Selig's term extended through 2012 at $15M per year

[BRM]

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- Commissioner Bud Selig's contract has been extended by Major League Baseball's 30 owners for three years, taking him through the 2012 season.

The decision was made in an executive council meeting on Wednesday and was ratified by the collective owners on Thursday, making the new deal the biggest news of this year's first quarterly meetings.

Selig was asked to step out of Wednesday's executive council meeting as the select owners on that board voted to secure the new terms of his position. When the doors swung open and Selig returned to the room, he was awarded a loud standing ovation.

The owners endorsed Selig, who replaced the deposed Fay Vincent on an interim basis on Sept. 9, 1992, on the heels of the release last month of the Mitchell Report, the result of an investigation into the use of performance-enhancing drugs in baseball. At Tuesday's four-hour Congressional hearing on Capitol Hill, the Commissioner was commended by a number of elected officials for having the foresight to seek former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell to spearhead the investigation.

Selig, 73, just finished his 15th full season as Commissioner. As a business, the sport has never done better, setting records last season in gross revenue ($6.1 billion) and total attendance (79.5 million). Projections right now are for attendance to easily soar over the 80 million ticket mark in 2008.

Selig had said a few years ago that he would retire at the end of his current term, which was set to expire after the 2009 season. But last year he backed off that assessment a bit when asked about it, saying "you never say never about anything."
Similarly, in 2003 he also mused that he would probably retire at the end of his term, but on Aug. 17, 2004, the owners extended him through 2009.

Selig, who once owned the Milwaukee Brewers, was given the job as Commissioner permanently on July 7, 1998, and since then has presided over unparalleled labor peace and an economic sea change in a sport that was barely generating more than $1 billion a year in revenue at the time he took over as baseball's ninth Commissioner.

Under his watch, Selig fought for and won approval for Interleague Play, the consolidation of the American League and National League under one office, the three-division format and a Wild Card berth in each league, the unbalanced schedule, worldwide recognition of the sport, steroids testing of Major League players beginning in 2003 and home-field advantage in the World Series for the winning league in the All-Star Game.

For the third time, MLB is slated to open its regular season in Japan, with the A's set to match the defending World Series champion Red Sox in March at Tokyo Dome. Also in March, the Padres and Dodgers are projected to play exhibition games in Beijing, the first time Major League games will be played in China.

And in 2009, the second World Baseball Classic is scheduled to be played, capitalizing on its popular inaugural in 2006.

To be sure, it hasn't always been sugar and roses. Early on Selig's watch, MLB was fractured by the 1994 player strike that abruptly ended that season, led to the cancellation of the World Series and delayed the start of the 1995 season. But it was the last event of its kind.

In 2002, the owners and players avoided the ninth consecutive work stoppage over three decades when they signed a four-year Basic Agreement that distributed revenue more liberally from the big-revenue clubs to the smaller ones. Likewise in 2006, the two sides extended the agreement for six years, assuring labor peace through 2012, which coincidentally coincides with the expiration of the Commissioner's latest contract.


LINK (http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080117&content_id=2347936&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb)

[Jpup]

Boo!

[RedLegSuperStar]

Well Crap...

[Yachtzee]

I thought he had already said he was stepping down after this current term.

[KronoRed]

Why bother with worry? even when he steps down another guy just like him will step in, the days of a strong commish are long since over with.

[westofyou]

Excellent

http://tech.blorge.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/simpsons-schip-page-not-a-hack-say-republicans-mr-burns.jpg

[RollyInRaleigh]

:barf:

[macro]

As a business, the sport has never done better, setting records last season in gross revenue ($6.1 billion) and total attendance (79.5 million). Projections right now are for attendance to easily soar over the 80 million ticket mark in 2008.

I have a problem with the numbers they throw out to support claims that baseball is doing so well. In order to make an accurate comparison to history, these numbers should be adjusted for inflation and also to take the total U.S. population into consideration.

As inflation persists and the total population continues to increase, it would stand to reason that "records" will continue to be set on a regular basis, regardless of who the commissioner is. These numbers have been on a fairly steady incline for the past 100 years.

Why don't they mention that total attendance was over 70 million in Pud's first year of 1993 and has consistently returned to that level only recently, and this while there are more teams than ever and a larger population than ever?

