PDA

View Full Version : Selig to retire to Madison to write memoirs on UW campus



savafan
10-19-2011, 07:53 PM
Thank heavens we only have one more year of Bud Ball. Then again, I don't expect a strong replacement...

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/article_ab1e31a0-f9f1-11e0-983d-001cc4c002e0.html


As the World Series begins, the most powerful man in baseball readies a nest in Madison for retirement. It contains bubble gum, pretzels, a basket of baseballs and a cable connection to Major League Baseball's TV channel.

Chip R
10-19-2011, 08:20 PM
I'll believe he retires when I see it.

BCubb2003
10-19-2011, 08:28 PM
Be careful what you wish for.

RFS62
10-19-2011, 10:43 PM
Be careful what you wish for.


No kidding. The office of the Commissioner changed forever when Selig moved in. No longer any pretense as to who he works for..... the owners.

Expect more of the same.

Ron Madden
10-20-2011, 03:09 AM
No kidding. The office of the Commissioner changed forever when Selig moved in. No longer any pretense as to who he works for..... the owners.

Expect more of the same.

Agreed. There are many things I dislike and disagree with about Selig's time in office.

One thing I have come around to appreciating is the addition of the Wild Card.

redsfandan
10-20-2011, 04:29 AM
The change to home field advantage in the World Series has worked out well. :thumbdown:

Roy Tucker
10-20-2011, 08:23 AM
Be careful what you wish for.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

reds1869
10-20-2011, 09:03 AM
No kidding. The office of the Commissioner changed forever when Selig moved in. No longer any pretense as to who he works for..... the owners.

Expect more of the same.

The commissioner has always worked for the owners. There have been a few historical instances where the charade of "in the best interests of baseball" has favored someone else, but the office was created to benefit ownership and will always do so.

WMR
10-20-2011, 11:15 AM
I can imagine few memoirs I would have less interest in reading.

Unassisted
10-20-2011, 02:08 PM
The precedent has been set. It might be useful to start considering who among the owners is likely to be a candidate for commissioner.

Chip R
10-20-2011, 03:02 PM
The precedent has been set. It might be useful to start considering who among the owners is likely to be a candidate for commissioner.

Frank McCourt? ;)

Unassisted
10-20-2011, 03:58 PM
Frank McCourt? ;)I had the same thought. If he's forced by finances to sell, it would clear up that conflict of interest issue quite nicely. :laugh:

And if McCourt has a special place in his heart for guys with messy personal and financial lives, as commissioner he'd probably be Pete Rose's dream come true. :eek:

Matt700wlw
10-20-2011, 10:10 PM
Please hurry up and retire, Bud.

Wildcard is great.

The fact that the Rangers (who won their divison and 96 games) have to play AT ST LOUIS (who won the wildcard and 90 games) because you wanted the All-Star game to "mean" somthing is stupid.

Go away, goofball.

Chip R
10-20-2011, 10:39 PM
I don't think he's going to retire because there has been no movement towards finding a new commissioner.

mth123
10-21-2011, 02:32 AM
Everyone does realize that prior to the All Star game determining the home field for the World Series, the series just alternated from NL to AL year to year for home field. Regular season record has never had anything to do with who gets the home field in the World Series. It isn't like Selig took away some meaningfiul system before putting his plan into place.

I think the criticism of this point is a huge over-reaction, Selig could have simply done nothing, received no criticism whatsoever and the system would be no more "fair" than it is today. I agree that its not the best way, but I don't see it as the huge negative that its made out to be.

Slyder
10-21-2011, 02:48 AM
I don't think he's going to retire because there has been no movement towards finding a new commissioner.

They (the owners) probably already have the empty suit and mouthpiece picked out and just don't want to ruin the surprise.

redsfandan
10-21-2011, 05:20 AM
Everyone does realize that prior to the All Star game determining the home field for the World Series, the series just alternated from NL to AL year to year for home field. Regular season record has never had anything to do with who gets the home field in the World Series. It isn't like Selig took away some meaningfiul system before putting his plan into place.

I think the criticism of this point is a huge over-reaction, Selig could have simply done nothing, received no criticism whatsoever and the system would be no more "fair" than it is today. I agree that its not the best way, but I don't see it as the huge negative that its made out to be.

