Fairball

Rating:
Summary: Silent Lucidity... or... Ideas So Good That No One Listens
Review: Contrary to some of the opinions listed in reviews here at Amazon, Costas is NOT stuck in the 70s, 60s, or 50s. He asks the reader to remember what baseball was like in 1993, just before The Strike. No wild-cards, no mini-divisions. Now, much of the book is devoted to the financial aspects of baseball. Costas' point here is that nothing about the game on the field matters much if these off-the-field problems continue. His views here are so straightforward, and so close to the NFL model (the most successful and popular sport in the U.S.), that baseball owners should be embarrassed by having to have it explained to them.

However, since I am a baseball fan, not an accountant, the sections on realignment and the wild-card system are what compelled me most. Costas makes lucid arguments for a simple 15-15 alignment of teams. Yes, you'd have an interleague game every day (or more precisely, every weekend day), but so what? I am ambivalent to interleague play, and there are bigger things wrong with baseball than whether a team plays six of its 50-52 series each year against the opposite league. The upside of a 15-15 split is no mini-divisions. One of these days a team is going to win the four-team AL West (not this year, but sometime) with a 78-84 mark. Or worse. Texas was leading the division at 10 games under when The Strike hit. The unbalanced schedule for 2001 was actually a good move by the owners, as it reduces the chances of this happening. However, it makes the wild-card even more of a joke than it already was. Before 2001, the wild-card team played pretty close to the same schedule as the other second-place clubs. However, now that teams play so many games within their own division, it means the wild-card is more likely to come from a weaker division. If you are in a division with several good teams, your record is likely to be worse than if you are in a division with only two good teams. The best argument Costas makes in his book is for the elimination of the wild-card. Yes, the wild-card has given us some close races, but in the end, who cares? We are rewarded with "races" pitting also-rans together. Other sports have conditioned us to accept the legitimacy of the best teams not winning. Anytime someone points this out they are rejected out of hand as traditionalist. Most fans are of the opinion that more teams "deserve" to be in the playoffs because they were good teams. However, good teams do not "deserve" to be champions; only great ones are accorded that distinction. Drawing a parallel from another sport, I remember a 1981 post-Super Bowl interview with a member of the Philadelphia Eagles. After his team lost, he said: (I am quoting from memory, so I may fudge it a bit) "It's too bad there can only be one world champion. I wish there could be two or three." Right.

Attitudes like that are what drive wild-card proponents. Nothing wrong with Florida beating Atlanta in the 1997 NLCS, since the Marlins were a "good team." Never mind that they had their chance to prove they were good, and still lost their division by nine games. It comes down to a fundamental truth: If you are not good enough to win your division, you are not good enough to be called World Champion. It's not that they aren't good teams, it is that they haven't earned the right to be there. They had the chance to prove themselves over 162 games, and they couldn't get the job done.

For those who say the wild-card creates interest, Costas counters that wild-cards merely create the illusion of a chance, and that it destroys the pennant races. What kind of races do wild-cards create? Races between two mediocre teams, with around 86-90 wins. The owners love the wild-card; that should be a warning sign right there. The reason they love it? They are able to dangle false hope to the fans of also-rans that they might still be able to win. Another illusion is that it allows small-market teams a chance. However, every single wild-card qualifier has been in the top ten in payroll.

After they failed to catch the Braves last season, Mets players made numerous comments on how they didn't care about winning the division; the wild-card was good enough for them. Is "second-place is fine with us" the kind of attitude we want in baseball? For each year since the wild-card's inception, Costas provides examples of how it killed that season's pennant races. Baseball fans have had dramatic, nail-biting, winner-take-all races between two excellent teams replaced by 1) lukewarm "races" between mediocre clubs, and 2) non-races between good teams that don't care. As long as the wild-card exists we will never have another GREAT pennant race. Sure, we will have races, but they won't be ones between two championship-caliber teams, and no one will remember them years later. Remembers the great 1996 NL West race? The Padres and Dodgers, tied for first, played each other on the final weekend. You don't remember? That's because they knew whomever finished second was going to the playoffs as the wild-card anyway, so they both benched they regulars. Who cares? Second place is fine with us.