Oh, and should we mention that the National League began counting "tickets sold" as "attendance" in 1993? Before that, it was only the number of bodies that actually walked through the turnstiles. (When did the AL start doing this? I know they did it before the NL.) What is the no-show rate for the typical game? What is the no-show rate in September for teams that are hopelessly out of it? Furthermore, teams also now count tickets given away to charity in their "attendance" numbers.

[dougdirt]

I have a problem with the numbers they throw out to support claims that baseball is doing so well. In order to make an accurate comparison to history, these numbers should be adjusted for inflation and also to take the total U.S. population into consideration.

As inflation persists and the total population continues to increase, it would stand to reason that "records" will continue to be set on a regular basis, regardless of who the commissioner is. These numbers have been on a fairly steady incline for the past 100 years.

Why don't they mention that total attendance was over 70 million in Pud's first year of 1993 and has consistently returned to that level only recently, and this while there are more teams than ever and a larger population than ever?

Oh, and should we mention that the National League began counting "tickets sold" as "attendance" in 1993? Before that, it was only the number of bodies that actually walked through the turnstiles. (When did the AL start doing this? I know they did it before the NL.) What is the no-show rate for the typical game? What is the no-show rate in September for teams that are hopelessly out of it? Furthermore, teams also now count tickets given away to charity in their "attendance" numbers.

Of course by the same token, there are 150 games on tv in nearly every market, more things to do with your family than ever and yet they are still drawing huge numbers.

[traderumor]

Could it be that they don't want to change until the steroids mess has run its course more fully? Plus, if they can his butt in the middle of this stuff, it would likely send an unwanted message to the owners' culpability in the scandal. They can lean on "Bud's grown our business," whether they're cherrypicking the basis for that assertion or not until the skies are a little clearer.

[Yachtzee]

I have a problem with the numbers they throw out to support claims that baseball is doing so well. In order to make an accurate comparison to history, these numbers should be adjusted for inflation and also to take the total U.S. population into consideration.

As inflation persists and the total population continues to increase, it would stand to reason that "records" will continue to be set on a regular basis, regardless of who the commissioner is. These numbers have been on a fairly steady incline for the past 100 years.

Why don't they mention that total attendance was over 70 million in Pud's first year of 1993 and has consistently returned to that level only recently, and this while there are more teams than ever and a larger population than ever?

Oh, and should we mention that the National League began counting "tickets sold" as "attendance" in 1993? Before that, it was only the number of bodies that actually walked through the turnstiles. (When did the AL start doing this? I know they did it before the NL.) What is the no-show rate for the typical game? What is the no-show rate in September for teams that are hopelessly out of it? Furthermore, teams also now count tickets given away to charity in their "attendance" numbers.

Baseball is in great shape, except when it's time to renegotiate the CBA. It would be interesting to see breakdowns based on teams. I would suspect the disparity of revenue earned by teams in different markets has increased as some of the more valuable teams have been able to start their own cable networks and enter into marketing agreements with professional sports entities in other leagues to expand their reach globally while other teams are limited in how far they can go to expand revenues.

[LincolnparkRed]

Of course by the same token, there are 150 games on tv in nearly every market, more things to do with your family than ever and yet they are still drawing huge numbers.

Yeah but they do the same thing with movies. This new movie made x million more than any older movie. We of course it did, it costs $10 to see the new movie and only $2 to see the older one so for the same number of viewers you would make 5 times as much. Not indexing for inflation always bugs me with a products whose price has gone up so much over the years like movies or the cost of sporting events.

[dougdirt]

Yeah but they do the same thing with movies. This new movie made x million more than any older movie. We of course it did, it costs $10 to see the new movie and only $2 to see the older one so for the same number of viewers you would make 5 times as much. Not indexing for inflation always bugs me with a products whose price has gone up so much over the years like movies or the cost of sporting events.
True, but movies are counted by money, not by tickets sold. Obviously tickets being 5 times as much as they used to be is one thing, but with baseball, they are looking at it in a tickets bought sense and not in the dollars spent on tickets sense.

