Read the opposing argument from Loyal Homer.
Baseball, above any other sport, reflects America. It mirrors American diversity and capitalizes on the exceptional qualities of each team to create a truly unique sports experience. Unlike football or basketball, baseball does not try to maintain an illusion of universal parity. Instead baseball embraces what it really is – a league of differences.
Baseball has rich teams and poor teams. Strong and weak. While some will cry foul at this overt rejection of an ideal notion of equality, can’t the same be said of America? Is this country not a land of diversity – a home for the strong and the weak, the rich and the poor, and people of all types? If it is, then so should its national pastime.
Today’s debate explores whether baseball should change the way it does business to accommodate a faster rebuilding process for bad teams. Unequivocally, the answer is no!
Former Cleveland Indians infielder and New York Yankees’ manager Bob Lemon once said, “Baseball was made for kids, and grown-ups screw it up.” As a baseball purist, I tend to agree. Overhauls for the sake of maximizing profits may make business sense, but they do not always turn out well for the sport in the long run.
Let’s examine the home run craze of the 1990s, for example. It brought excitement back to a sport that seemed to be waning, following an unpopular work stoppage that ended the 1994 season prematurely. The long ball emerged as the savior of baseball. Fast forward a decade and society looks at the same time period as a black eye for baseball. All the media attention and buildup that the homerun record chase generated seemed like a good idea at the time, but ultimately all of the hype clearly contributed to the increase in performance enhancing drugs. The Steroids Era has permanently marred baseball. Nowadays if homerun numbers are up, people scramble to find something – anything – to blame, rather than considering hitting might have been up that year. In 2006 players were cutting open balls to make sure they weren’t juiced to provide a non-steroid advantage to hitters. All of this craziness could have been avoided if baseball had just thought through all aspects of the scenario and not just chased a quick fix.
For this debate my worthy adversary, Loyal Homer, and I were asked to use the Cleveland Indians as a case study in slow restructuring in MLB. In 2001 the Indians general manager Mark Shapiro made a prediction that the club’s rebuilding efforts would not be realized for several seasons. His words proved truthful, as it took another six years to return to the playoffs. Before you start feeling sorry for the “struggling” franchise consider this: Shapiro’s efforts to restructure the club did not have lasting positive effects. Following the Indians deep postseason run in 2007 they collapsed, tying for the worst record in the division in 2008. Cleveland has not been back to the playoffs since. Although the restructuring occurred during Shapiro’s watch, so did the epic collapse, proving he certainly he did not have the right answers, either.
Winning takes time. It took the Boston Red Sox 86 years to win a World Series. The Chicago Cubs are at 102 years and counting. Sure these clubs fielded some phenomenal teams during their droughts, but they were not able to achieve their ultimate goal of winning a World Series championship. Losing helped them build character. It gave them an identity, and in my opinion, endeared them to America. Both clubs have an enormous national and international following. If these teams won championships frequently and there never was a Curse of the Bambino or the Billy Goat, would they be as popular today? I am sure they would have a larger following because the clubs play in big markets, but I do not think they would captivate America they way they do today.
It is wrong to point out the “alleged” decline of baseball to discredit the current system. The Sports Business Journal admits that baseball’s ratings were down last year, but not because small teams were struggling to rebuild. Instead the media outlet states that a lack of televised playoff chasing teams caused the diminished ratings, rather than general dissatisfaction. I would also be willing to bet that baseball is still feeling some aftershock from the Steroid Era. But the season was not without success. In fact, historically underachieving teams like the Washington Nationals and Colorado Rockies were among the top five in television ratings increases last year.
Baseball does not need a bailout for bad teams. Struggling teams just need time to work things out. People should not jump hastily to conclusions and restructure to “level the playing field.” Look no further than last season for evidence of this. In 2009 The New York Yankees’ payroll ($201,449,289) was more than five times that of the Florida Marlins ($36,814,000). These two teams had the greatest disparity in salaries, but they were both competitive. The Marlins nearly won the National League wild card, finishing better than 19 other MLB teams. Baseball does not need to revamp its draft system or free agency to stay competitive. It just needs time for teams and managers to straighten things out. It took the New York Yankees nine seasons to win their elusive 27th championship, and they were literally throwing money at any and every weakness they could find. I did not hear too many people empathizing with the Bombers and suggesting intervention to help with restructuring. Now the Yankees are the defending World Series champs. Their game plan did not change, it just took time to sort out the kinks.
Baseball is best in its purest form. In the words of American author Paul Gallico, “No game in the world is as tidy and dramatically neat as baseball, with cause and effect, crime and punishment, motive and result, so cleanly defined.”
The game’s greatness is far above our poor power to add to it or detract from it. Baseball should be left alone.
Posted by Loyal Homer 
