred spoke at Wrigley Stadium, announcing the Cubs will host the 2027 All-Star Game, and he finally made a dispute with Harper, claiming: “It’s a special way for a person to express himself, and I don’t think you need to do more from it” (Patrick Mooney’s track and field).
Maybe yes. However, it is undeniable that downplaying the dispute with one of the most influential players in the league is not in Manfred’s best interest. It is also his best interest to believe that this is an isolated incident that “individual” expresses himself, rather than reflecting the feelings of players from all 30 teams.
With the current collective bargaining agreement between Major League Baseball and MLBPA due on December 1, 2026, it is no secret that several owners are interested in establishing a salary cap. Indeed, according to ESPN’s Jorge Castillo, MLBPA believes Manfred pushes hats at his club meeting this year, even if he doesn’t use those exact words. Not surprisingly, the Players Association strongly opposes the hat, believing it is primarily to artificially suppress players’ salaries rather than increasing equality around the league or helping to develop the game.
MLBPA executive director speaks to reporters ahead of last month’s All-Star Game Tony Clark Describe the salary cap as “institutionalized collusion” (each Castillo). “Hats are not about developing games.” He said. “The cap is about the value and profit of the franchise. That’s what the hat means.”
More importantly, although Manfred may not be willing to say “salary cap,” he has mentioned the possibility of lockdown. Clark said back in March that he expected to stop working after the 2026 season, with many leagues surrounded by fears that the controversial CBA negotiations could fall into the 2027 campaign. It’s not difficult to guess what the sticky points in those negotiations might be.
Castellanos told Trendy Hannah Keyser and Zach Crizer (who had his first “heavy” meeting between Manfred and the Phillies, where the commissioner “very eloquently” the idea of salary cap. He later told ESPN: “Rob seems to be in a very urgent place because of how important it is to limit this salary to the term “salary” before our collective bargaining agreement [expiring]. ”
Manfred started annual meetings with players from each team three years ago after lasting most of the 2021-22 offseason and postponed the start of the 2022 game. One of the reasons for these meetings? He wants to communicate directly with the players rather than conveying the message through MLBPA. He said at the recent investor event held by the Brave: “The strategy is to attract players directly. I don’t think the union’s leadership is eager to lead the path of change. So we need to provide energy to the workforce to familiarize them with or support ideas that system changes may be beneficial to everyone” (Evan Drellich according to athleticism).
One way to read these comments? Manfred knows that MLBPA is firmly against salary caps. Of course, he seems to want to push the union members against the union leadership, which in Clark’s words would be: “Increase the profits and franchise value of the owner while prohibiting the club from competing perfectly to place the best products to fans and limit the compensation, guarantees and flexibility of players” (per drellich).
If Harper’s reaction shows any signs, then Manfred may not have been as successful as he hoped, even if he sometimes accompanied his respected former players to the club meetings of the Commissioner Ambassador Program (CAP). But at least for the time being, the Commissioner insists that this is not that serious: “I think it’s much more to make with it. (Andrew Seligman of the Associated Press).
Photos in the picture by Bill Streicher, Imagn.