[Sea Ray]

One factor that hasn't been mentioned in regards to attendance is that a lot of teams have decreased the seating capacity of their stadiums. Here in Cincinnati we went from 52K to about 43K when Great American BP was built. That is commonplace in other cities where they got rid of their cement doughnut like Atl, Pitt and St Louis.

I think Bud is slow to make decisions but overall he's been a good Commissioner. He does fight for the small market teams more than any other Commissioner has. After 15 yrs of Bud I'd have to say I like the guy.

[WMR]

BOO!!

Selig you STINK!

[bucksfan2]

Baseball is in great shape, except when it's time to renegotiate the CBA. It would be interesting to see breakdowns based on teams. I would suspect the disparity of revenue earned by teams in different markets has increased as some of the more valuable teams have been able to start their own cable networks and enter into marketing agreements with professional sports entities in other leagues to expand their reach globally while other teams are limited in how far they can go to expand revenues.

Actually I really don't think all of baseball is in great shape. I think the big market teams are thriving but the smaller market teams are not doing as well. There is an economic divide that I really don't feel like discussing at all.

I do believe that baseball has grown monetarily inspite of Selig. You have a few teams with their own networks while you have other teams that have very good TV contracts. Not to mention national TV contracts. There is also satellite radio as well as both video and audio broadcast over the internet that bring in a lot of money.

I wonder what this economic downturn is going to do to attendance, especially in the midwest?

[Matt700wlw]

Morons!

[Sea Ray]

Actually I really don't think all of baseball is in great shape. I think the big market teams are thriving but the smaller market teams are not doing as well. There is an economic divide that I really don't feel like discussing at all.


I agree but I think the small markets are more competitive than they were 10 yrs ago. Progress has been slow indeed. Bud made the decision that slow change w/o a work stoppage was preferable to all out armegeddon. In both of the most recent CBAs revenue sharing has increased. I'm still not satisfied that our Reds have a level playing field but it is better.

[M2]

Why not just call him Commissioner for Life Bud Selig and be done with it? Or Baseball's High Potentate?

Though I think he should be required to parade around in a military uniform with a chest full of bogus medals as part of the deal.

[westofyou]

Actually I really don't think all of baseball is in great shape. I think the big market teams are thriving but the smaller market teams are not doing as well. There is an economic divide that I really don't feel like discussing at all.



Has been since 1876, one time only it thinned enough and that was during the first wave of expansion and even then the new teams were hamstrung something awful. But the real rub is the game centers around the big towns, that's why the AL moved into NYC and Chicago before they claimed Major League status, that's why the Continental League forced expansion by playing around with a team in Flushing Meadows. It's why they let the Braves and the A's bolt their "new" towns in the 60's.. because there was more money in those bigger cities, then they'd just throw another team at the lawsuit over letting the first team leave.

It is a business and like most of them it's a constant shell game.


I wonder what this economic downturn is going to do to attendance, especially in the midwest?

More Dollar Hot Dog nights

[bucksfan2]

I agree but I think the small markets are more competitive than they were 10 yrs ago. Progress has been slow indeed. Bud made the decision that slow change w/o a work stoppage was preferable to all out armegeddon. In both of the most recent CBAs revenue sharing has increased. I'm still not satisfied that our Reds have a level playing field but it is better.

Disagree here. In the past 10-20 years teams like the Reds, Royals, Pirates, and Twins were very relevant. The Twins have had an impressive run as of late but never got passed the first round of the playoffs. I believe in the 90's the Reds and Royals were amongst the teams with the highest payrolls. Also during that time the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, and White Sox were pretty poor.

[Matt700wlw]

Man, and they talk about the importance of the game's INTEGRITY

[traderumor]

mmmm, dollar hot dogs

[Chip R]

They just don't want to go to the trouble of finding anyone else. Who knows what a new guy may do?

[Unassisted]

The man is 73 years old. He's not going to spend 4 more years in that job. This is largely symbolic, but ill-timed, coming on the heels of his lackluster Congressional testimony.

[Yachtzee]

They just don't want to go to the trouble of finding anyone else. Who knows what a new guy may do?

