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]

Re: Che

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