Come on, now. It’s not merely because “they’re really rich.” We’ve gone over this multiple times, in this thread. It’s also - and more so - because they get massive, public subsidies to build their ballparks, which further enriches them, and favorable legal treatment allowing them to maintain a monopoly that’s (arguably) in the public’s interest, also further enriching them. The players are not the direct or primary beneficiaries of this special treatment. So now, we the public expect the owners to step up and act in the public’s interest, to preserve if not save the game, even if they might need to lose a relatively small amount of $ in the short term.That is exactly correct, but many SOSHers seem to believe the owners should be willing, because they're really rich, to absorb 100% of any downside.