Yep. The new guy might do something scary, like try to grow the sport and improve the competitiveness of all teams rather than putting out hare-brained ideas like contraction. Sometimes I get the feeling they keep Selig around because they like the status quo. Small market teams like to complain about revenue disparity, large market teams like to paint small market teams as not wanting to win, and owners and the players union like to paint each other as the bad guy. A new commissioner might actually try to pressure small markets to improve in exchange for more revenue from big market teams. He (or she) might even get the owners and players union to realize that the sport might be more profitable for owners and players if they worked together. Such ideas might be too much for people who have spent so much time painting their opponents as evil incarnate.

[westofyou]

Baseball owners fire or run the guys out who cause a ruckus, they gave the Judge too much rope and he helped stunt the growth of the game at times with is old world views, they ran Vincent off and Peter U.... Bud once sued MLB and now he's the commissioner, forty years is a long time, and he's currently been here longer then all of them.

Crazy game, crazy business.

[vaticanplum]

The man is 73 years old. He's not going to spend 4 more years in that job. This is largely symbolic, but ill-timed, coming on the heels of his lackluster Congressional testimony.

Is he really 73? Gosh, he doesn't look it.

Did I just compliment Bud Selig?

[Matt700wlw]

Did I just compliment Bud Selig?

Unless you think he looks about 90... :cool:

[MrCinatit]

Sounds like crypt keeper has become emperor for life, a la Landis.

[WMR]

Please someone tell me this is a practical joke. :rolleyes:

[Highlifeman21]

It is not.

Bud is making some coin.

[Sea Ray]

Disagree here. In the past 10-20 years teams like the Reds, Royals, Pirates, and Twins were very relevant. The Twins have had an impressive run as of late but never got passed the first round of the playoffs. I believe in the 90's the Reds and Royals were amongst the teams with the highest payrolls. Also during that time the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, and White Sox were pretty poor.


I guess it depends on how set the parameters. If you set it at 20 years, I agree with you. In 1990 as our Reds were winning the World Series over another small market team, the A's had the game's highest payroll. I don't think we'll see that again no matter who's commissioner. But in the late 90s the large market teams had huges advantages over the small markets. Unlike then, we now see teams more small market teams competing. I grant you, it is still an unfair playing field. Teams like the Twins and A's still can't get past the first rd but the revenue sharing has helped.

[Sea Ray]

Yep. The new guy might do something scary, like try to grow the sport and improve the competitiveness of all teams rather than putting out hare-brained ideas like contraction.


He did oversee expansion to three divisions per league and the addition of a wildcard team in the playoffs. I think that was good for the sport. If you go by attendance, interleague play is good for the sport. Fans come out in droves for these interleague games. He is currently working on expanding the sport internationally by playing games overseas and establishing a "world cup" of baseball.

I agree there is more work to be done where the competitiveness of all teams is concerned.

[WMR]

It's ********************** ridiculous, is what it is.

[Unassisted]

I'm no fan of Bud's, but I don't think this is worth flogging him over.

MLB is earning over $6 billion a year in revenue now under Bud's watch. 15 million is 0.25 percent of 6 billion. What percentage of annual revenue do most CEOs of private companies earn? I'll bet the percentage is not out of line.

It also strikes me that $15M/year may be less revenue than Bud was pulling out of the Brewers on an annual basis when he owned the club.

[red-in-la]

I'm no fan of Bud's, but I don't think this is worth flogging him over.

MLB is earning over $6 billion a year in revenue now under Bud's watch. 15 million is 0.25 percent of 6 billion. What percentage of annual revenue do most CEOs of private companies earn? I'll bet the percentage is not out of line.

It also strikes me that $15M/year may be less revenue than Bud was pulling out of the Brewers on an annual basis when he owned the club.

I don't think the Brewers were exactly a honey pot for dear old Buddy boy. I would guess that he has been living high on the hog since he got the sweet commish gig.

[cincinnati chili]

Bud Selig exemplifies the Blind Squirrel/Acorn theory.

[Yachtzee]

He did oversee expansion to three divisions per league and the addition of a wildcard team in the playoffs. I think that was good for the sport. If you go by attendance, interleague play is good for the sport. Fans come out in droves for these interleague games. He is currently working on expanding the sport internationally by playing games overseas and establishing a "world cup" of baseball.

I agree there is more work to be done where the competitiveness of all teams is concerned.