Sure, it was that way before. But Bud decided to make a change and this is how he did it. By tieing the World Series to the All-Star game. Nevermind how silly that seems. Why the World Series? The rest of the postseason isn't like that. Have any of the other major sports done something like that? Bud could've made a change that made a little more sense. Instead his focus was $. The World Series was fine. But, if he could make the All-Star game a little more interesting ...

mth123
10-21-2011, 05:42 AM
Sure, it was that way before. But Bud decided to make a change and this is how he did it. By tieing the World Series to the All-Star game. Nevermind how silly that seems. Why the World Series? The rest of the postseason isn't like that. Have any of the other major sports done something like that? Bud could've made a change that made a little more sense. Instead his focus was $. The World Series was fine. But, if he could make the All-Star game a little more interesting ...

Focusing on $ is his job. The next commisioner will do the same thing.

redsfandan
10-21-2011, 05:51 AM
Focusing on $ is his job. The next commisioner will do the same thing.

Duh. Of course, they'll focus on $ most. Ya know why don't they just add some NFL cheerleaders while they're at it. That'll help. Or add the DH to the NL teams so they have more offense. That might also help so why not. Should the possibility of increased revenue be the only thing that matters? Nah.

mth123
10-21-2011, 06:35 AM
Duh. Of course, they'll focus on $ most. Ya know why don't they just add some NFL cheerleaders while they're at it. That'll help. Or add the DH to the NL teams so they have more offense. That might also help so why not. Should the possibility of increased revenue be the only thing that matters? Nah.

So what do you and everyone else think a commissioner's job should be? He's basically the president of a conglomerate that has 30 franchises and some media holdings. Maximizing revenue is really his only job. Anything else he does is for that purpose.

BCubb2003
10-21-2011, 10:15 AM
Duh. Of course, they'll focus on $ most. Ya know why don't they just add some NFL cheerleaders while they're at it. That'll help. Or add the DH to the NL teams so they have more offense. That might also help so why not. Should the possibility of increased revenue be the only thing that matters? Nah.

Didn't the Reds have cheerleaders a few years ago?

dfs
10-21-2011, 10:22 AM
Duh. Of course, they'll focus on $ most. Ya know why don't they just add some NFL cheerleaders while they're at it. That'll help. Or add the DH to the NL teams so they have more offense. That might also help so why not. Should the possibility of increased revenue be the only thing that matters? Nah.

For the long term good of the sport, the office needs to get the owners to work together to find an equitable way to share revenue. Despite what the media presents, that isn't a player/owner battle, but an owner-owner battle. Getting the owners to honestly open the books to each other is the first step. I don't see any way that's going to happen soon.

SunDeck
10-21-2011, 11:58 AM
All I can say is, I used to like Madison.

redsfandan
10-21-2011, 12:18 PM
So what do you and everyone else think a commissioner's job should be? He's basically the president of a conglomerate that has 30 franchises and some media holdings. Maximizing revenue is really his only job. Anything else he does is for that purpose.

All I'm saying is that 'maximizing revenue' shouldn't be the only factor in baseball decisions and I'm going to leave it at that.

mth123
10-21-2011, 07:06 PM
All I'm saying is that 'maximizing revenue' shouldn't be the only factor in baseball decisions and I'm going to leave it at that.

But it always has been.

Banning the black sox? that was to restore confidence of the paying customer so they'd keep buying tickets. It was not some morality issue.

Discipline for on field brawls? That is to keep the fan from becoming disenchanted with on field thuggery.

Nixing sales of guys like Vida Blue? That was to maintan some compettive balance so that fans wouldn't feel the game was becoming a sham.

The Black-out rules? The Steroid look the other way followed by the hardline stance? MLBTV? Allowing fans to keep balls hit in the stands? Publicizing the draft? The Wild Card? The DH? Raising the mound? Lowering the mound? Night games? Business man specials? Day/Night Doubleheaders? Retractable roofs? Astroturf? Eliminating Astroturf? Juicing the ball? The winter meetings? The All Star game? Touring Japan? Spring Training? The disclaimer about "rights and privileges to the accounts of this game" heard every day? The 7th inning stretch? The Hall of Fame? The veterans committee? MLB At Bat? The RBI Program? Any other charitable thing they ever do? etc. etc. etc.. All for maximizing revenue or profit no matter who the commisioner has been. Its at the root of every action. Period. If you believe otherwise, you are just kidding yourself IMO.

cincinnati chili
10-21-2011, 11:42 PM
Everyone does realize that prior to the All Star game determining the home field for the World Series, the series just alternated from NL to AL year to year for home field. Regular season record has never had anything to do with who gets the home field in the World Series. It isn't like Selig took away some meaningfiul system before putting his plan into place.

I think the criticism of this point is a huge over-reaction, Selig could have simply done nothing, received no criticism whatsoever and the system would be no more "fair" than it is today. I agree that its not the best way, but I don't see it as the huge negative that its made out to be.

