Passed Time to Adjust Our National Past Time

I love baseball.  I enjoy the game and I especially enjoy the games within the game.  Nuance is what makes baseball fun and it is my opinion that baseball produces the best highlights and highest drama.

With that said, baseball needs a facelift, or at least a shot of botox.  There are some things about baseball that drive me insane.  My biggest pet peeve about baseball is the adherence to tradition for tradition's sake.  The justification of rules and procedures based on "that is what we have always done" is typically useless and annoying.  Change doesn't need to affect the heart of the game or the essence of what makes it good.  You can clean up your house without moving.

So, let's tap the needle and start injecting (sorry, bad analogy for baseball).  Here are some suggestions that I have to inject a bit of life into the game (or at least stop its wrinkled, weathered face from falling further):

Rules:
1) Instant Replay - stop dinking around and add a damn challenge flag already.  Run it similar to the NFL.  Not on balls and strikes, but everything else is available.  Safe/Out, Homer/Not, Catch/Not - all is up for grabs for 2x per game for each manager.  Add a monitor near the backstop and communication capabilities to an upstairs booth.

Now, my wife was quick on the draw with the most talked about argument:  We don't need to lengthen a baseball game further.  I agree completely, and here are my fixes for that.

2) Time Limits Between Pitches - 20 second maximums from the time the pitcher receives the ball to beginning of delivery.  The penalty is an automatic ball.   I think this rule is for anyone who has had to stomach a full 4 and 1/2 hour game between the Yankees and Red Sox (on roughly about 75x per year) with each pitcher coming off the rubber to the rosin bag and standing there for 10 minutes before checking the runner at first and starting the process all over again.  Just stop.  Also, while we are at it, let's quit condoning these A.D.D. batting routines and keep the hitters in the box.  Are batting glove bands so poor that they need to be retightened after every look at a pitch?  I don't think so.  Get in there and hit.  Umps need to take control and not allow hitters out of the box unless something actually relevant happens.  This alone should save us time enough to install instant replay.

3) Stop with the meetings - No more catcher talking to the pitcher.  No more infield meetings at the mound.  No more pitching coach talks followed by polite buttslaps.  This is not AA or the Elks Lodge - it is a baseball game.  What the hell is all the talking about anyway?  Candlesticks do make a nice gift (Bull Durham reference) but I really think we are past needing to be reminded of it every game.  Also, why do we allow the pitching coach out there at all?  Starting pitchers pitch every 5 days.  Why can't you discuss mechanics on off days?  Why do I have to be there for the assistant coach to tell his pitcher to bend his legs a few more inches?  You don't see the NFL special teams coach talking to the punter on the field do you?  Also, most of these meetings are admitted time wasters to get the guy in the bullpen more time to warm up.  How about some better planning instead of further time wasting?  Then, after the time wasting meeting, what does the relief pitcher do when he arrives at the mound... HE WARMS UP AGAIN!  Let's go already.

4) Arguments are a goner - This one is a little more of a bummer, but I think its time has come.  I sometimes love seeing an overweight old man stuffed in a too tight uniform getting all red faced by berating an authority figure.  It makes for good viewing.  However, you know what makes for better viewing?  The baseball game itself.  Seriously, NFL, NBA, or hockey would never allow this crap.   Can you imagine the blowback if Belichick races on the field, stops the game for 10 minutes, and berates an official for a call that we KNOW was never going to be reversed in the first place?  Wouldn't Goodell make sure that Bill's kids couldn't go to college with the amount of fines he would levy?  NBA coaches get fined for discussing referees constantly, and they are doing it in the locker room after the game.   Technical fouls for yelling at officials during the game cost you points in the NBA.  In baseball, you berate the hell out of an official, delay the game, get tossed, and there is no penalty outside of enjoying a beer while watching the game in the clubhouse tv.  Seems a little strange.

The above rule changes would add speed and accuracy to the game without really changing the essence of the game.  It is still played the same but tweaked in a way that makes it bearable to watch for the average American attention span.

Innovations:
Run and Gun or Wildcat Offense in the NFL.  Small Ball or Showtime in the NBA.  These are dramatic changes to offensive systems in the league that created havoc based on innovative ideas.  If you look at a baseball game, Abner Doubleday and the boys would pretty much have suited up and played the game the same way that Pujols and Halladay are playing today.  There is some solace in that from a historical perspective but it seems strange that we haven't seen someone come in and try SOMETHING different.

There have been small changes recently mostly based on the advanced statistical knowledge that has created moneyball type of innovation and changes to defensive shifts and scenario analysis.  However, what I am talking about are radical changes to the way the game is played.  Here are some radical thoughts that could get the wheels rolling:

1) Speed Demons:  College Sprinters run about 20 miles per hour.  That means they could get 90 feet in  about 3.1 seconds.  Couldn't we teach at least a few of them to grab a bat and tell them to choke up?  Well placed bunts and half swings with that kind of speed could create pressure on infielders.  Once on base, continued bunts / steals / hit and runs could create enough distractions to pitchers to create more of a mess for the opposing team.  Even if you don't fill your team with these guys, wouldn't an emphasis on a few spots for this type of athlete combined with a different style of hitting add a flavor to the game that would make it more interesting to watch?