I'll give you that, but I don't necessarily credit Selig with all of those. Expansion and the wild card were likely to happen anyway, what with increased pressure from cities seeking major league franchises. With expansion, adding the wild card made sense and was merely falling in line with what other sports had already done. I think his big feat in that regard was getting consensus on divisional realignment, something that Fay Vincent failed to do, which made the transition smooth.

Interleague play is a nice boost to attendance for a few series a year, but I really still feel like it's a gimmick that kind of messes things up more than improves the game. With the three divisions and the wild card, I'd much rather see no interleague games and a more balanced schedule so that wild card teams are competing on an more even basis. It would also mean more games for the Reds against long-time rival Dodgers, Giants and Braves. I think attendance would show a more healthy increase in a number of markets by working harder to improve the quality of the teams and the promotion of baseball in those markets rather than a few series of gimmicky interleague matchups.

I think the "World Cup" idea was something that was kind of pushed on baseball from the outside. I think it was a real black eye for the sport when it was dropped from the roster of medal sports in the Olympics and one of the reasons was the lack of international competition outside the Olympics. IIRC, MLB had been sandbagging on a World Cup-style competition because they didn't want it to interfere with the MLB season, just as they don't like the idea of players taking off for a few weeks to play in the Olympics. Thus the World Baseball Classic seems more like a concession to international pressures as much as it does an attempt to grow the sport internationally. Even with that, I think a number of owners are wary about letting their star players go to play in international competitions.

[KronoRed]

He doesn't rock the boat, that's worth it for the guys who pay him

[Ron Madden]

He might make 15 million per season, if he earns it or not is another question. ;)

[bucksfan2]

I'll give you that, but I don't necessarily credit Selig with all of those. Expansion and the wild card were likely to happen anyway, what with increased pressure from cities seeking major league franchises. With expansion, adding the wild card made sense and was merely falling in line with what other sports had already done. I think his big feat in that regard was getting consensus on divisional realignment, something that Fay Vincent failed to do, which made the transition smooth.

Interleague play is a nice boost to attendance for a few series a year, but I really still feel like it's a gimmick that kind of messes things up more than improves the game. With the three divisions and the wild card, I'd much rather see no interleague games and a more balanced schedule so that wild card teams are competing on an more even basis. It would also mean more games for the Reds against long-time rival Dodgers, Giants and Braves. I think attendance would show a more healthy increase in a number of markets by working harder to improve the quality of the teams and the promotion of baseball in those markets rather than a few series of gimmicky interleague matchups.

I think the "World Cup" idea was something that was kind of pushed on baseball from the outside. I think it was a real black eye for the sport when it was dropped from the roster of medal sports in the Olympics and one of the reasons was the lack of international competition outside the Olympics. IIRC, MLB had been sandbagging on a World Cup-style competition because they didn't want it to interfere with the MLB season, just as they don't like the idea of players taking off for a few weeks to play in the Olympics. Thus the World Baseball Classic seems more like a concession to international pressures as much as it does an attempt to grow the sport internationally. Even with that, I think a number of owners are wary about letting their star players go to play in international competitions.

Everything you mentioned was pretty easy to do. Selig did implement those things but in reality did he have to think outside of the box to do any of that? IMO that the revenue growth was more a product of advances in technology that baseball took advantage of rather than MLB drastically improving their product.

[westofyou]

I don't think the Brewers were exactly a honey pot for dear old Buddy boy. I would guess that he has been living high on the hog since he got the sweet commish gig.

He bought into the team at 6 million, owned 26% and they sold for 180 Million.

Gimmi some of that honey.

[dfs]

Yep. The new guy might do something scary, like try to grow the sport and improve the competitiveness of all teams rather than putting out hare-brained ideas like contraction.

but that's not the commissioner's mandate. He's an employee for the owners who...well, duh....love the status quo.

The owners are FAR more concerned about maximizing revenue than they are with a balanced playing field and Bud is all about maximizing revenue.

Contraction was a smoke screen to get stadiums built and to allow the Montreal-Washington transfer and it worked brilliantly.

I seriously don't get the Selig-hate. The man has done exactly what the owners want. Frankly, I think Selig is to be COMMENDED for minimizing the player/owner friction and moving the labor troubles from the front pages to the back burner.