Totally agree. This needs to be stated much more often.

The current system for determining home field is better than the old system of eeny-meeny-miney-moe.

George Anderson
10-22-2011, 12:13 AM
Everyone does realize that prior to the All Star game determining the home field for the World Series, the series just alternated from NL to AL year to year for home field. Regular season record has never had anything to do with who gets the home field in the World Series. It isn't like Selig took away some meaningfiul system before putting his plan into place.

I think the criticism of this point is a huge over-reaction, Selig could have simply done nothing, received no criticism whatsoever and the system would be no more "fair" than it is today. I agree that its not the best way, but I don't see it as the huge negative that its made out to be.

Why doesn't MLB do like the NBA and NFL do and reward the team with the best regular season record home field advantage??

marcshoe
10-22-2011, 12:17 AM
I don't think he's going to retire because there has been no movement towards finding a new commissioner.

What's his daughter doing these days?


This all reminds me of a satirical article I read in the seventies about Charlie O. Finley being named commissioner after Bowie Kuhn resigns to serve in President Cosell's administration, iirc.

Ron Madden
10-22-2011, 02:33 AM
The next Commissioner will be someone nominated by one of the most wealthy and powerful owners and approved by the majority of the other owners. Here we go again.

mth123
10-22-2011, 02:36 AM
Why doesn't MLB do like the NBA and NFL do and reward the team with the best regular season record home field advantage??

Understand that, but what Selig did didn't make it any worse. Its portrayed as the worst decision ever. It was a reaction to the All Star game ending in a tie. Personally, I would do like you say and then eliminate the all star game completely, but he did no harm to the post season by making this decision. Selig was trying to make a public show to keep the fans interested in the All Star game and preserve one of the sport's more profitable paydays. That is his job. This seems to be the issue everyone points toward when criticizing selig, yet IMO its a pretty minor change. Having the All Star game decide home field instead of alternating it. If this really is the worst decison he's made, then he's probably the best commissioner the game has ever had.

I'm kind of "meh," where Selig is concerned. I don't reallly favor him, but I don't really dislike him all that much either. He seems like a guy who is doing his job though once you accept the growing the game's cash coffers is what his job really is.

Ron Madden
10-22-2011, 03:15 AM
Understand that, but what Selig did didn't make it any worse. Its portrayed as the worst decision ever. It was a reaction to the All Star game ending in a tie. Personally, I would do like you say and then eliminate the all star game completely, but he did no harm to the post season by making this decision. Selig was trying to make a public show to keep the fans interested in the All Star game and preserve one of the sport's more profitable paydays. That is his job. This seems to be the issue everyone points toward when criticizing selig, yet IMO its a pretty minor change. Having the All Star game decide home field instead of alternating it. If this really is the worst decison he's made, then he's probably the best commissioner the game has ever had.

I'm kind of "meh," where Selig is concerned. I don't reallly favor him, but I don't really dislike him all that much either. He seems like a guy who is doing his job though once you accept the growing the game's cash coffers is what his job really is.

I think there were also players being voted onto the All Star Teams by the fans who were just blowing off the honor in favor of taking three days off. That may have had something to do with it too.

redsfandan
10-22-2011, 03:17 AM
Its portrayed as the worst decision ever. ... If this really is the worst decison he's made, then he's probably the best commissioner the game has ever had.
By who?

Selig was trying to make a public show to keep the fans interested in the All Star game and preserve one of the sport's more profitable paydays. That is his job .... This seems to be the issue everyone points toward when criticizing selig, yet IMO its a pretty minor change.
Yep, in the grande scheme of things it is a minor change. Just one of his decisions that most people probably don't agree with.

mth123
10-22-2011, 04:03 AM
By who?

Yep, in the grande scheme of things it is a minor change. Just one of his decisions that most people probably don't agree with.

Based on this thread, there are three posters who have mentioned it as a negative and I really haven't seen any other specific thing he did that people don't like.

Personally, I hate interelague play. I don't like the expanded play-offs that drag on so long that I lose all interest in who wins or loses by the time the World Series rolls around and cheapens the meaning of proving who is the best team over 162 games. I dislike the idea of teams playing a different number of games against certain teams at home than they do on the road and probably quite a few other things if I thought about it.

But, in just about every case, these changes made the game more money. That is Selig's purpose. How can he be criticized for fulfilling the duties that his job description calls for?

redsfandan
10-22-2011, 05:16 AM
Based on this thread, there are three posters who have mentioned it as a negative and I really haven't seen any other specific thing he did that people don't like. ...


