Saving Baseball

[Arrian]

Reismark:

I'm trying to be feasible - meaning coming up with something that will improve the game and something that the owners and players could actually agree on...

4) Require teams to come up with affordable ticketing packages so that the average family doesn't need to blow $200 to see a game.

Umm... how? First off, the owners will never agree to this. Second, what gives anybody the right to regulate ticket prices (especially if you remove the anti-trust protection)? The market determines ticket prices. I agree that they are outrageous, but the only way to change that is for fans to stop going to the games. Despite insane ticket prices, there are about 40,000 people in Yankee Stadium right now to watch the Yankees play a godawful last-place club on a weekday afternoon. Hmm...

-Arrian

[drake]

How's this for the middle relief thing - a pitcher MUST face at least 2 hitters. No more lefty/lefty or righty/righty matchups where the pitcher is in there for 1 batter and then there's another pitching change.

How about a 3 pitcher max in a game? 1 extra pitcher for every 2 innings of extra innings?

I've seen 6 and 7 pitching changes in a single game. It's absolutely ridiculous and boring.

[Arrian]

Drake,

I was trying for something a little less restrictive than you. I don't mind pitching changes when a guy's getting shelled or is obviously tired out. If the starter goes out and gives up 8 runs in 2 innings, your 3 pitchers per game rule could cause problems.

I don't even mind the idea of bringing in, for example, a Mike Stanton to pitch an inning in which 2 out of the 3 hitters coming up are lefties. That's fine. Mike comes in, deals with those 3 guys, and takes a hike. But if we had a "2 batters minimum" rule, Joe Torre couldn't come out and remove Stanton if the opposing manager pinch hit a righty. Stanton would have to stay in and pitch. I like that, both on the "less time wasteage" level and the strategic level.

-Arrian

[DinoDoc]

I'm somewhat suprised that che isn't on the side of the owners this time. They're the ones advancing the commie solutions to the problem, not the union.

[Arrian]

But a good commie always sticks up for the workers, Dino.

-Arrian

[drake]

Not when the workers make more in a year than the commie makes in a lifetime for hitting a ball with a stick

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by drake
So if you were at a restaraunt and your waiter haucked up a loogie on your dinner you wouldn't be upset? Thats what the owners and players are doing to the fans in a very real way.

No it's not. That's disgusting and a health hazard. It's not even compareable.

If there was a labor dispute between the waiters and management, I wouldn't swear off resteraunts forever just because every waiter in the city went on strike. I'd find it a little inconvenient, but I wouldn't be cursing their very existence.

[drake]

MLBPA is not providing a good service or product when they ruin a season with a strike. The whole point of the regular season is to determine playoff spots for the championship. Playing these games for nothing (except their precious money), is doing a major disservice to its loyal fans.

Its a slap in the face. A loogie on the burger. A kick in the nuts. CHoose your faqvorite analogy, the idea is the same.

[chequita guevara]

You are using inappropriate analogies. A loogie on the burger conjurs up immediate disgust. I cannot fathom in the least why anyone should be disgusted with the players strike. Upset that you're losing your entertainment, yes, but such a visceral reaction as disgust is unwarrented.

[DinoDoc]

*Ahem*

[Ming]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara I cannot fathom in the least why anyone should be disgusted with the players strike.

I'm disgusted because MLB is breaking their contract with the fans. People have spent tons of money and invested a lot of their own time into the current season under the promise that these games actually mean something in terms of delivering a yearly champion.

For them to "cheapen" the season with a strike, just shows their total disregard for the people who provide all their revenue. That's disgusting.

[drake]

You don't think a man who makes 10 million a year for playing a game, who wants to strike because he wants MORE money isn't disgusting?

I think it's more disgusting than a loogie on a burger myself.

The whole idea is this......the players and the owners have lost track of who pays their salaries.

With a good strong fan coalition (a real one I mean), the public could bankrupt baseball within a few years. And I must say I would laugh my ass off seeing it

[rah]

When players that average 2.4 million say they're striking to guarentee being able to take care of their families in the future, I feel justified feeling disgusted.