[Sea Ray]

I seriously don't get the Selig-hate. The man has done exactly what the owners want. Frankly, I think Selig is to be COMMENDED for minimizing the player/owner friction and moving the labor troubles from the front pages to the back burner.

You really don't get it? I can explain it in two words: Pete Rose

I don't agree with the Selig hate but I can see where it's coming from in our neck of the woods.

[Chip R]

Frankly, I think Selig is to be COMMENDED for minimizing the player/owner friction and moving the labor troubles from the front pages to the back burner.


I think Bud has come to the slow, painful realization that taking a hard line with the players is not the way to get things done. He's probably the first post-free agent commissioner to finally realize that.

[RedsManRick]

The purpose of the commissioner is to serve as an independent arbiter between labor and ownership, representing the interests of the game when the two sides are unable to reach agreements. Instead, Bud has interpreted the role to be that of the CEO of the industry. Whether or not his changes have helped grow the game are beside the point in my book. Growing the game is not his job.

[westofyou]

The purpose of the commissioner is to serve as an independent arbiter between labor and ownership, representing the interests of the game when the two sides are unable to reach agreements.

Really?

The commish has been representing the owners whims since the mid 40's and the first guy who held the job was hardly an arbitrator who valued the position of both sides.

It's a figurehead position playing the back room votes of the owners consensus in public, also in public they broker deals with their semi equals the players union, whose thin moment of earning power causes them to both accept less and demand less. It's like the push me pull me, it seems it's moving one way for one group, then the other... but in reality they all move in unison.

[RedsManRick]

Really?

The commish has been representing the owners whims since the mid 40's and the first guy who held the job was hardly an arbitrator who valued the position of both sides.

It's a figurehead position playing the back room votes of the owners consensus in public, also in public they broker deals with their semi equals the players union, whose thin moment of earning power causes them to both accept less and demand less. It's like the push me pull me, it seems it's moving one way for one group, then the other... but in reality they all move in unison.

And I would level that same criticism against those past commissioners. The entire realization of the position relative to it's described purpose is a farce. Just kill the position, have the owners elect one of their own and be done with it. The way it plays out now, the only real arbitration function the commissioner serves is between large and small market owners -- which I suppose is how it's been for 70 years.

[Sea Ray]

In the real world the Commissioner is nominated and paid by the owners. The players have no say in the matter. It follows that he'll represent the interests of the owners.

[Yachtzee]

but that's not the commissioner's mandate. He's an employee for the owners who...well, duh....love the status quo.

The owners are FAR more concerned about maximizing revenue than they are with a balanced playing field and Bud is all about maximizing revenue.

Contraction was a smoke screen to get stadiums built and to allow the Montreal-Washington transfer and it worked brilliantly.

I seriously don't get the Selig-hate. The man has done exactly what the owners want. Frankly, I think Selig is to be COMMENDED for minimizing the player/owner friction and moving the labor troubles from the front pages to the back burner.

I don't think contraction was a smoke screen. The Twins were one of the teams most likely to be contracted and they got nowhere with a new stadium bid until after contraction had already been taken off the table.

I don't credit him with maximizing revenue because he hasn't really done much for that. The business of revenue maximization has primarily been the province of the individual teams. The Yankees by themselves have done more to increase the revenues of MLB as a whole than any initiatives from the commissioners office. Sure, he's implemented some degree of revenue sharing among clubs. But he has done little to improve the health of the game in all of its markets. IMO, a good commissioner, while pushing for the Red Sox and Yankees to share more of the wealth, he would also push for teams like the Royals, Pirates, and especially the Marlins to invest more of that revenue sharing money in ways that improve the quality of their play AND enhance revenues for the ballclub. Part of the reason why the Yankees have sympathy with players and fans when it comes to revenue sharing is that some teams use it as a form of billionaire welfare.

I also don't see how you can really give Selig all that much credit for peace between the players and the owners, considering the only baseball strike to cancel a World Series was under his watch. Couple that with the brinksmanship he engaged in with contraction and the whole steroids era, and it looks more and more like Selig isn't some proactive champion who has done much good for baseball. Instead I see him as a passive caretaker whose strong point has been building a consensus among the owners for compromise positions. While it's a valuable asset, it's hardly the mark of a great commissioner.

