Baseball and 9/11

Jose Reyes wore a first-responder cap
before the Mets game on  Sunday.

I'm not a Bud Selig hater. Without him there would be no team in Milwaukee, and while I don't like many of his decisions, I think he does love the game and is doing what he believes is the right thing. But his reaction to the flap over the New York Mets wardrobe choice for Sunday's game on the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks has me mystified.

For whatever reason, Major League Baseball decided that teams had to wear their own caps with an American flag sewn on the side. This presented a problem for the Mets. The team famously hosted the first sporting event in New York after the attacks. Players wore hats representing many of the first responders—firefighters, police, EMS etc.—and were lionized for the gesture.

This year, Mets players wanted to repeat the gesture. But MLB said no. Joe Torre, now a member of the league office, explained that baseball wanted all the teams to do the same thing. Although that sounds more like the NFL than MLB, apparently the league has the authority to make that call.

The Mets weren't happy about it but complied under protest. The strange thing is that Selig is upset that the Mets went public with the dispute and "embarrassed" the league. Did he really think no one notice the Mets were wearing their regular caps or that no reporter would ask about it? And if Selig thought it was the right decision why is he embarrassed that it became public?

It seems obvious that in hindsight Selig knows the decision was wrong. No harm would have been done if the Mets had worn the special caps. The controversy was predictable and avoidable.

By the way, even the NFL allowed coaches to wear FDNY and other such hats on the sidelines of its game over the weekend.

Are You Listening, Bud?

Another day and another bad idea from Major League Baseball. In his annual All-Star chat with fans, Commissioner Bud Selig talked about many things. Most of them were predictable (he evaded a question about the Dodgers and said no major realignment was "imminent')  but one was another one of those ideas that is just plain awful.

Selig said he wouldn't mind tweaking interleague play so that the designated hitter is used in NL parks. Conversely, pitchers would hit when NL teams visited AL stadiums. Selig likes the idea, he says, because NL fans would get a chance to see how game is played with the DH and AL fans would enjoy seeing pitchers bat.

I find that hard to believe. I know fans of both leagues and none of the Senior Circuit rooters have any interest in the DH. They find the concept, if it is brought up, loathsome. While some AL fans are affirmed backers of the DH, there are some who haven't warmed up to it after 39 years.

Personally, I was an AL fan first and the DH was OK back then. Because of the rule, I was able to see Hank Aaron play his final two years. He was well past his prime and in no shape to play the outfield, so DH was the only position he could have played.

Since the Brewers have moved to the NL, though, I have no interest in the Junior Circuit brand of ball. It's slower and lacks the strategy of the NL version.

Hopefully, this was just a trial balloon and Selig will hear it burst.

Baseball and Immigration

Baseball's midsummer classic is in Phoenix this year. Besides the heat (at least the stadium has a retractable roof) fans going to the game will probably encounter protesters reminding them of the state's tough anti-immigration laws.

The Arizona Diamondbacks had already been chosen to host the game before the issue exploded. When it did, players and human rights' groups urged MLB to move the game. That didn't happen.

Some Hispanic ballplayers have said they would avoid the All-Star Game this year. A U.S. senator has called for a boycott. There have been stories from time to time in the mainstream media, but the threat has not gained much traction. 

Commissioner Bud Selig, never shy about promoting the breaking of baseball's color line in 1947 (never mind that baseball had maintained that line and most in the game at the time would have just as soon let it stay in place), hasn't seen fit to speak out on the issue.

The NBA commissioner, David Stern, backed the Phoenix Suns when they wore "Los Suns" jerseys for a playoff game in May 2010. He called the gesture "appropriate." I wouldn't doubt that someone with an eye on the NBA's bottom line thought the league should have just ignored the issue. But to the Suns' and Stern's credit they didn't.

It's nice that baseball like to celebrate Jackie Robinson every year. MLB even stages a conference where racial issues are discussed.

Given that, it's stunning that Selig can't see a current issue that merits his attention. It's time for baseball's silence to end.

15-Team Leagues? No!