2) Pitching Rotations:  Why is the 5 man rotation the way to go?  Why not 7?  Why not 3?  Why not have everyone in the rotation?  My innovation here would be based on the notion that hitters get more comfortable on the 2nd or 3rd at bats against the same pitcher.  Why let that happen?  In my rotation, everyone starts and everyone should be prepared to pitch every 3 days for 3-5 innings.  Starters are currently very highly paid to pitch every 5 days for 100+ pitches at a time.  During their off days, they are working on their game and throwing bullpen sessions.  Why not eliminate the bullpen session, allow them to affect more games by pitching more often, but don't allow them to pitch as many pitches or innings as a normal starting rotation.  Situational substitutions occur throughout the game, not just when the starter comes out.  You can still get your top guys more innings than your lesser talents by timing the appearances and the situations in which they pitch.  Closers are out.  If you want someone quality to finish a game, why can they only throw one inning?  Change the thinking from MLB rotations to NBA rotations - some are crunch time guys, some are scrubs that only come in during blowouts.  The upside is that everyone is available - if you need an out and haven't used Verlander in a few days, bring him out there.  If you are down by 12 and just need to eat innings, bring anyone from the 2012 Twins rotation in.

Maybe I can understand why the innovations don't occur at the MLB level.  The game is played a very similar way all the way up the minors to the majors, so tinkering at that point might be a little late (though for low budget teams, it might be worth it to play a little differently).  Though, if you think about it, NBA and NFL players learn new systems and plays all the time, why not the MLB?  Also, it would appear the ability to innovate at the lower levels, especially where defense is a little more suspect, would be totally plausible.  At minimum, it would be a fun experiment, and who knows, you might be the guy that changes the game.  Wouldn't it be worth it just to piss Bud Selig and all the other tradition over innovation types off?

JB3

Time for Redskins and Indians to Go

Let's play a game.  We are going to pretend I was Zuckerberg's Harvard roommate, the one who set him up with the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.  As a shout out, I got 5% of Facebook.  As of Friday, I am now a verified Billionaire. Now that I am loaded, I have decided to spend my hard earned cash on an NFL and MLB team.

One of the first decisions that someone in this endeavor would have to make is what to name my team.  In this regard, I am going to pay homage to the locals in the community by bringing in a civic pride name that people can get behind.  In that regard, I am debating about starting a team in Wisconsin and calling them the "Whitebread Honkey Crackers", or bringing the first pro team to Alabama, and I am naming them simply "Blackface".  For the Whitebreads, I am bringing out a mascot that is a piece of white bread with a huge toothy grin that dresses like a J. Crew model and dances with no rhythm.  For the Blackface, think of a logo that looks like Billy Crystal doing Sammy Davis Jr.

What did you say?  Why would I blatantly deride a particular ethnic group for a substantial profit from the sale of merchandise with an offensive logo on it?  Because I am following the model of the Cleveland Indians and Washington Redskins, that's why.

In all seriousness, it is time to stop pretending these names and images aren't racist and way past due for change.  Redskins is the NFL team of OUR NATION'S CAPITAL for crying out loud.  How, in 2012, can this still be the name of a team in America?  What is the possible defense of this name?  Really, I googled a lot of different terms to try to find the argument that Dan Snyder, owner of the "Redskins", uses to challenge the assertion that his team name is racist, degrading, and a mockery of 5.2 Million Americans.  I couldn't find it.  If you have his or any other justification, I would love to know.

For the Indians, they go for the more acceptable team term (still inappropriate, but far less brash about it), then follow it up with a caricature of a mascot and name him Chief Wahoo.  Let me say that again - a red face mascot named Chief Wahoo.  Can someone explain to me how this mascot is any different than the "Sambo" or "Mammy" impressions that have been decried as racist and long overdue for removal?  Would anyone be okay paying $20 for a hat that was affiliated with a team called the "Asians" with a picture of the "slant-eyed, buck-tooth, no speaky engrish" racist drawings of the past.  No, they wouldn't.  So why is Chief Wahoo still generating big profit dollars for Major League Baseball?

What I can't figure out is how a culture that has become so touchy on the subject of race treats these images with such apathy.  Oh yes I do, because the NFL and MLB have substantial sums of money while the group in question has the least amount of political influence and is consistently among the forgotten people of the United States.  It's true.  Why else would this ever be allowed to stand?

Do either of these images, even if not blatantly offensive to some, really scream tolerance?  Are color labels really where we want to stay?  I will admit, I still use black as a term for African Americans.  I do so with the possibly limited justification that it seems that the African Americans that I know and/or follow have taken to the "black" moniker as a source of pride.  However, would I ever call an Asian "Yellow" or a Hispanic "Brown"?  Absolutely not.  Also, if someone I knew that was African American told me it was offensive for me to call them black, I probably wouldn't do it anymore.  In regard to the team in Washington, they are protested EVERY YEAR by Native Americans and not only do they continue to use it, they continue to make a profit on its use.  How is this okay?

