Does Baseball NEED a Commisioner?

[sturg1dj]

is the commissioner's office really necessary?

[Imgran]

It needs some form of government body, but I'd definitely prefer one much more independent from the owners.

[sturg1dj]

if we had the ideal of what a commish should be then I would be in favor. Someone who is above the players and owners. But what we have had over the history is a puppet for the owners (Landis wasn't even though at times you'd wonder). I would say what has been done by the last bunch of commissioners could have been done by either a coalition of owners (which now that I wrote that sounds scary) or done by the league presidents. I say this because I believe the Union has enough power where there is now a balance of power that was not there in 1920.

[Brian McKenna]

Baseball is a business. Business decisions are ultimately the responsibility of owners and/or CEOs. Any owner who would turn over decision making power to the labor force rather than their own management is a complete idiot.

[sturg1dj]

Baseball is a business. Business decisions are ultimately the responsibility of owners and/or CEOs. Any owner who would turn over decision making power to the labor force rather than their own management is a complete idiot.

and thats not the case. The owners don't need someone to speak for them though and its not like he's looking out for the players either, they are fine. So whats the commissioner's use?

[Honus Wagner Rules]

and thats not the case. The owners don't need someone to speak for them though and its not like he's looking out for the players either, they are fine. So whats the commissioner's use?

To me the Commissioner is like the CEO and the baseball owners are the board of directors. Don't CEOs need approval from the board of directors to implement some action?

[Old Sweater]

I voted yes. MLB could use a better one though that is not a proven thief. Ever since Selig and Riensdorf stole that 280 million from the players, the MLBPA hasn't had no trust in Selig. Can you balme them?

[rockin500]

To me the Commissioner is like the CEO and the baseball owners are the board of directors. Don't CEOs need approval from the board of directors to implement some action?
yes and thats a very very good analogy of what a commissioner is. He's a ceo and anyone who thinks differently is naive to the nth degree.

[sturg1dj]

wouldn't it be interesting though if the owners had to speak for themselves at these steroid hearings. You see Fehr and the players then in walks Angelos and Steinbrenner for questioning. That would be awesome

[Old Sweater]

wouldn't it be interesting though if the owners had to speak for themselves at these steroid hearings. You see Fehr and the players then in walks Angelos and Steinbrenner for questioning. That would be awesome

I'd be great, after seeing Selig and Fehr doing their tap dance and telling their lies in front of Congress without even getting their hands slapped. IMO<<<<<<<

[Brian McKenna]

The owners don't need someone to speak for them though and its not like he's looking out for the players either, they are fine. So whats the commissioner's use?

Sounds like a unfamiliarity with the role of a business leader. There are many books (many recent), articles and internet sites that can help with that. I could recommend some if you're not sure how to do the leg work.

[KCGHOST]

Though we would all prefer the idealized vision of the Commissioner's office that we have in our minds you have to have a commissioner. Heck, if for nothing else than the getting the CBA negotiated. Can you imagine the chaos if each team had to negotiate its own??

You do not have to go back to Landis to find a commisioner who tried to act in the best interests of the game. Fay Vincent made an attempt to do this but fell victim to the Reinsdorf/Steinbrenner/MLBPA cabal.

[jalbright]

My flippant answer is that Bud Selig is proving baseball doesn't need a commissioner, as he's one in name only.

[Brian McKenna]

I think it is obvious that MLB needs a structured, organized management body. 30 teams with no unified management structure could not function.

[sturg1dj]

I think it is obvious that MLB needs a structured, organized management body. 30 teams with no unified management structure could not function.

why?


so without a commish all of the sudden the structure of the MLB disappears? It still would have a GM for every team, an owner for every team and two league presidents.

and you are accusing me of not understanding the role of a business leader? I understand that when it is needed then you have one. Here it seems like there are more efficient ways to manage the league without paying out a huge salary to a figure head on top who doesn't show any extra vision or leadership skills. To assume that baseball would collapse if the commissioner's office was removed is laughable. The league would not be different at all except for different people being held accountable.

[Brian McKenna]

The FACT that revenue has SOARED since Selig took over is proof of the worth of his position and his contributions. The game is expected to further increase its revenue dramatically over at least the next decade as well.

There is no debate. There are no greater priorities. There is no conflict. It must be a great joy to work within the industry and see the money flying around. There is a path the game is taking and Selig put them on it.

No one will ever - and I mean ever - soothe all the complaints. Life goes on everyday in every way. The goal is to work and advance for the future. Getting bogged down by petty complaints and grievances only hinders this. It's short-sighted and better left to those that merely talk and not to those that DO.

If the complaints were of such great importance, this financial boom would not exist.

