When it comes to Barry Bonds, I've been skeptical about the C-word: Collusion. After reading John Brattain's carefully built argument, though, I'm less skeptical than I was. Brattain:
Bud Selig, Jerry Reinsdorf, George Steinbrenner, Fred Wilpon, The Tribune Company, Carl Pohlad and David Montgomery were all part of collusion under Ueberroth and most are among the sport's power brokers. The ghosts remain.
Surely, they learned their lesson, right? They learned it so well that when the last collective bargaining agreement was ratified, they paid the players' union a modest collusion settlement. The simple fact is that ownership colludes whenever they feel they can get away with it. They felt that they could get away with it during the Jim Crow era and boycott non-Caucasians from the field. They did likewise in the 1980s since the game was 'on the verge of bankruptcy.' It reared its ugly head again in 2002 since the union had become complacent. With an aging Barry Bonds without a contract and a desire to 'move on' from the steroid era it seems they're trying again.
Just as all 26 teams came to the simultaneous conclusion that players like Kirk Gibson, Tim Raines, Jack Morris, Ron Guidry, Andre Dawson etc. couldn't help their clubs, all 30 have decided that a big left-handed bat who isn't even the biggest south end of a northbound mule in the game cannot help their clubs compete in 2008.
|
First off, I'm not convinced that this big left-handed bat
isn't the biggest south end of a northbound mule. But that's a minor quibble. Brattain is right: None of Barry Bonds' particular qualities -- steroid user, early 40s, emotional adolescence, physical unreliability -- have disqualified other players from getting major league jobs, and some of them with hefty contracts.
One question for Brattain, though: Has any player with
all of those lovely qualities gotten the sort of money ($10 million) that Bonds reportedly is looking for? And if so, did that player draw the overwhelmingly negative reception from the local media that would likely result from signing Bonds?
I'm not saying Brattain is wrong. When it comes to the Lords of Baseball, we should be ever vigilant, because we know their impulses are often craven. Or have been, throughout the sport's history. But I know that if I were running a team, I would be reluctant to give Barry Bonds $10 million. And I don't even care much about the off-the-field stuff.
Rob Neyer