I don't hate Selig. I just think the sport really needs a visionary commissioner who can help owners realize that players aren't their adversaries but actually their best assets and that having a good, well marketed organization in Kansas City is just as important for the long-term health of the game as having one in New York or Boston. I'd like to see a commissioner who promotes the game so that national broadcasts get good rating even when the Yankees and Red Sox aren't playing. The commissioner works for the owners, it's true. However, the mark of a good commissioner is one who can convince his bosses that something is in their long-term best interest even when they can't see it themselves.

[westofyou]

have the owners elect one of their own and be done with it.

Isn't that what they already have done?

[RedsManRick]

Isn't that what they already have done?

Well, yes. I meant that they shouldn't pretend that it is anything but that. The window dressing of impartiality serves no purpose.

[RFS62]

Really?

The commish has been representing the owners whims since the mid 40's and the first guy who held the job was hardly an arbitrator who valued the position of both sides.

It's a figurehead position playing the back room votes of the owners consensus in public, also in public they broker deals with their semi equals the players union, whose thin moment of earning power causes them to both accept less and demand less. It's like the push me pull me, it seems it's moving one way for one group, then the other... but in reality they all move in unison.


Yep. He's up there to take the heat from the Feds. The other Bosses are the real power.


http://l.yimg.com/img.tv.yahoo.com/tv/us/img/site/44/20/0000034420_20061020200542.jpg

[Roy Tucker]

This pretty well sums up my feelings...

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/telander/747323,CST-SPT-rick18.article



Doin' a heck of a job, Bud
After Selig received a comeuppance on Capitol Hill as enabler of the Steroid Era, the owners gave him a multi-million-dollar pat on the back

January 18, 2008
BY RICK TELANDER Sun-Times Columnist

Clearly, there is a wild disconnect between major-league baseball and and the rest of the world.

Less than 48 hours after he was told by the U.S. House of Representatives that he and baseball players union chief Donald Fehr basically were responsible for allowing steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs to infest baseball the way holes infest Swiss cheese, commissioner Bud Selig received a contract extension from the club owners through 2012.

''Believable Bud,'' 73, made almost $15 million in 2005, the last year his baseball tax returns are available for scrutiny.

I know, as does everyone in this country, that the citadel of capitalism worships at the temple of profit.

Free enterprise and free markets create the most profit for the most people for the most time. And that, as Adam Smith, the philosopher and not the minor-leaguer, declared, is good.

Baseball under Selig's watch has been incredibly profitable -- $6 billion in revenue last year, more predicted this year, more next year, all of it adorned with labor peace, new arenas, attendance records, etc.

But that's business.

And business has no soul, no conscience, no children.

Ethics supposedly are within, but they hide on the sidelines while toxic waste is dumped, mortgages are squeezed, taxes are levied, syringes are filled.

What is probable cause for drug testing? Rep. Mark E. Souder (R-Ind.) asked Selig with disbelief at the congressional hearing Tuesday on Capitol Hill. Must baseball always be ''waiting until potentially the law is coming?'' Souder asked.

Shouldn't suspicion be raised about players ''when their stats are tripling from one year to the next?'' Souder continued, amazed. ''Are statistical anomalies potentially cause?''

As I listened there in the packed hearing room, I thought of Brady Anderson, on this year's Hall of Fame ballot, and how he went from 16 home runs to 50 in one season, and Lenny Dykstra (six homers to 19), and Sammy Sosa (36 to 66), and -- oh, yes -- the indicted Barry Bonds (49 to 73).
An attention deficit

Selig, of course, gave the verbal equivalent of a shrug over such mysteries. And then he signed a contract extension that will carry him along until he is 78.

It was brought to Selig's attention at the hearing that the number of players granted permission to use banned drugs for medical purposes more than tripled from 2006 to 2007.

Most of them were for attention deficit disorders, meaning the players could take handy stimulants like Adderall and Ritalin.

Though this increase was described as a potential ''epidemic'' by one drug expert, it was only a point for discussion for Selig and his gang.

Couldn't this fraudulently avuncular and ever-so-conveniently-clueless leader from Wisconsin say, just once, the most obvious thing: Without greenies, guys are getting their speed from prescriptions.

Selig has the most wonderful way of pushing his unruly hair to the side, cupping his hand about his ear and appearing like your helpful Uncle Willy.