Joe Girardi of the Cubs was quoted this weekend saying that. A catcher that can't hit 200 and is mediocre defensively at best. And he's never entertaining on the field. Just when he opens his mouth.

And if waiters averaged 2.4 million and went on strike, I'd be disgusted too. I have served up that loogie burger a few times.

[Odin]

we need a salary cap or else the World Series will be the Yankies show again, and again, and again...

[Arrian]

I was waiting for that one...

"Waaaaaah, the big bad Yankees always win, let's make them pay the Royals, Tigers, Devil Rays, etc. lots of money so those teams can suck just as bad but their owners can pocket the cash, while Steinbrenner can still afford to put an excellent team on the field." A salary cap wouldn't help all that much, either. There are a lot of owners out there who don't really care about winning. They SAY they care about it, but they are unwilling to go out and invest in their product, thus running in the red in the hopes that their team will improve and along with it, attendance and associated profitable things.

Sorry, I'm a little fed up with the Yankee-bashing (not in this thread, clearly, in RL). I personally LIKE that Steinbrenner bothers investing in his team, unlike Carl Polhad and a number of others. I'm happy that he now listens to his employees, who talk him out of most of the dumb deals he wants to do (they couldn't talk him out of Mondesi, unfortunately).

Who is to blame for the Yankees getting Jeff Weaver? It isn't Steinbrenner's cashola, that's for sure. Billy Beane stole Weaver from the Tigers and then turned him over to the Yanks for players he wanted... meanwhile Weaver (who has a very reasonable contract for a young, winning pitcher) has sucked so far in NY. Still, if Weaver goes on to have a great Yankee career, I don't want to hear whining about how the Yankees "bought" him. First off, all of the players are "bought." That is the meaning of "professional" - they get paid. Second, I think the Detroit GM should be fired for the deal he made. Utter stupidity, so far as I can see. If the Yankees take advantage of other's stupidity, how is that their fault?

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

If the Yankees take advantage of other's stupidity, how is that their fault?

I was waiting for that one too...

The Yankees can AFFORD to make stupid mistakes. If Mondesi or Weaver sucks ass, they can just go out and get someone else. Some teams simply can't pay their players, and a team like the Yankees suck them up because they can pay them and realize the other team is in a tough position.

To fix the game:

1) Drastic revenue sharing. 50% of all local revenues and gate reciepts go into a pool that is divided equally among every team.

2) Salary Minimums and Caps.

3) World-wide draft, so it isn't Free Agency galore for out of country talent, and allow trading of draft picks.

4) End the wild card (have a bye for the best team in the league while the other division winners play a series to move on).

5) End the DH immediatly.

6) Kill interleague play.

[Ned]

I'm a White Sox fan. The Sox last won the World Series in 1917. I find it disgusting that the Yankees have won around 20% of baseball's championships. I also find it disgusting that the Marlins and the Diamondback, two new expansion teams, won the World Series by spending the big bucks on free agents.

Governor Ventura said that he would oppose any new public money for baseball until they had some form of revenue sharing so that the small market teams have a real chance of winning. (Strange, though, that Minnesota and Oakland seem to do well without revenue sharing while Boston and both Chicago teams do not.)

This suggests a solution: An agreement by Governors of the various states and provinces to cut baseball off from access to the public's coffers unless there is reform. This is how the fan can intervene - through their elected representatives.

[SlowwHand]

No baseball for 5 years, and start fresh with people who care.
Who had that thought first?

[Kepler]

End the monopoly exemption.

Public-owned franchises and stadiums to eliminate city-shopping, media-team deals, and crooked owners.

24 teams: two 6-team divisions in each league. Best of 7 LCS and best of 7 World Series, both in 2-3-2 format.

End interleague play (it won't save baseball, but gods it's stupid).

End the DH to cut AL salary disadvantage.

Significant revenue sharing.

Progressive luxury tax adjusted each season for total payroll.

Redevelop regional B and C leagues.

No game start after 7 pm local time to make games family-friendly.

Independent baseball commissioner with complete transparency of all franchise assets.

154 game schedule with Sunday single admission double headers and Monday offdays.

