by David Beck, EEEEEE! Contributing Editor
Tuesday, August 29, 2000
I'm going to begin by being the devil's advocate. Big-time. So much so, that I'm going to be the devil's main counsel here.
Bob Costas says his book, Fair Ball, is a "fan's case for baseball." He makes the claim, as most fans these days do, that we should "level the playing field," and he spends half of his book writing about how the wealth must be spread through a more viable revenue sharing plan.
As devil's counsel I argue that this isn't what fans really want. It may be what fans think they want, but not really. Here's what they really want:
"I want my team to be the richest, and I get that by being a fan of the team with the most fans. Why must we level the playing field? What exactly does that mean? That in a perfectly ideal 'level playing field' world, we make every team exactly the same so they all finish 81-81, each team with 6-6 records against each other, every game ending in a 4-3 score? (Excuse me, these days, a 12-11 score.)
"I say bunk to that. I pay my money to see the Yankees, and my compatriots do too. We've got more fans than any other team, so our money should go to the team we want to win, and that's the Yankees. I don't want any portion of my money to go to the Tigers or the Orioles or especially the Red Sox. We're paying for the Yankees to win, and by golly, they should be able to use it to win. And if that means they use my money to buy whatever players they can, then they should do that -- lower bidders be damned.
"Hey. I'm the one payin' for it."
As I step out of my role as devil's counsel with the hope I haven't been too corrupted there, I must say that this case is compelling. It really is. Even if you're not a Yankees fan, you must admit you'd want your team to be the richest, also. In today's world, that gets you the wins you pay for.
Indeed, it is the one simple fundamental principle that will sadly prolong the vast inequities of baseball, no matter how much Bob Costas rails against them.
Costas' main mistake is that he merely thinks along with what fans think they want. Most fans have this foggy idea that we should have some of letting teams have their own money (Yankees with many-millions, Expos with a-bit-fewer-millions) and some of spreading the wealth around so that the Pirates and the Brewers of the world can have at least some fighting chance. "Let's just sort of continue to have a mixture of both," is the thinking. "And by no means may we tinker with free agency."
The perpetuation of this whole mentality will keep the game going where it is going. The post-'94-strike years have been disastrous, Costas cries, but he simply does not get to the core of the problem. He even proposes modifying free agency, calling for a number of cosmetic arrangements. He reviles the "free agency Chicken Littles," of whom I am certainly one. Problem is, his whole book is a description of how, indeed, the baseball sky has fallen.
The only thing that will truly, fully put the sky back up into the sky is the elimination of free agency.
But Costas and most fans would never endorse that because, again, the fans will still always shout, "My money goes to my team." Even as the devil's principle, this is still completely reasonable.
Think about it. If we did implement the Dave Beck Plan -- no free agency, all revenues into one pot, players get X %, owners get Y % -- there is the now real chance that the Expos could become the most brilliant developer of talent, build a 20-year powerhouse dynasty, have a payroll of $200 million to the average of $10 million for the rest of the major league teams, and simply win World Series after World Series.
The problem should be plain to see.
What will happen to all the Yankees fans, Dodger fans, Red Sox fans, Mets fans -- all those fans with all their $$$?
They take a hike.
Under my plan, it would no longer be money that allows one team to dominate, but it would be things like skill, expertise, ability, front office smarts, sound baseball wisdom. But you see, those things don't matter in a world in which getting more and more money is the goal. In today's world, fans rule, and the team with the most fans gets the most fans to put their $$$ in.
If everyone really loved the game of baseball, and they wanted a true "level playing field," then they'd be willing to say essentially, "Hey, you know? Those Expos really did an awesome job of building their team and playing great ball, they deserve to win fair and square, for however long their honest efforts bring success. We all just need to work that much harder ourselves to compete. If overall revenues are down because of it, oh well."
Ahhh, a dream world.
You know what I really think, though? Under the Dave Beck Plan, I don't think that would happen -- I don't really think an Expos team would do that. I think some teams may be strong some years, but I think most teams would be competitive more than not, and especially more than they are in today's $$$-dominated world.
Unless we all radically change our perspective, the game remains doomed. Costas' recommendations are more window-dressing, even though I give him a great deal of credit for truly seeing what's what. He has always been someone I respect -- a true Powers-That-Be guy who boldly speaks out with honesty and insight. His book is a smart, intelligent polemic against the problems, but where before we have been reaching out with a wet noodle to rescue the drowning elephant, Costas now comes in holding out a fish net.
Quite a difference! Noodle to fishnet! It still won't work, in any way.
With all that said, I will say that Costas gives solid recommendations for making major league baseball itself better. I really like his responses to proposed realignment and the existing wild card.
For realignment, he starts by intimating a call for a moratorium on expansion. Good idea. He believes the 16-14 National-American League split should be adjusted to 15-15 with at least one interleague game played every series throughout the year's schedule. The team that should switch leagues would be the Astros, going from the NL Central to the AL West where they can form a rivalry with the Rangers. He makes the case, then, for three five-team divisions in each league, and does so to support one of his main arguments:
We must bring back the thrill of pennant races.
To this end, he stridently objects to the principle of the wild card. He claims it should be eliminated, with the three division winners going to the playoffs. The post-season would feature a bye for the team with the best record. He gives strong support for this format, and I fully agree with him. Turning the majors into an NBA where everyone and his uncle get into the playoffs thoroughly dilutes the integrity of the game. It was bad enough that the League Championship was a five-game series after a long 162-game season, it is no better now to have the first round of playoffs the same crapshoot.
Costas makes a good case for a number of other issues. He is so compelling that he even drew me into his comments about the one of the most pointless arguments in baseball today -- whether or not Pete Rose should be in the Hall.
I would wholly recommend getting a hold of Fair Ball, not just for getting a well-written case for making the game better, but to pointedly discover the magnitude of the major leagues' competitive balance problem. As futile as Costas' proposals are, they force us to confront it. Hopefully some solution will arise, whether it is Costas', mine, anybody's.
If Dave were not in the CID, something else he'd like to be. If Dave were not in the CID, a window cleaner, he. With a rub-a-dub-dub and a scrub-a-dub-dub and a rub-a-dub all day long. With a scrub-a-dub-dub and a rub-a-dub-dub he'd sing this merry song.
Copyright © 2000 by David Beck
Last updated 10/30/00E-mail Dave at david.beck@wcdhs.net
Gregg Pearlman, gregg@EEEEEEgp.com