Hello and Happy New Year!!!

It's a New Year and as such, we all have to consider resolutions. I think as individuals we all come up with the same lame ideas year after year. So instead of coming up with resolutions for myself, that I know I will eventually wind up breaking, I thought I'd come up with some resolutions for Bud Selig and Company.

Since this is my first Baseball column, I'll quantify to everyone why I think I can write about the most noble of sports. First and foremost, I love baseball. I have since I was a very small child. I went to my first game with my dad when I was ten in 1974. It was a Braves game at Fulton County Stadium. I don't remember who they played, all I remember was that Hank Aaron pinch-hit in the eighth inning. Nothing else mattered. I saw Hank Aaron bat. One of, in my humble opinion, the three best players ever. (The other two being, the best ever, Willie Mays, and a tie between Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, and of course, Ty Cobb.) I've seen some great players in those years since, and I've seen some pathetic displays of what some call professional baseball. I was talented enough to play throughout my high school career. I could have played college, but none of the schools I was interested in offered me the chance to major in what I wanted to major in. I was never foolish enough to think I was good enough to play at the level of MLB, so I opted for a school that offered me a chance to major in what I thought was important at the time, Chemical Engineering. Which I grew bored of after about two years, and began to regret that, given the salaries these guys command these days, I didn't take the game more serious at the time. However, that, is hindsight, and we all know hindsight is 20/20. I offer my thoughts as to what I think its future holds. I love my Braves, hate the Yankees, because I can, however, I think if the game doesn't change on a fundamental level, those of us who love the game will have nothing to recollect about except the memories it has already created for us.

I think the game, as a whole, has many problems. The least of which are talented players. The free agent market reminds us of this each winter. In addition, even as a fan of one of the few "Big Market" teams, I will admit that the disparity in the game has forgotten about the average fan. That's you and me. The game is about nothing more than money. It really has always been about it, but it wasn't until recently that most of us realized that baseball is a business. So to begin, in my first column, I will address a few things that, without contraction (which I resolutely hate), in my opinion will generate some revenue for the grand old game, and save it in the meantime.

It's about 850 million dollars if my math is correct. It's about 845 million more than what my goal in life is to earn. It's a lot of money. And that is what baseball owners stand to lose if contraction is not allowed to happen. I'll explain. There is a gentleman in Alabama who wants to buy the Twins for $150 million. He's even willing to pay for a new stadium out of his own pocket. (The owners must be ready to kill him for this offer) That sets the price for the Twins, and ticks Carl Pohlad off, because MLB was ready to give him $150 million for the Twins. But to be honest, $100 million to him, is pocket change to you and me. And the team is estimated to be worth about $98 million. As sure as we sit here, if MLB is allowed to contract two teams, after the 2002 season, the will be screaming about the need for two expansion teams in about 4-6 years. At about $500 million apiece. That, minus the $150 million paid to the Twins owner, leaves $850 million to be divided amongst the remaining owners. A blessing Colangelo dreams of. And that is a whole lot more money than what will be divided if they allow the teams in question to either be sold to an "outsider" or God forbid, moved.

WHAT HAPPENS IF MONTREAL IS ALLOWED TO MOVE AND THE TWINS ARE BOUGHT?

Not much for most of us. The fans in DC are happier, and the fans in Minneapolis/St. Paul get to watch a great young franchise develop.

Montreal cannot support baseball. It's a sad fact of life because I know there are true fans of baseball in Montreal. The team needs to move to Northern Virginia. The Twins need to stay in Minnesota. The Expo's organization has developed so many great ball players in the last ten years that it would be a debacle to fold them. The only real answer is to allow them to move to a market that they can make money. I've lived in Wash, DC and I can assure Peter Angelos that people do not drive from DC to Baltimore to see a game. There's too much traffic. The only time someone from DC catches a game at Camden Yards is because they went to Baltimore over the weekend to see the aquarium or go to Inner Harbor and the O's just happened to be in town. And now that Cal Ripken isn't playing, they really have no reason at all to see an O's game.

Let me pause for a minute to say that I once saw a game in old Memorial Stadium where every fan at the game cheered when Cal struck out to end the game. Wilson Alvarez struck him out to complete his no hitter. I've seen a no hitter.

The only reason the owners will vote for contraction is because of the money they will make the next two times baseball expands. They will expand. It is inevitable. I only hope the players are smart enough to see this and either get a piece of the action, or as I hope, they laugh at the owners and tell them there is no way they will allow the contraction of two teams. The teams should be allowed to move. Call you congressman or E-Mail him that you are all for MLB losing their anti-trust exemption.