Costas has a painfully simple solution to the problem: keep the three divisions but eliminate the wild-card. Give the team with the best overall record a first-round bye, much like teams in the NFL. Costas makes many great points about this (and other issues), more than enough to justify the (admittedly too high) price of the book. If you hate the wild-card, buy the book and get some fresh ammunition for your next bar argument. If you like wild-cards, buy it and perhaps you will come to understand the error of your ways.

Rating:
Summary: The Ideas Make Sense, So It Will Never Happen
Review: I have listened to Bob Costas announce sports for probably over 20 years. When he isn't trying to wax poetic about sports, he is a knowledgeable and entertaining broadcaster. With that in mind, I decided to read his book "Fair Ball" which is his manifesto as to how the game of major league baseball can be improved in the future.

Much of his book concentrates on the issue of revenue sharing, which has been a bone of contention among owners for years. His plans for sharing local broadcasting money and for sharing ticket money are solid ideas, but they've been suggested before and little has been done over the years because the teams that rake in the most money through these are not likely to want to part with them. Costas says that the big-market teams need to look at the long-term impact that revenue sharing will bring to the entire league, but doesn't really address that it will be very hard for owners of those teams to do that.

His arguments for realignment, interleague play and scheduling are great ideas. I liked the concept of interleague play when it was adopted in 1997, but did not know that the same divisions were always going to play each other each year. Major league basball has agreed to follow one of his suggestions as it is following an unbalanced schedule this year (where teams within a division play more games against each other than against the rest of the league). So maybe they will look at the bigger picture someday.

I agree with his positions on mostly everything else, including allowing Pete Rose to be eligible to enter the Hall of Fame, the elimination of the designated hitter and a day World Series game (the latter will never happen, however, because of the money that will be lost from advertisers).

Costas has written a concise argument for baseball. I hope the powers that represent the owners and players read it before the end of the collective bargaining agreement at the end of this season!

Rating:
Summary: Great Book
Review: I wish the owners of MLB would read this book and learn a thing or two. Bob Costas hits the mark with his views in this captivating lecture on the Goods and bads of baseball today.

Rating:
Summary: Fair Minded...
Review: This is the book that no true student of the great game should be without. Costas goes in depth, detailing the miriad of problems baseball is facing. But, unlike most commentators, Costas offers rational, realistic solutions to the problems he presents. While not taking sides with either the owners or the Players Association, Costas offers good advice for both. Clearly, all parties involved should read this book and seriously consider his suggestions before Baseball Armegeddon occurs. One caveat though, if you don't come into this book with a fundamental understanding of baseball economics and the history behind the dispute between the players and owners, don't bother reading it. Try picking up "Lords of the Realm" first (its long but worth it), then pick up this great and fair minded book.

Rating:
Summary: Bob Costas for commissioner!
Review: Costas builds a very strong case for how he would improve the grand old game. His logical approach to each and every topic he takes on is well-founded and, frankly, makes too much sense for the lords of baseball to ever adopt! By the end of the 2001 season we will most assuredly be knee-deep in all the stale rhetoric from both sides as another work-stoppage attacks our sensibilities. Selig, Fehr, Orza and all the rest should be locked in a room with this book and not let out until they come up with something better. You know what? They won't! Kudos to Bob Costas for rationally setting out to do what those who have the most to lose cannot or will not accomplish...achieving equity for all, including, most importantly, the fans.

Rating:
Summary: On the,um, money
Review: I'm no economist, but it seems to me Costas is on-- or awfully close to-- the mark here. Clearly, SOMEthing has to be done. This is a sport that seems absolutely set on self-destruction. I've been a lifelong fan of the game, and played it a lot of years. But I won't go near a big-league ballpark anymore, or even watch an inning on the tube. These guys (owners, players- everybody connected to MLB) have absolutely no respect for the game or for me as a fan. Why should I give a damn about their "product?" For me, the real action is among the kids on college teams, and in the minors. They are playing the game I remember, and at a price I not only find affordable, but that isn't actually offensive.