[sturg1dj]

The FACT that revenue has SOARED since Selig took over is proof of the worth of his position and his contributions. The game is expected to further increase its revenue dramatically over at least the next decade as well.

There is no debate. There are no greater priorities. There is no conflict. It must be a great joy to work within the industry and see the money flying around. There is a path the game is taking and Selig put them on it.

No one will ever - and I mean ever - soothe all the complaints. Life goes on everyday in every way. The goal is to work and advance for the future. Getting bogged down by petty complaints and grievances only hinders this. It's short-sighted and better left to those that merely talk and not to those that DO.

If the complaints were of such great importance, this financial boom would not exist.

you think that PROVES something? it proves nothing. It just shows that Selig was lucky to be the one in that position when the steroid homerun boom happened. Ueberroth made a ton of profits too, he was the first to merchandise everything and get all of the lucrative TV contracts. You think that without him the owners would have never found that money? give me a break.

proof?

not quite

[Brian McKenna]

It's amazing how people who preside over a time of properity could be completely discounted and chastized as mere benefactors of the mythical beast called "luck." This seems to be more of an interpretation of the author's views and not the subject itself.

Sorry but there is no break for those who merely rant about a percieved "evil" and ignore any and all counterargument and logic. That my friend is the definition of bias and the biggest detractor of productive converation which seems to plague the Current Events forum.

[jalbright]

It's amazing how people who preside over a time of properity could be completely discounted and chastized as mere benefactors of the mythical beast called "luck." This seems to be more of an interpretation of the author's views and not the subject itself.

Sorry but there is no break for those who merely rant about a percieved "evil" and ignore any and all counterargument and logic. That my friend is the definition of bias and the biggest detractor of productive converation which seems to plague the Current Events forum.

OK, Selig had to do something right, if only not get in the way of existing trends toward higher ticket prices and better marketing opportunities. Maybe he's been more powerful behind the scenes than we know, but it sure isn't reflected in news coverage. Also, Bud buried his head in the sand on PEDs, botched the all-star game "tie", and has presided over a definite trend toward a situation where some teams have great difficulty competing. Those things happened in the glare of the public spotlight, and they didn't work out too well. I think there's good reason to think Selig was fortunate to benefit from some things he really can't take much credit for combined with the fact he probably has helped in some ways with the asset side of the accounting ledger, but that he hasn't been great for the game of baseball, as opposed to the business of baseball.

[sturg1dj]

It's amazing how people who preside over a time of properity could be completely discounted and chastized as mere benefactors of the mythical beast called "luck." This seems to be more of an interpretation of the author's views and not the subject itself.

Sorry but there is no break for those who merely rant about a percieved "evil" and ignore any and all counterargument and logic. That my friend is the definition of bias and the biggest detractor of productive converation which seems to plague the Current Events forum.

wow that is one high horse

and I might add you've been talking down to me during this whole discussion, not something that warrants a nice discussion


the question is whether the game needs a commissioner. Simple one. I say no, why do I say no because I think his job can be done by the two league presidents and a group of owners. Since today the commish is more a tool for the owners then ever before, why is he necessary?

if anything he is necessary for the owners to push the buck to someone. If anything the commish is the paid whipping boy of the owners. When something that the owners may have done wrong comes back to bite them the blame gets shifted to the commish.

the original idea for the commish was for a man to be above both the owners and players. That is not the case today. Back when it was created it was as much a tool for the owners as it was a check on the owners. We now, today, have a new check on the owners called the player's union, and I believe that leaves the only job for the commish as tool for the owners. This has helped owners sidestep blame on various issues.

removing the commish would change little in the game since the league is run by the owners anyway. Just think if Selig was never named interim commish and they got rid of the commish and let the owners rule. You don't think the league would be the same? there would be the same work stoppages, the same scandals, and the same person would be making many of the decision, Bud Selig, who would still be an owner. Instead of paying him a hefty commish salary, however, he would just be an owner.

biases aside, this is not an attack on Bud Selig as a person or even his decisions, it is an attack on a position that is unnecessary. I am not saying without a commish the league would be this Utopian place free of all scandal, I am saying it would be exactly the same just free of one contract and maybe, just maybe the individual owners would be held more accountable for things.

[rockin500]

some people just dont understand business at all. Leagues are a business today, as it should be. If you dont think thats the case, i have a bridge to sell you. all businesses have some form of head.

[sturg1dj]

some people just dont understand business at all. Leagues are a business today, as it should be. If you dont think thats the case, i have a bridge to sell you. all businesses have some form of head.


a good business removes inefficient pieces. that is all I am saying

and I don't think anyone here is saying baseball is not a business, we are just amazed that they are allowing someone unnecessary to make $14+ million a year


but I will concede that I do have some ignorance when it comes to the business of baseball. If Bud Selig is the one who made baseball so profitable then what does the COO do?