If the owners or the players think they can get away with another work stoppage, baseball will end, as we know it. The only good game to watch will be the one you son plays with his friend on Play Station 2. I'm an average Joe. I work for a living. Why are people who make more in a year than I will in my lifetime arguing over money? Let's play some ball! Maybe if you stopped and thought about it, you could even find a way for every team to be competitive. Wouldn't it be great if every team knew they had a legitimate chance for a World Series title? OK that's stretching it, each team should, however, be on equal ground with every other team. The only thing that should separate the good from the bad is the management of the team. Starting with the manager in the dugout to the General Manager to the higher exec's of the franchise. The difference between the good franchises and those struggling to keep a field on the field should never be money. First, and the owners aren't going to like this idea at first, you share equally amongst every team, all revenue from television and radio. Just like they do in football. Secondly, and the players won't like this one at first either, you empose a salary cap on every team.

I'll tackle the revenue sharing first.

Put it all in a pile and every team shares equally. This puts each team on an equal level financially. It allows each team to spend the same amount of money on players. It stops some teams from being able to buy a World Series. It gives each team a chance every spring to be able to put the players on the field that it needs to compete on an equal footing with every other team. The only separations from first place and last will be the ability of that franchise to evaluate talent. There are good free agent acquisitions and bad ones. Some GM's always seem to make the right choices and others always seem to make the wrong one. There is a difference in the dugout as well. Some managers aren't actually watching the same game their team is playing. Most of the GM's of teams that do well in the current system are actually pretty good, but they also have the luxury of bottomless wallets of the owner. And there are some good GM's would couldn't field a good team, due to money restrictions, if they made a deal with the Devil.

How much money would a team make if it sold out every game in the season? Ask the Cleveland owner. Ask any owner of a team that sells out virtually every night. If you do, you'll be talking to the owners of the clubs that continually, year after year, also sell playoff tickets. Selling tickets is one of the reasons, if not the most important, baseball stays in business. The more tickets that sell, the more money a franchise makes. The more hot dogs and beers sell. How much more money could be generated if every stadium sold out every night? If every team were on equal footing to the amount of money each could spend on its team, all the teams could be competitive. Not just the few whose owners happen to have the most pocket change to spend. And guess what? You each can only spend the same amount on salaries.

Part 2: The Salary Cap

Players have to accept that in order to make the sport more attractive is to allow each team the same ability to win. To win in baseball, a team must be able to supply the manager a good pool of talent each spring. The manager should then be able to manipulate each player is to giving his best efforts on a day to day basis. The manager should also be able to manipulate the game in a manner that fully utilizes his players' talent. It has been, and always will be, my contention that baseball is won or lost by its management. Good managers seem to always win, even with less than par teams. Bad managers tend to lose no matter what talent is at their disposal. There have been more than one team that was full of superstars that was predicted to win it all, only to fall short because of bad management. If each team spent the same amount of money on players to ability to win or lose would be solely dependent on the management of the team. What should the salary cap be? I don't know. However, I'll offer a theory. Take the average salary of every team and then each team to spend eighty percent of that as a cap, increasing five percent a year. Teams have three years to comply. Overages are not allowed in any way. You can defer all you want in salary, but it counts against a team every year it is paid. Each team must spend to this cap every year to within en percent. Or suffer a penalty equal to the difference. This money would then be dispersed amongst any former player drawing a pension. This means each team will be spending more money. This undoubtedly will increase the average salary of ball players. It will limit the upper level that each team has available for the true super stars of the game. However, more players, overall, will be able to make what I like to refer to as "boatloads of money."

People want to know in spring that their team has a chance to win. If they feel this way, they will go to the ballpark. They will buy tickets. They will buy hot dogs and beer. They will spend what I like to refer to as, "boatloads of money."

Players, as a whole, will make more money. If stadiums sell out on a daily basis, the owners will make more money. Football wishes it could have 81 home games a year. I know a certain shortshop that plays for a team in Texas that will never be able to spend the money guaranteed in his contract. Kudos for him getting that much money. But, it's not fair to the rest of the teams or the fans for one team to be able to spend that much money on one player.

In conclusion, if team owners don't do something in the immediate future to stop the disparity of teams, the game will not exist another twenty years. You either love or hate the Yankees, and I happen to hate them, but if they keep buying the World Series, I'm going to stop giving baseball any of my money. And you should too.