I didn't always think like this.  I used to own products from these teams and several of the college teams that have Native American logos.  I used to feel that wearing these gave a source of "I am one, so it's okay" kind of pride and the thought that at least those items gave some recognition to the Native community.  I now feel differently.  Supporting these teams with my dollars validates their status quo as the profit derived is the only reason I see for billionaire owners to keep these names intact.  Money is the largest concern of these institutions and my guess is that "social change" would be far faster if it was facilitated by economic impact.

Look, I know that changing these names won't solve the problems that Native Americans face, many of which are self inflicted.  I know there are deep seated issues of education, drugs, poverty, health care, and crime that won't change overnight if Washington and Cleveland wise up.  I am well aware of this.  However, can't we agree that social acceptance of degrading names and logos gives an impression of ignorance and profit from racism shouldn't really be a part of 2 high profile, major league organizations?  If we can agree on that, then maybe - just maybe - we can affect a small change that will show that at least someone is in the corner of the little guy here.

To do my small part, I am writing this blog post and attaching a petition on change.org that I have started as well. I will be forwarding this blog to persons affiliated with professional organizations and to community leaders in various government organizations.  It is what I feel I can do and we will see where it goes.  If you wish to support this action, feel free to sign the petition and forward this post.  If you have an opposing view, I am always open to the fact that I might be missing something.  Please include it in the comments section of my blog or on the petition itself.  Thanks.

Petition: http://www.change.org/petitions/the-national-football-league-and-major-league-baseball-remove-redskins-and-indians-from-nfl-and-mlb-names-and-logos#

JB3

Don't Chase The Night

Back in 2010, Bill Simmons from ESPN had an article that relayed a story about Worldwide Wes and an unnamed NBA player.  For those that don't know, Worldwide Wes is a power broker type in the NBA and has relationships with a lot of the top players.  Anyway, the story goes that Wes and said player were outside the club at 2:45 am when the player wanted to find "the next place".  Wes proceeded to give the following advice: "You can't chase the night.  When the night is over, it's over.  You just gotta wake up tomorrow and hope for a better day."

I have come to rank this among "don't eat yellow snow" as some of the most sage advice ever given.  If I had this advice in my late teens and early twenties, there would be a lot fewer cases of "I can't believe I did that", "Man, that sucked", and "I should have just stayed home" in my memory file.

In my opinion, the quest for the ultimate night is much more likely to end in disappointment than satisfaction.  Think about the nights where the going was good - did it ever seem forced?  Now think about the nights where it started out okay and you thought a change of venue would kick it into the next gear.  How did that work out for you?  My guess would be it devolved into one of the following categories:

1) "Man, I spent way too much money last night." Do you ever feel regret about this when you had an awesome time?  My guess is yes, but you don't START the conversation that way.  If someone asks you how your night was, and these words come out of your mouth, you chased the night and it got away.

2) "Me and Person X got into a big fight."  This is a classic chase the night phenomenon.  What happens is you are concentrating too much on the person next to you because the night sucks.  Mixing booze with irritation is a great way to ruin any experience.  Usually, it manifests itself to picking fights with friends or total strangers.  Either is a bad option and would have never happened if you had realized the night was over when it was over.

3) "The next morning life re-evaluation."  The night really got away from you when this occurs.  If it is Sunday, you are sitting in bed, and all you can think is "what is wrong with me... I really need to make some changes", chances are the night wasn't an overly fun experience.  This could result from your choice of the #1 and #2 combo meal where you fought your friend and spent this month's rent.  Also, there are other reasons for the life evaluation - the night never got going at all, your friends bothered the hell out of you, and you feel that playing Solitaire Jenga and picking belly lint would have been a more fun evening.  That is a life re-evaluation type night.  The bad news is these nights are a wicked bummer.  The good news is that these nights tend to happen to us all once in a while.  They aren't a reflection on your poor character, just the culmination of a lot of bad choices while searching out that terrific time that you know is out there.  However, if life re-evaluation is a fixture of your weekends, chances are a little change of behavior may be in order.

I like to think I have learned a little in my formative years.  Last night was a good example.  I was out with friends having a good time, but the venue was, shall we say, lacking.  Now, last night being Cinco de Mayo, knowing me means knowing that I don't like the type of crowds that go out for that type of event.  What old me would have done was chase the night to the next locale and fought through the same issues as our current spot.  This was setting up to be a classic #1.  New me made a conscious decision to realize that the night for me was over and I will just wake up tomorrow and hope for a better day.  The better day meant an uncloudy head, comfortable stomach, and quality time with my little girl.  I didn't chase and it turned out great.

Now, this is when the old me rears his ugly head by telling me "yeah, but how do you know you didn't MISS THE BEST TIME EVER???"  That is what chasing the night has on its side - the unknown.  Ignore that devil on your shoulder.  The best times don't come with those types of decisions.  They evolve naturally.  Just like most things - don't over think it and don't force it.  If it happens it happens.  When they do, you get a great story.  When they don't, well... there's always another chance next weekend.

JB3