To his credit, Costas resists engaging in diatribes like mine. He's actually optimistic, a state many of us are finding increasingly difficult to sustain. Best of all, he's not just criticising- he's making a number of positive suggestions. It's tough to imagine, given the astonishingly inflated egos involved on all sides, that any of his proposals will ever actually be implemented, but no one can say he didn't offer a number of constructive alternatives.

Baseball at the major league level is deeply embedded in America's national psyche. It's hard to imagine that it could actually cease to be. However, one more season-truncating or Series-eliminating strike (or owners' lockout-- it doesn't really matter) and the game will be history. Fans are not going to continue to be made fools of forever.

Costas deserves great credit for calling 'em as he sees 'em, and putting his very substantial reputation on the line in so doing.

Rating:
Summary: A Common-Sense Solution
Review: Bob Costas is to be congratulated for his thoughtfully crafted plan to save baseball from is certain demise (or at least decline) at the hands of commercialism.

Costas' plan recognizes that professional baseball is, after all, a business. However, he points out that it is a business that can be conducted with dignity and ethics. He notes that while skyrocketing salaries and broadcast contracts may be generating huge amounts of cash today, it's not good business in the long term.

Costas shows in his plan that revenue sharing, salary caps and the like, if implemented properly, are not "Robin Hood" steal-from-the-rich-give-to-the-poor ploys, but rather, sound business plans which will actually increase revenues accross the board. The only party to lose money in Costas' plan are the super-rich superstar players like Alex Rodrigues and Manny Rimerez.

The economy of words in Costas' plan is admirable. He calmly and clearly presents the details of his plan without belaboring his points or being repetitive, and he anticipates objections and addresses them. Even for those uninterested in baseball, this book is a model of persuasive writing at its best.

Rating:
Summary: He's Right
Review: In my opinion Bob Costas is right in just about every issue he writes about in this book. I am a fan of a big market club (Red Sox) but I agree that something MUST be done in order to ensure baseball has a prosperous future. The propositions he put forth were well thought out and an excellent plan to at the very least consider. I also must agree with him on the issue of the wild card and how it has damaged Major League Baseball. It is now impossible to be sitting home in September and getting really excited about a game between the first and second place team in a division because they will either both make the playoffs, they are seperated by alot of games or neither of them are all that good. It is just sad to think that the youth of America like me (14) might never be fortunate enough to witness a great pennant/divisional race.

Rating:
Summary: Costas hits a home run
Review: Bob Costas, the nationally praised sports commentator wrote his first book Fair Ball. He tries to explain why baseball is losing its fans, and attempts to find a remedy for the problem that only a few teams having a chance at winning the world series before the season starts. He does a brilliant job writing the book, and advocates revenue sharing, which is his main plan to give all teams a fair shot at the World Series. He has made me a believer in his ways by bringing up useful charts throughout the book. Costas has hit a home run in this concise book. I could make a legitimate case for Bob Costas to be the commissioner of baseball.

Rating:
Summary: The shining light of reason in all this BS
Review: Let's face it: we all love baseball, but we all hate what Major League Baseball has become. For example, in 2001 A-Rod will make more money than some teams will earn a profit. A running joke I've heard is that George Steinbrenner is going to buy the A's and make them a farm team for the Yankees. Even head honcho Bud Selig has said that something needs to and _will_ change.

Well, Butch, here's the place to start. Bob Costas, in Fair Ball, has presented the best comprehensive look at baseball that I have ever seen. He's tackled all of the controversial issues in the game today, such as: realignment and the wild card, interleague play and balanced schedules, salary caps, revenue sharing, the DH rule, the All-Star Game, and lots of other stuff. He also discusses realistic, detailed remedies for all of the items discussed above. He also makes a strong point when comparing MLB to the NFL, how the salary cap has helped the NFL, and that the MLB should follow a playoff schedule like the NFL (NO wild card, first-round bye for best record in league).

I sincerely hope that some of this stuff is changed/removed, because baseball has become less of a game and more of a business. For now, though, all I can do is applaud Costas for such a great look at an ailing system.