[sturg1dj]

oh wait, I guess he's in charge of the business of baseball

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/about_mlb/executives.jsp?bio=dupuy_bob

[digglahhh]

the question is whether the game needs a commissioner. Simple one. I say no, why do I say no because I think his job can be done by the two league presidents and a group of owners. Since today the commish is more a tool for the owners then ever before, why is he necessary?

if anything he is necessary for the owners to push the buck to someone. If anything the commish is the paid whipping boy of the owners. When something that the owners may have done wrong comes back to bite them the blame gets shifted to the commish.

the original idea for the commish was for a man to be above both the owners and players. That is not the case today. Back when it was created it was as much a tool for the owners as it was a check on the owners. We now, today, have a new check on the owners called the player's union, and I believe that leaves the only job for the commish as tool for the owners. This has helped owners sidestep blame on various issues.

removing the commish would change little in the game since the league is run by the owners anyway. Just think if Selig was never named interim commish and they got rid of the commish and let the owners rule. You don't think the league would be the same? there would be the same work stoppages, the same scandals, and the same person would be making many of the decision, Bud Selig, who would still be an owner. Instead of paying him a hefty commish salary, however, he would just be an owner.

The paid whipping boy status is reason enough for the institution to support the existence of such a position.

Think about it, you could make the same exact argument revolving around the U.S. Presidency.

Is the commish office, needed? Well, that depends on who you ask. It is the overwhelming consensus among those in positions of power within the institution that it is.

People on the outside offering conflicting vantage points will always posit that instruments of hegemony are not necessary. An ultimate civil libertarian questions the necessity of the IRS, an anarchist an institutionalized police force. If the actualization of your personal utopian vision of MLB requires revolutionary changes and paradigmatic shifts from the status quo, you are naturally going the question the necessity of the infrastructure of present power. This isn't even a question of baseball, it's simply Poli Sci 101.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

OK, Selig had to do something right, if only not get in the way of existing trends toward higher ticket prices and better marketing opportunities. Maybe he's been more powerful behind the scenes than we know, but it sure isn't reflected in news coverage. Also, Bud buried his head in the sand on PEDs, botched the all-star game "tie",

To this day I do not understand what Selig gets blamed for this? :shrug: He didn't botch anything. Brenly and Torre burned through their entire pitching staffs and only had one pitcher left each. How is that Selig's fault? The game did go 11 innings. what was he supposed to do, force the last available pitchers keep pitching until someone wins? What if the game kept going and going to say 18-19 innings? Then what?


and has presided over a definite trend toward a situation where some teams have great difficulty competing.

Through out baseball history there have always been true that some will simply not be able to compete. Think back to t he old Philadelphia A's and Phillies of the 1930s-40s. Or the old Boston Braves? Or the St.Louis Browns. These teams racked up 100 loss seasons and last finishes it seemingly year after year. There will never be a time in baseball where every team will have an equal opportunity to compete because some teams have more financial resources, make better decisions, and have smarter GMs.

[jalbright]

To this day I do not understand what Selig gets blamed for this? :shrug: He didn't botch anything. Brenly and Torre burned through their entire pitching staffs and only had one pitcher left each. How is that Selig's fault? The game did go 11 innings. what was he supposed to do, force the last available pitchers keep pitching until someone wins? What if the game kept going and going to say 18-19 innings? Then what?



Through out baseball history there have always been true that some will simply not be able to compete. Think back to t he old Philadelphia A's and Phillies of the 1930s-40s. Or the old Boston Braves? Or the St.Louis Browns. These teams racked up 100 loss seasons and last finishes it seemingly year after year. There will never be a time in baseball where every team will have an equal opportunity to compete because some teams have more financial resources, make better decisions, and have smarter GMs.


How did Bud botch the all-star game? While I understand the issues you raise, you resolve them before the game is played. I know it was an "exhibition", but the reaction of the fans made it clear they still expected the game to go to resolution. Also, if the managers knew it was to completion, don't you think they'd have managed differently? Changing the rules in the middle of the game is the one of the worst things to do--but Bud's "management" of the game wound up choosing that solution.

As for the inability of teams to compete, the solution that minimizes the issue to a far greater degree is quite simple: Every team gets to keep half its broadcasting, concession, parking, ticket, etc income, and the other half is shared basically evenly. I think it would be better if there were some incentives for performing better, but that should be the framework. The Yankees or the Red Sox or whomever has an opponent in every game, right? When the differences between the small market and large market teams are so great, a revenue sharing approach of this sort levels the field without robbing teams of the incentive to maximize their incomes. Sure, some teams will have incompetent front offices and so forth, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the structural imbalance in the financial fortunes of the teams.