But it's a ruse.

And it's a ruse because it works.

Consider that under his and the oily Fehr's watch, three players in 2006 and two in 2007 actually had legal scripts for androgen deficiencies, meaning they could take legal testosterone -- i.e. 'roids.

Gary Wadler, chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency, told the Washington Post that this was so unusual, he could think of only one Olympic athlete who was granted such an exemption: a sailor who had lost both of his testicles.

Back in March 2005, a national USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll showed that almost 90 percent of fans thought steroids were a serious problem or worse, with 23 percent saying they had ruined the game.

But since the turnstiles keep moving, the lords of the sport keep winking.

On Wednesday WADA president John Fahey ripped to shreds Selig's and Fehr's contention to Congress that there is no HGH test available and that storing players' blood for future testing is unreliable and not worth doing.

''Demeaning'' and ''reprehensible'' are two of the words Fahey used.

Again, adjectives wither and vanish in the shadows of the operative word: money.

And because of money, Selig rules.
'It can erode our humanity'

Bottom-lineism is a cynical thing to ponder when it involves America's Pastime and its effect on kids, but we see it everywhere on the landscape -- the lessons of decency and fair play trumped by the lessons of blind success.

In a remarkable essay in the New York Times on Wednesday, former Cubs outfielder Doug Glanville wrote eloquently of the thing that drives baseball players to take illicit drugs, to cheat, to do anything at all to stave off the inevitable. Fear.

''We're scared of failure, aging, vulnerability, leaving too soon, being passed up -- and in the quest to conquer those fears, we are inspired by those who do whatever it takes to rise above and beat those odds. We call it 'drive' or 'ambition,' but when doing 'whatever it takes' leads us down the wrong road, it can erode our humanity.''

Selig can laugh at all that philosophical mumbo-jumbo.

Ethics is not his deal.

Business is.

And business is good.

[cincinnati chili]

In the real world the Commissioner is nominated and paid by the owners. The players have no say in the matter. It follows that he'll represent the interests of the owners.

This is exactly right. He's not independent and shouldn't be. However, it's in the best interest of the people who pay him to make the game as appealing as possible. Sometimes extending an olive branch to the players WHO ARE YOUR PRODUCT is the best way to do that.

I'm convinced that baseball has thrived in spite of Selig, not because of Selig. Right place. Right time. Very, very lucky. He's made bad decision after bad decision. If David Stern had been commissioner of baseball for the past 15 years, I bet its popularity would be much closer to the NFL than it is now.

[M2]

The conspiracy theory running around (http://www.slate.com/id/2180254/) is that Selig's extension might have a lot to do with his eventual successor. Supposedly there's a certain fellow, whom we'll call POTUS for the sake of anonymity, who wants the job, but who would be a disastrous choice at this moment in time. The thinking is that perhaps this POTUS will become more palatable in another five years.

[Sea Ray]

A long time ago when I saw GW Bush in his front row box seat at Rangers games, I commented how he'd found a far superior "life" than his family of politicians. He'd sit there with a big box of popcorn, hot dog and a drink and looked like he'd found real happiness. Then he allowed the GOP to talk him into running for Governor and yeah, you know the rest. He'd have been much better off running the Texas Rangers and maybe eventually being Commissioner for $15mill a year. I wonder is he regrets ever being roped into politics.

[KronoRed]

The conspiracy theory running around (http://www.slate.com/id/2180254/) is that Selig's extension might have a lot to do with his eventual successor. Supposedly there's a certain fellow, whom we'll call POTUS for the sake of anonymity, who wants the job, but who would be a disastrous choice at this moment in time. The thinking is that perhaps this POTUS will become more palatable in another five years.

That's a horrifying though.

[SunDeck]

If POTUS becomes the next commissioner, I predict the player's union will be the next Evil Empire.

[Unassisted]

that would be like the U.S. Olympic Committee deciding in 1981 to tap Jimmy Carter because of his experience with the 1980 boycott.


Condi Rice, who wants to be NFL commissioner, faces the same hurdles—her current job isn't going too well, while the job she wants is taken and the sport is doing famously without her.

Those were just a couple of the many belly laughs to be found in the Slate article M2's post linked to. :laugh: