PED's in MLB no longer Selig's Fault

For years, Bud Selig has been taking heat from the media and the public on the issue of PED’s in baseball. And for years, the commissioner has fended off his critics with a combination of fact, fiction and bluster, maintaining that he did everything he could to rid the sport of chemical enhancers. Selig has never passed up an opportunity to detail the efforts he and the owners have made to eliminate PED’s, only to be thwarted at every turn by the players and their union.

Despite Selig’s protestations to the contrary, the owners dragged their feet in trying to eliminate steroids from baseball. When the bosses look the other way, and in some instances overtly encourage the use of performance enhancers, it’s difficult for the worker bees to keep their hands out of the substance jar. But we can finally say that it’s not the commissioner’s fault that there are still players in baseball using banned substances.

This isn’t 2002, before there was a drug testing program in baseball and the likes of Jose Canseco, Mark Maguire, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds and who knows how many hundreds of others were juicing. This isn’t 2003, when the results of a test survey to determine the extent of drug use in baseball were supposed to be anonymous, and Alex Rodriguez’ name was leaked from a list of 104 players who tested positive.


This is 2009, when MLB, as Selig is only too proud to proclaim, has the strictest drug testing program in all of team sports, and imposes the stiffest penalties for testing positive of any sport this side of the Olympics; when notice of that drug policy and those penalties is posted in every Major League clubhouse. And yet players are still ingesting banned substances, as evidenced by the fact that Manny Ramirez tested positive for a prohibited substance during spring training this year.

Ramirez is just the latest MLB player to take a seat in drug-suspension purgatory. If you think he’ll be the last, you also think the federal government will soon embrace fiscal responsibility. Won’t happen. Many people, including this correspondent, have called for stricter penalties for those caught using, including a one-and-done policy. But even the ultimate penalty won’t eliminate PED’s in baseball. Want proof? How long have we had the death penalty? And that has eliminated murders, right?

Illegal drug use in baseball is a matter of individual choice, and as long as the cheaters are ahead of the testers - and it will always be thus - some players will be willing to take their chances. There’s too much money to be made and too little time to make it.

The responsibility to stamp out drugs in baseball rests not with the owners or the commissioner, but with the players and their twin enablers, the MLBPA and the agents, neither of whom appears willing to fulfill their fiduciary responsibilities to their clients on the issue of PED’s. From fighting the commissioner and owners in negotiations, arbitration and court, to spinning fairy tales for the players when they’re caught red-handed, the union and the agents have been the ultimate co-conspirators.

For all the money the players make, not to mention all the money members of the Scott Boras Fraternity make, you’d think they could afford to employ someone who would guard against players ingesting anything that wasn’t “certified kosher.” It may not be fair to single out one agent, but Boras has had his share of clients snared by the drug police. Boras’ list of scofflaws includes Ramirez, Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, Kevin Brown, Garry Sheffield, Eric Gagne, Ivan Rodriguez and Rick Ankiel, among others.

Ramirez will lose approximately $7 million during his suspension – deducted over the four years his 2009 salary will be paid - but will still earn almost $38 million under the terms of his two-year contract with the Dodgers. So, what exactly is the penalty for getting caught using - shame and embarrassment? No bust in the Hall of Fame? Some players obviously prefer the money to their reputations and eternal enshrinement.

And as long as that remains true, PED’s in baseball will be a reality. But the pendulum has swung. It’s no longer Bud Selig’s fault.


Jordan Kobritz is a former attorney, CPA, and Minor League Baseball team owner. He is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at Eastern New Mexico University, teaches the Business of Sports at the University of Wyoming, and is a contributing author to the Business of Sports Network. Jordan can be reached at jkobritz@mindspring.com.

RETURN TO THE GUIDING LIGHT OF SPORTS BUSINESS

RETURN TO CENTRAL MAINE SPORTS BLOG

World Baseball Classic is what it is...

The second edition of the World Baseball Classic ended its three-week run amidst a torrent of criticism, most of it undeserved. Critics pan the Classic for a number of reasons, chief among them the timing and lack of interest in the U.S. Baseball purists decree the imposition on Spring Training and the lack of topnotch talent on the rosters of most countries.

Much of the criticism comes from those who don’t understand the impetus behind the event. The WBC was never designed to determine which country has the best talent. The intent was to promote the game worldwide. In that respect, it has achieved as much if not more than its supporters could have hoped for. Game attendance, TV ratings and media coverage around the globe all increased over the first WBC in 2006.

While fans in this country have been lukewarm towards the event, fans in other participating countries have embraced the WBC in ways never dreamed of before the Classic became a reality. The Netherlands defeating the Dominican Republic – twice – to move into the second round of this year’s Classic gave hope to nascent baseball countries around the globe that they, too, can play the game on the world stage.

As a marketing tool, the WBC has been wildly successful. The exposure the game has received from the WBC will undoubtedly increase baseball’s revenues, benefitting owners and players alike. No surprise, therefore, that this is one of the few areas of agreement between MLB and the players association.

Owners and managers have voiced concerns - however muted, given the support of the Classic from the commissioner’s office- about the well being of the players, especially pitchers. And the media has chimed in with both criticism and suggestions on how to improve the event, both in terms of timing and format.

The major misconception about the WBC is that this is a world tournament. That’s hardly the case. Some of the best players decline to participate, for reasons ranging from fear of injury to the outright disapproval of their clubs. Because the Classic is held during Spring Training, with the exception of the Asian teams - who begin practicing for the event months in advance - most players aren’t in regular season shape. Pitchers who do agree to participate are held to set pitch counts. Position players are assured of a certain number of innings or at bats, regardless of the dictates of the games. The result is the tournament is a global version of Spring Training.

And the format – this year’s Classic was double elimination for the first two rounds and single elimination for the final round – isn’t conducive to the sport of baseball. MLB playoffs are best-of-seven affairs (five in the Division Series). But playing a best-of-seven series would extend the WBC beyond the acceptance of even its most ardent supporters.

The timing of the WBC is admittedly horrible. Playing games during Spring Training upsets the natural rhythms and rituals of baseball. But although a number of critics have suggested alternatives – playing the final round of the classic in July, either around or instead of the All Star Game, or after the MLB season ends – those options are even less palatable than the status quo. MLB teams would not be inclined to give up lucrative July dates for the WBC. And playing the WBC after the MLB season ends doesn’t make much sense either, given that the World Series can extend into November. The fact is, there is no perfect time to hold the WBC.

The bottom line is the WBC is all about the bottom line. It was designed to generate revenue for the owners and players. The WBC isn’t so much a tournament, as it is an exhibition. That doesn’t make it bad, nor does it mean it shouldn’t be held. Just don’t make it out to be something it isn’t or something it was never intended to be.

In the face of mounting criticism, even from the ranks of owners, Commissioner Bud Selig insists the WBC will continue, with the next version scheduled for spring 2013. Give Selig credit for holding firm to his position. We should be appreciating the WBC for what it is, not criticizing it for what it isn’t.

Jordan Kobritz is a former attorney, CPA, and Minor League Baseball team owner. He is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at Eastern New Mexico University, teaches the Business of Sports at the University of Wyoming, and is a contributing author to the Business of Sports Network. Jordan can be reached at jkobritz@mindspring.com.

RETURN TO THE GUIDING LIGHT OF SPORTS BUSINESS

RETURN TO CENTRAL MAINE SPORTS BLOG

Capitalism, Yes; Salary Cap, No!

The old adage, “Be careful what you wish for,” should be a siren call to Major League Baseball owners and executives calling for a salary cap in the wake of the Yankees’ off-season spending spree. 

Oakland A’s owner Lew Wolff, Milwaukee Brewers owner Mark Attanasio, Houston Astros owner Drayton McLane, and Pittsburgh Pirates President Frank Coonelly took turns lamenting baseball’s status as the only Major League team sport without a salary cap. All four suggested that a salary cap would be a panacea for both parity in MLB and preventing the Yankees from acquiring the best – and most expensive - free agent talent.  As my father used to say every time I made a suggestion he was loath to embrace, “It sounds good.”  

Indeed it does.  After all, in leagues with a salary cap, there is no equivalent of the Yankees, a team that can purchase any free agent it chooses regardless of the price.  And, so the theory goes, there is more parity in leagues with a salary cap, particularly the NFL which is the poster child for sharing revenues equitably.  Except it’s just not true.   

The NFL shares a higher percentage of revenue (approximately 70%) than the NBA, NHL and MLB.  But the revenue discrepancy between the richest and poorest teams in the NFL exceeds $100 million.  Because a salary cap in sports also includes a floor - a minimum amount each club must spend on payroll – the lower revenue clubs make significantly less money (they spend a higher percentage of their revenue on payroll) than the higher revenue clubs.  

The NFL does have parity - how else to explain the Arizona Cardinals in the Super Bowl?  Most teams, with the exception of Detroit and Cincinnati, begin each season with a reasonable chance of making the playoffs.  But that’s as much a function of the nature of the sport and the limited number of games in a season as it is a salary cap. 

The NBA’s salary cap would be laughable, except it’s no joke.  The intricacies of the salary cap are known to only a handful of humans, living or dead.  And the bottom line in constructing a team has nothing to do with talent and everything to do with the bottom line:  Making sure each team stays within the parameters of the salary cap/floor.   

As for parity, unless the Celtics decide to guard anyone other than LeBron James in their expected playoff matchup with the Cleveland Cavaliers, does anyone believe the two teams in the NBA finals will not be named the Lakers and the Celtics – again?   

In the NHL, clubs such as Nashville and Columbus are hemorrhaging millions thanks to the minimum salary requirements, while Phoenix will reportedly lose $30 million this year and teeters on the brink of bankruptcy.  The strongest teams in the salary cap era – Detroit, San Jose, New Jersey – were also dominant prior to the advent of a salary cap.  Can you say good management? 

A salary floor in MLB would require teams such as the Florida Marlins to increase payroll by as much as $50 million over last year’s figure. 

The only realistic source for that money would be increased revenue sharing -  taking more money from the Yankees to distribute to other clubs.  Which is what all the crying and grandstanding is about.  Clubs want to reduce the Yankees’ spending power; but owners can’t increase revenue sharing or implement a salary cap without the consent of the union.  Peace will come to the Middle East before MLB negotiators convince the union to agree to a salary cap.    

What the whiners fail to acknowledge is that parity in MLB doesn’t take a backseat to any league, including the NFL.  In the last eight years, 13 different MLB teams have played in the World Series – the Yankees only twice and they lost both times - compared to 12 different NFL teams that played in the Super Bowl.       

A salary cap in MLB is merely a pipe dream.  It’s also a convenient crutch for incompetence on the part of team management.  If the Pirates had drafted as well as Tampa Bay over the past 12 years, they - not the Phillies - would have played the Rays in last year’s World Series.  Now that’s something for Coonelly to focus on.

Jordan Kobritz is a former attorney, CPA, and Minor League Baseball team owner. He is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at Eastern New Mexico University, teaches the Business of Sports at the University of Wyoming, and is a contributing author to the Business of Sports Network. Jordan can be reached at jkobritz@mindspring.com.

RETURN TO THE GUIDING LIGHT OF SPORTS BUSINESS

RETURN TO CENTRAL MAINE SPORTS BLOG

Piling on Clemens

For Roger Clemens, the fallout seemingly has no end.

Last November, Clemens was asked to end his involvement with a charity golf tournament he had co-hosted for the past four years in his hometown of Houston. With Clemens’ help, the tournament has raised millions of dollars for local charities that benefited kids.

A month later, a Houston hospital announced it was removing Clemens’ name from a sports medicine institute created in 2006. The Roger Clemens Institute for Sports Medicine at Memorial Hermann became known as the Memorial Hermann Sports Medicine Institute, effective January 1. Clemens had given liberally of his time and money in support of the clinic. He was also a major contributor to other needs of the hospital, having donated a reported $3 million towards a new pediatric wing at the time the sports medicine clinic was founded.

Why now? Why, after a year of denying the allegations in the Mitchell Report that he used performance enhancing drugs, was Clemens suddenly discarded like yesterday’s newspaper? Was his name suddenly more of a liability than an asset? Was the association with Clemens costing more in contributions than he could offset? Did the hospital return any of Clemens’ contributions? No one representing the hospital was willing to answer any of those questions.

This isn’t an attempt to defend Clemens, either for using PED’s or lying about using them. I know; Clemens hasn’t been convicted of anything. But my Cornell Law education to the contrary notwithstanding, anyone who still believes Clemens’ denials is in serious denial themselves. Common sense says Clemens used drugs illegally, cheated on his wife, and lied about both.

Come to think of it, that profile fits a number of current and former politicians, and if you believe the research, a majority of the people in this country. Should Roger Clemens be held to a higher standard than the rest of us, just because his physical talent is superior to ours?

Have John Kennedy’s, Richard Nixon’s or Bill Clinton’s names been deleted from the many buildings and roads named after them? Is there any reason to think George W. won’t have his name emblazoned on buildings and road signs around the state of Texas, if not other parts of this country? Why should athletes be held to higher standards than presidents?

Clemens is no different than the hundreds - perhaps thousands - of current and former Major Leaguers who used PED’s. No different than former teammates Jason Giambi and Andy Pettitte, both of whom played in the Major Leagues post the Mitchell Report. Except Pettitte and Giambi admitted using (sort of, in the case of Giambi) and apologized for it; while Clemens, due to a combination of hubris and bad advice, responded to the accusations by attacking his accusers, which is the same way he approached the opposing team.

MLB drug users’ biggest offense was against their fellow players. The fact remains that their teammates and the union treated replacement players – those who agreed to play during the 1994 strike - with more disdain and acrimony than the players who used PED’s. Should we treat the druggies worse than their teammates did?

Failing to admit guilt and say he was sorry has already cost Clemens dearly, with more likely to come. His reputation is in tatters, his lock on the Hall of Fame has evaporated, and criminal charges appear likely. And now, his hometown is turning against him. After so many years of supporting his neighbors, friends and people in need, those who should stand up and say “Thanks, you did wrong, but we appreciate all the good you’ve done for us and others,” can’t seem to find the will to do so.

