Ever since the investigation into the Los Angeles Dodgers’ owner became public, scrutiny surrounding the franchise’s financial prowess has only grown. It has also added another layer to MLB’s ongoing debate over the widening payroll gap between teams. But while the Dodgers remain the focal point of the discussion, Bruce Meyer continues to focus on the other end of that equation.

“Teams that say, ‘We can’t compete with the Dodgers,’ well, they’re not even trying, right?” he questioned. “And again, we’re saying, look at the Milwaukee Brewers. There’s no reason why any team, any small market team, can’t do what the Brewers have done.”

The Dodgers have a payroll of approximately over $400 million in 2026. The Brewers, on the other hand, have a payroll of somewhere around $125 million. Milwaukee is leading the NL Central, and they are also the No. 1 seed for the postseason. Meanwhile, the Dodgers are leading the NL West and are right behind the Brewers in playoff contention. That’s why MLBPA’s interim executive director said that the problem isn’t that the high-revenue teams are spending aggressively. He argued on a recent Foul Territory podcast that it’s the other way around. 

“If the owner chooses not to spend to make the team better, that increases payroll disparity in part because of their decision,” he added.

According to the current rules, MLB has a soft cap threshold of $244 million for the teams. They have to pay around 20% to 60% based on how much they are spending above that limit and whether they are repeat offenders. Franchises like the Dodgers or the New York Mets pay penalties for crossing the threshold, and Meyer stated that half of that money goes to the small market teams. 

But he highlighted that the league considers them as disparities, which in turn makes it look bigger than the actual disparity. Meyer has continued to argue that MLB’s proposed salary cap of $245.3 million and salary floor of $171.2 million only allows the owners to spend less than they actually can. 

“It’s really an excuse,” the executive director had said earlier in June. “And that’s one of the reasons why they want the salary cap so badly. Because the salary cap gives teams the ultimate excuse not to compete.”

He reiterated that he has the financial reports that suggest there are teams who can afford to spend, but they are simply unwilling to make the team better. Meyer, however, said that he can’t disclose such information to the media or the fans, but he did acknowledge that spending a lot of money doesn’t necessarily guarantee success. The Mets, who have already been eliminated from the playoffs despite an approximately $350 million payroll, are a prime example of that. 

While Bruce Meyer believes that the problem lies with how teams choose to spend, former MLB general manager Jim Bowden has a different take on closing the payroll gap. 

Jim Bowden breaks down MLB’s proposal

The ex-GM believes that MLB’s proposed system can close the gap by forcing movement at both ends of the spending spectrum. He argued that under this proposal, big spenders would have to bring their payrolls down. Meanwhile, small-market teams would be forced to up their game. By his calculations, eight teams would have to cut their spending, while a dozen franchises would need to spend more. And he said:

“Even with eight teams needing to reduce their payrolls, more money would be spent on major-league players under this system on the whole because the 12 smaller-payroll teams would need to spend a total of $621 million to reach the floor, while the eight larger-payroll teams would need to reduce their spending by $577 million.”

Bowden stated that this will increase both average player salary and their overall salary pool compared to what they currently have. 

In contrast, the players’ association wants to tackle the disparity without having a salary cap for the highest spenders. They proposed a $300 million CBT threshold, alongside a competitive-integrity tax for owners who spend below $150 million. This essentially pushes the low-spending franchises to shell out more money on their rosters. 

MLB also proposed that players changing teams would be limited to five-year contracts, while re-signing with the current team can be up to a 6-year deal. MLBPA argued that this will only limit the players’ ability to negotiate long-term deals as free agents. According to Bowden, this will instead prevent teams from using longer contracts to circumvent the proposed payroll restrictions. 

Both MLB and the players’ association remain apart on how to address the payroll gap, and Bruce Meyer’s recent comments prove that MLBPA is unlikely to back away from its position. Irrespective of their stances, they have to reach mutual ground before the current CBA ends on December 1 to avoid an MLB lockout.