Rozner: There will be baseball, but not before more ugly MLB talks

There will be baseball in 2020.

Yes, right here in North America. There will be baseball, assuming local governments allow such behavior.

It won't be canceled as a result of a bargaining bloodbath. Soon enough, the owners and players will start negotiating in reasonably good faith.

It sounds bad at the moment, with opening salvos fired and rhetoric louder by the day. Seen it a hundred times before. To borrow from George Costanza, "I am ne-go-ti-ating."

Unfortunately for the players, on one side is baseball commissioner Rob Manfred, who's like the Denzel Washington - think "Philadelphia" - of labor lawyers, while players union boss Tony Clark is in over his head and acting more like "My Cousin Vinny" when he first walked into a courtroom.

Thus, the "agreement" from a few months back and the players' current claim that the owners are violating the "spirit" of said bargain.

The sides agreed on prorated salaries for 2020 months before anyone knew the games would be played without fans, and the owners left open the possibility of revisiting paychecks.

Now the owners say they must have givebacks or not bother playing the games without a gate.

Call it a fight between billionaires and millionaires if that makes you feel better, or even call out the players for being greedy as did the governor of Illinois.

That is too laughably simplistic and cynical even for politicians trying to score cheap points. The players are looking out for themselves, just as the governor always did when buying mansions or striking business deals.

These are businessmen on both sides and they are seeking a middle ground, even as some of the biggest agents argue for their highest-paid players.

The owners began with a 50-50 revenue-sharing plan that they knew would never fly. Manfred understood the union could not accept that and would never accept that.

But by starting with the impossible, it gave the owners a chance to come back with something that sounds more palatable, also believing the players have to be reasonable about movement considering the present circumstances.

Players can't think that they will get full, prorated pay when there are no tickets sold, no hot dogs eaten and no beer consumed at the ballparks.

So the owners' next proposal was a sliding scale on which the lowest-paid players would make the most of their prorated dollars, while the most expensive players would take the biggest haircut.

Thus, the screaming by high-profile agents and very expensive players.

This is not a new tactic, a divide-and-conquer strategy from ownership to pit the superrich players against the bottom of the roster making the minimum. It goes back decades.

The players will now come back and start fighting over the numbers or counter with something entirely different - like a longer season, expanded playoffs or deferred money - as the two sides try to find reason in an unreasonable situation.

What's not going to happen is the owners opening up their books and showing the players precisely what the revenues have been over the last few years. They have never done it and aren't about to be honest now as they prepare for the upcoming CBA talks.

Baseball owners have historically been dishonest about revenues and superb at hiding profits or shifting them to another pocket, out of view of the players union.

What's also not going to happen is the players agreeing to some sort of revenue-sharing program, not without seeing the books and probably not even if they did, especially with Clark needing to act and talk tough if he wants to keep his job.

Marvin Miller wouldn't just spin in his grave if he heard such a conversation. He's liable to rise and take someone back with him after all he did to prevent it.

It's bad enough that the players have buckled on a salary tax that now acts like a salary cap, for which the players and their agents frequently blame the owners, crying collusion during any winter in which free agents struggle.

During winters when free agents do well, you don't hear a word about it.

Go figure.

Insert here the frequent qualifier that I am a players' guy, a capitalist in favor of them earning whatever they can in a free-market system, just as can a movie star, a singer, a billionaire businessman turned governor or a tennis star like Roger Federer, who earned $100 million just in endorsements last year.

Good for him.

In any case, these aren't greedy players and these aren't horrible owners trying to steal from the poor. These are businessmen and this is a negotiation, albeit unlike all others before considering the bizarre environment, which is why the players must be reasonable or lose any measure of public support.

Everyone wants baseball this summer. You want it. The players want it. The owners want it. The TV networks really want it. And some of us desperately need it.

It's going to happen, but there will be more ugliness before the two sides come to terms. That's what baseball negotiations look like. You just don't remember because there's been labor peace since 1995.

We need no ghost from the grave to tell us what happens next.

So relax. It will happen. In the meantime, try that cricket series on Netflix. And if you figure out how to keep score, please let me know.