Seriously? Yes that decision of his was a negative. But, noone said that it was "the worst decision ever". You made that leap all by yourself.

As for the rest of your statement I'm sure someone would help you out there if you really need it. I don't think it would be that hard for people to think of a couple things for ya. People would prefer to not rehash that stuff. I mentioned one thing because there's a World Series going on. And that specific decision of his is kinda related to that. There is a reason why he doesn't have many fans though. But, if you wanna defend the guy, by all means, go for it.

cincinnati chili
10-22-2011, 11:38 AM
Why doesn't MLB do like the NBA and NFL do and reward the team with the best regular season record home field advantage??

I wouldn't hate this idea, but I don't exactly favor it either. Imagine that the Tampa Rays had met the Arizona Diamondbacks in the World Series this year. Arizona would have "earned" home field advantage due to the better record. In reality, Tampa had a significantly more difficult schedule, and IMO was an appreciably better team than Arizona. I'm not sure Arizona would have won 85 games with Tampa's schedule.

Also, for what it's worth, Bud Selig has complained that your idea is impossible. I don't necessarily believe him, but his argument goes like this:

The media coverage for the World Series far exceeds that of the NBA and NHL playoffs. Thus, Selig claims that MLB needs to know by the end of the regular season whether the NL or AL will have home field advantage in the World Series. MLB apparently reserves oodles of hotel rooms for the home games in the cities of all four teams in each league. In other words, until about a week ago, MLB had a bunch of hotel rooms reserved for tonight in Detroit, in case the Tigers had made the series.

I'm not sure I buy that this is a serious problem, but I do recall that in the 2004 Series, there were no first class hotel rooms available in the city of Boston, and the Cardinals had to stay in Quincy. That's only 10 miles or so to Fenway, but in bad rush hour traffic can take a good hour.

There's also the logistical problem of NFL games sharing stadiums in a few places (Oakland, Marlins).

Here's a crazy outside the box idea - do it like the Super Bowl, in a predetermined location. For example the winning city of this year's world series would host the 2012 World Series.

Chip R
10-22-2011, 12:38 PM
Why doesn't MLB do like the NBA and NFL do and reward the team with the best regular season record home field advantage??

That would be a better idea but the NFL does not award the Super Bowl to the team with the best regular season record.

A minor drawback to that is that not every MLB teams plays every other MLB team. In the NBA, Eastern Conference plays all Western Conference teams home and home. But I like that idea more than the current idea or alternating leagues.

nate
10-22-2011, 12:59 PM
You had me at "retire."

Roy Tucker
10-22-2011, 12:59 PM
Also, for what it's worth, Bud Selig has complained that your idea is impossible. I don't necessarily believe him, but his argument goes like this:

The media coverage for the World Series far exceeds that of the NBA and NHL playoffs. Thus, Selig claims that MLB needs to know by the end of the regular season whether the NL or AL will have home field advantage in the World Series. MLB apparently reserves oodles of hotel rooms for the home games in the cities of all four teams in each league. In other words, until about a week ago, MLB had a bunch of hotel rooms reserved for tonight in Detroit, in case the Tigers had made the series.

I'm not sure I buy that this is a serious problem, but I do recall that in the 2004 Series, there were no first class hotel rooms available in the city of Boston, and the Cardinals had to stay in Quincy. That's only 10 miles or so to Fenway, but in bad rush hour traffic can take a good hour.



Yeah, I've heard that argument and there is probably some merit to it. But the media seems to do OK with the Division Series and the League Championship Series and with those series, they don't know who is going to be where till days before and I don't see reporters camping in tents in the local parks.

Does the World Series get *that* much more coverage than the DS and LCS? I kinda don't think so. Maybe a 20-50% more (maybe), but not enough warrant basing the decision on that.

And in these hyper-connected split-second internet expedia travelocity orbitz priceline days, I gotta think they can book rooms. Booking months ahead of time "just in case" is something my 80-year old grandmother does.

savafan
10-22-2011, 03:08 PM
Selig, Costas discuss possible changes to game

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20111021&content_id=25745024&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb


Commissioner Bud Selig sat down to speak with Bob Costas in an interview that aired Friday night on MLB Network, discussing the state of Major League Baseball -- including a few changes that could be coming soon.

cincinnati chili
10-22-2011, 04:22 PM
Selig, Costas discuss possible changes to game

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20111021&content_id=25745024&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

Saw that on MLB Network last night. Good job by Costas. Selig is pretty annoying especially his defense of instant replay based on the human element and because it's the way they've always done it.