The word broke this weekend that MLB is considering a realignment plan. I have written before that I think a radical remaking of the leagues is in order. But the new plan calls for two 15-team leagues. I can't think of anything I'd like to see less.

Equal leagues will almost assuredly mean interleague play every day. What a mess. Down the stretch of the season with playoff spots on the line division rivalries should be the order of the day.

Instead, baseball could have a pennant contender playing an also-ran from the other league. And if they try to remedy that by matching, say, power rivals like the New York Yankees and Mets, fans would be distracted from what should be baseball's most exciting time.

This is such a bad idea I have almost no doubt that it will come to pass. Each time interleague play starts, I find myself less interested in the games than at other times. They almost seem like exhibitions to me. I'm much more passionate when the Brewers are playing the Cardinals, the Reds or the Cubs. Those are true rivalries that determine who makes the playoffs.

I have a soft spot for Bud Selig, without there'd likely be no baseball in Milwaukee, my hometown. But the idea of two 15-team leagues should be forgotten. And then maybe we can work on banishing the designated hitter.

The Mets and Fan Owners

A lot of owners say they care
about the fans, but But Bill Veeck
really seemed to mean it.

Major League Baseball has reportedly turned back a group of fans that wanted to buy a minority stake in the New York Mets. This word comes after Met's owner Fred Wilpon announced last week he had an investor lined up he tries to escape the mess the Madoff scam has made of his finances.

It's too bad that the fan-based group, buythemets.com, which was organized by business professionals, was so quickly turned down. I know baseball prefers its owners rich so they can spend their way out of financial jams (and maybe so they trade capitalism war stories at pricey restaurants). But that model has proven anything but rock solid.

From the Montreal Expos, which had to be taken over and moved to Washington, D.C., to the Texas Rangers, Los Angeles Dodgers and New York Mets, rich owners have had their problems in recent years. Maybe it's time to try another way.

Some point to the model of the Green Bay Packers, a team owned by community stockholders. Obviously, that model has looked pretty good the last few years with the Packers consistently winning. And the buythemets.com group would operate in a similar way.

There would be no guarantee, of course, that a community-owned team would win, as one blogger notes. But as we've seen there's no guarantee with the current model of rich owners.

Baseball for years barely tolerated Bill Veeck, probably the most populist owner ever. They never gave him a break. But fans adored him, whose autobiography, "Veeck--As In Wreck: The Autobiography of Bill Veeck," reveals him to be part baseball visionary and part P.T. Barnum, was never liked by the other owners.

The Braves, Brewers and Memory

With all of the sensational news lately -- Roger McDowell's tirade, fans cheering bin Laden's death -- I started thinking of happier topics. At the top of the list are my earliest memories of heading to the ballpark.

I was fortunate enough to grow up in Milwaukee where big league baseball was part of the fabric of the city. The Braves are a fuzzy memory for me. I was only 6 when the Braves headed South, but I can remember going to a game. The only images in my mind's eye are walking in the concourse at County Stadium. It's a pleasant memory, if scant on details.

The next Braves memory I have is of my cousins, who lived in Atlanta, telling me my team was headed their way. I can still feel the shock of hearing that. Maybe it was city pride, but I was saddened when my Dad confirmed the bad news.

Do Dodgers, Mets Spell Trouble?

Maybe it was just a matter of time before a major sports league was beset by financial problems. After all, why should they be immune from the problems other industries must cope with? But it was shocking to hear today that the Los Angeles Dodgers, an iconic franchise, were being taken over by major league baseball.


Sure, there had been lots of stories about the war of the roses like breakup of the marriage of owners Frank and Jamie McCourt. But to see the Dodgers have its business operations taken over has to be the biggest surprise sine the Boys of Summer  left Brooklyn more than a half century ago.

And that's not the only financial mess baseball is facing. All winter the New York Mets have had to face withering publicity about its connection to Bernard L. Madoff as well as  questions about the financial well-being of the club. Bud Selig, the baseball commissioner, has held meetings with the Mets owners.