[Kepler]

The good old days of competitive balance are a myth. All I want is to have the good old days of 3-5 year dominant teams that gradually rotate.

[Drake Tungsten]

Waaaaaah, the big bad Yankees always win, let's make them pay the Royals

Amen to that.

[chequita guevara]

I find it hilarious that a lot of the free marketeers want a strictly controlled market in baseball.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I find it hilarious that a lot of the free marketeers want a strictly controlled market in baseball.

Is it anymore funny than you supporting the very people fighting against bringing commie measures to baseball?

[Drake Tungsten]

I think I should put a link to this thread in "The Definition of Irony" thread...

Originally posted by Vlad Antlerkov
-- Eliminate salary arbitration. It's caused salaries to go up all because of the stupidity of some rich owners (*cough*Steinbrenner*cough*), forcing smarter but poorer owners (Oakland) to up their salary offers. (Or just throw Steinbrenner in the tank with Selig. )

And to think that my 2nd Cousin (Herb McQuaid) once played for the Yankees. Steinbrenner makes me sick.

-- Random drug testing.

Yes.

[DarkCloud]

1) remove the special anti-trust protection baseball has, and allow new franchises to pop up if people are willing to fund them (DC springs to mind, and NY could support 1-2 more teams). At the same time, if a team is badly run or in a market which cannot support them, allow them to go bankrupt. Them's the breaks.

Then you had better make it so that taxpayer don't have to foot the bill

I think the Owners plan is the best, perhaps the only way to conduct business. The player's plan is stupid. Only 1 or 2 teams even THREATEN to eclipse 130 million in payroll and the tax for 130 mil is laughabally small.

The owners plan hurts the owners more than it hurts the players, the players should agree to this defacto salary cap, or I fear the Bush, because of his "love of the game" may step in and try to push forward a True salary cap. Which WOULD hurt the game.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I find it hilarious that a lot of the free marketeers want a strictly controlled market in baseball.

I don't look at it that way, Che. The way I view it is that all teams should play by the same rules. Being able to field the best team money can buy, as do the Yankees, Marlins or Diamondbacks, is cheating in a way even though there is no rule against it.

Imagine if we had car companies that could sell only into selected major cities in the US, but could compete elsewhere in the US. One would expect that the car companies that "owned" the larger cities would have a competitive advantage over those that had the smaller cities. Calling for "revenue" in baseball is equivalent to providing open markets in the automobile example.

One usually is loyal to the team of the city he lives in or where he was born. If you were born or live in Chicago or Boston, you would know the pain of being a baseball fan under the current system. Reform is needed.

[DarkCloud]

And the game costs too much
I haven't been to a game since 1995 because I don't want to drive 60 KM, then pay 30 euros for a game

here's another suggestion- instead of folding the expos- fold the 2 WORST teams in the league-

Marlins and Brewers (Hey Selig! )

If they strike, I hope the lockout lasts 2 years. Then I hope that attendance drops 50% Then perhaps the players will have some sense knocked into them.

1994's strike RUINED baseball
That could have been Tony Gwynn's .400 season
62 home runs could have been hit sooner

All sorts of records... lost.

Then what the players did to the repl,acement players was horrid

[DarkCloud]

Being able to field the best team money can buy, as do the Yankees, Marlins or Diamondbacks, is cheating in a way even though there is no rule against it.

What about the rangers- it does take some skill

I'm against reveune sharing because it takes the skill out of the leagues and the skill out of baseball.

But as already stated, I support defacto caps so that idiots don't get out of control.

(PS Ned- see. that's my Republocrat nature coming out. I'm 1/2 and 1/2 here )

[Q Classic]

i remember that i liked the game a lot more before the '94 strike... i was still impressionable then, and that's why i don't really like the players anymore.

the one that really gets my goat is a-rod, who gets 252 million for being craptacular. that's one investment they wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy overpaid for. he's not alone, either, you've got people who're making fistfuls of money complaining about it at a time when the common, average joe is worried about losing his pension, his 401k, and his frikkin' job...

if they had any sense, they'd put off this strike until economic conditions were good.