The person Roger Clemens hurt the most was himself, followed closely by his family. So far, it appears as if his family is standing behind him. Good for them. If Hilary and the country can stand behind Bill, then Debbie and his Houston neighbors can do the same for Roger.

As Willie Nelson croons, “Forgiving you is easy forgetting seems to take the longest time.” There’s no need to forget all the wrong Clemens has done. But a little forgiveness from those who accepted his help along the way would seem appropriate.

Jordan Kobritz is a former attorney, CPA, and Minor League Baseball team owner. He is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at Eastern New Mexico University, teaches the Business of Sports at the University of Wyoming, and is a contributing author to the Business of Sports Network. Jordan can be reached at jkobritz@mindspring.com.

RETURN TO THE GUIDING LIGHT OF SPORTS BUSINESS

RETURN TO CENTRAL MAINE SPORTS BLOG

MLB Free Agency

As the Major League Baseball free agent signing period begins in earnest – the first day teams can talk money with other teams’ free agents is November 14 – the question on everyone’s mind is, given the current state of the economy, will the big money be out there? The prediction here is...yes.

The economy may be in the doldrums, but most professional sports - although not recession proof - are recession “delayed.” Thanks to long-term contracts with TV networks, naming rights holders, sponsors, suite and season ticket holders, most professional leagues and teams can count on at least the same - if not increased - levels of revenue for the foreseeable future.

There are exceptions, for sure. As previously mentioned in this space, NASCAR has seen race attendance plunge and some teams are closing up shop in the absence of sponsorships. With the season ending this week, rumors are running rampant in the garage that hundreds of employees will be dismissed.

Major League Baseball, on the other hand, is swimming in an estimated $6.5 billion in revenue this year, a figure that will almost certainly be eclipsed next year regardless of the state of the economy. The sport is set to launch the MLB Network in January to the largest audience in the history of sports networks.

Not all MLB teams are flush with cash. The Arizona Diamondbacks recently announced the layoff of 31 front office employees. But the Red Sox aren’t likely to see a diminution of passion for their team. And the Yankees and Mets are moving into new stadiums that will generate obscene amounts of revenue. In the case of the Yankees, the 300 seats in the new Yankee Stadium priced at $2,500 per game – already sold out – will generate $60 million next year. That figure exceeds the ticket revenue generated by over half of MLB clubs in the 2008 season.

The uncertain economic climate led Commissioner Bud Selig to urge all clubs to exercise caution in their financial dealings, which is code for avoiding exorbitant free agent contracts. Super-agent Scott Boras pooh-poohed Selig’s cautionary tone, opining that baseball won’t be affected by the economy. “Baseball didn’t invest in derivatives and sub-primes,” he told NBCSports.com. “Baseball has long-term contracts with national and local TV networks…As I’ve said all along, the hay is in the barn.”

As someone who is given to hyperbole, it’s usually best to take anything Boras says with a barrel of salt. But in this instance, the hyperbolic agent is right on. His clients, including the top two position players on the market, Manny Ramirez and Mark Teixeira, are guaranteed to be well compensated. The only thing the economy may do is reduce the length of their free agent contracts. But teams will be willing to pay more up front to obtain increased flexibility down the road, which means the overall dollars are likely to be the same.

Case in point: When the Dodgers opened the bidding on Manny last week, speculation put the offer at $45 million for two years, with an option for a third year. While not publicly announcing the terms of the offer, Dodger GM Ned Coletti did say the offer would give the enigmatic slugger the second-highest average salary in the sport, behind only Yankee third baseman Alex Rodriguez. Whether the Dodgers are intent on signing Ramirez or merely trying to appease their fans, is another story.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Boras quickly rejected the offer as too short, having previously hinted that his client was seeking a six-year deal at $25 million per year. But that’s where the uncertainty of the economy may come into play.

Once the big names are off the board, there will likely be a feeding frenzy for the second tier of free agents. Clubs who never got in on the Manny or Teixeira sweepstakes will feel compelled to do something – anything – to convince their fan base that they want to win. To avoid the wrath of the press, and to prevent erosion in their ticket base, those clubs will likely overpay for mediocrity.

Welcome to MLB’s 2008 off-season. Less money for free agents as a result of the

economy? Don’t count on it.


Jordan Kobritz is a former attorney, CPA, and Minor League Baseball team owner. He is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at Eastern New Mexico University, teaches the Business of Sports at the University of Wyoming, and is a contributing author to the Business of Sports Network. Jordan can be reached at jkobritz@mindspring.com.

RETURN TO THE GUIDING LIGHT OF SPORTS BUSINESS

RETURN TO CENTRAL MAINE SPORTS BLOG