|
|
|
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
|
|
|
› See most helpful viewpoints
|
|
14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
Finally, a Comprehensive Plan to fix Baseball, July 23, 2000
Bob Costas has taken the time (and laying his reputation on the line) to put forth a case to put the Game/Business of Major League Baseball on the right track to insure its place of prominence in the sporting world. The result of his efforts is a well thought out, capable and possibly, doable plan to fix the problems that have been growing since the strike of 94/95.Granted, not all of the ideas are original to Mr. Costas, but he places all the ideas together, something I haven't come across before. As stated earlier, Mr. Costas premise is that the future stability of baseball has been further weaken by the owner's decisions since the last strike. Among Mr. Costas' solutions are: a revenue sharing arrangement, including local the team's media revenues and gate receipts; a salary cap complete with a floor; no radical realignment of the divisions; and the elimination of the Wild Card. Along the way Mr. Costas chides both the owners and the players for their selfish, self-motivated attitudes, which left unchecked, just hurt the game. One drawback to the book is the last chapter in which Mr. Costas discusses nine minor points that are best left out of the book, as the subjects do not fit the book's theme, with the exception of the debate on the DH. In the Introduction, Mr. Costas states that his effort is to draw distinctions between progress and mere change. Mr. Costas' book does just that and is a good starting point for all baseball fans to discuss the future needs of the game.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
Costas For Commissioner, May 6, 2000
Bob Costas presents an intelligent, well reasoned, and objective analysis of the state of baseball. From revenue sharing and realignment to the barber shop debates over the DH, Pete Rose, and the size of the strike zone, Costas outlines a prescription to both revitalize the great American pasttime yet keep it in balance with its long tradition. Fans of the big market teams will find his pill hard to swallow; but having grown up around Kansas City and St. Louis baseball, it seems medication worth considering. Costas steps away from the passioned positions of owners and players to present a plan that will, in the long run, make The Game better. I highly recommend this short, readable book. You may not agree with Costas or like him, but anyone who respects baseball will find his ideas worth consideration. Hey, Bud Selig, are you out there?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
Don't read it if you are a Yankee fan, April 18, 2000
By A Customer
I joked with my buddy earlier this year that I am going to stop rooting for the Yankees because I think the Yankees winning another World Series would be as much fun as winning a pickup game of softball in which you get to choose the eight other players you want first rather than alternating picks. After reading this book, I became even more disenchanted with the Yankees and the unlevel playing field that exists in MLB. What is great about this book is that Costas not only makes the case of what is wrong with the system but provides very rational solutions to improve it. I would love to hear Bud Selig's thoughts on why Costas' solutions shouldn't be implemented other than George Steinbrenner, Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner don't think it is a good idea.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
The Ideas Make Sense, So It Will Never Happen, June 7, 2001
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!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
Costas makes an admirable debut, April 5, 2000
By A Customer
Costas brings to light several issues with Major League Baseball that have been inherent through the 90's. Everyone knows that small market teams simply cannot compete with the big market clubs with their cable revenues and such. Costas, however, brings in the emotional side of this issue. Is it really fair to the fans and how will this effect baseball in the future? Costas has always been a proponent of bringing to light controversial issues in sports. With this book, he makes it clear that there are problems with America's past time and because it is Costas, people will listen.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
Commissioner Costas, April 7, 2000
This is a wonderful book, full of thought provoking ideas. Very good analysis of what is good and bad about baseball. If even half of his suggestions came to reality all baseball fans would be eternally grateful. Costas for Commissioner!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
Silent Lucidity... or... Ideas So Good That No One Listens, June 11, 2001
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.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
Costas Pitches Relief For Pastime's Future In "Fair Ball", July 9, 2001
In "Fair Ball," longtime NBC-TV sports journalist Bob Costas has written a succint, numbers-soggy, yet unsentimental look at how far baseball's on and above-field stewards let its image and financial management slip.But unlike Mike Lupica's mad, mindless manure spreading in "Mad As Hell," Costas aims facts and proposed solutions at baseball's hard numbers: on the schedule (his criticism of interleague play) at the gate (everything from a proposed revenue sharing plan to the constant between inning noise; he cites the Montreal Expos' and Texas Rangers' star-crossed, strike-shortened seasons as examples), on TV (the disastrous "Baseball Network," wild card folly destroying September pennant game-by-game tension), World Series games starting too late for younger fans and peppered with commercial messages. His description of 1997's Marlins-Indians World Series accurately descibes how interminable and unapproachable the game had become in less than a decade. Costas outlines his plan to address baseball's large and small, money and image issues: Pete Rose's Hall of Fame induction (he favors it while strongly opposing that gambling that got Rose suspended) the DH (he opposes it despite its extending the careers of stars like Eddie Murray) radical, georgaphical realignment (a disaster still discussed but earlier dismissed). Costas' book is welcome because, unlike more emotional stories like David Halberstam's "October 1964" or Lupica's "Summer of 98" (both chronicling World Series which changed baseball's image) you don't smell the green grass and hear the bat crack. "Fair Ball" is the work not of a baseball poet (Costas' writing is broadcast-tight, although more charts and graphs would have made his revenue sharing plan more accessible ). Costas here is a baseball doctor diagnosing a decade's baseball owner obesity and union player gluttony, prescribing diet and weight redistribution. Bob Costas' book is recommended reading for fans, those they cheer for (everyone should read Chapter Three, "The Nature of Sports Leagues," among the most accurate descriptions of player perks and pressures), and all deriving employment, profit or pleasure from the national pastime.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
Read This Book, Bud Selig!, July 10, 2000
Bud Selig NEEDS to read this book. The owners NEED to read this book. The players and their union reps NEED to read this book. And all true fans of the game NEED to read this book.Bob Costas has become one of America's most trusted and admired sports commentators. He has earned this status by being informed about the games he telecasts from. He has HUGE encyclopedias of sports stats and factoids. God only knows how he gets some of the stats (ie: "Gary Sheffield bats .232 on artificial turf when it's raining outside, but get him outdoors and he slugs out an astonishing .406 when runners are on first and third.").--note: not an actual Bob Costas quote, but could be close. In any rate, "Fair Ball" is written by someone who loves the game of baseball in every facet. He wants change in the game--real change, not some tinkering around that only prolongs the inevitable. He has closely anlayzed the problems that have emerged since 1993 and, unlike some sports analysts, he has A PLAN. The plan is logical and it is direct in getting to the root of the problems and not merely tweeking it in spots. He argues for ways to implimate proper revenue-sharing, create a fair and better method for salary caps and "floors," and realignement. He hates the wild-card and gives up several pages in his reasons why it is blurring the distinction between baseball and other sports. He even makes his case eliminating the DH and integrating a more "global" representation to the game with worldwide scouting and drafts. In this short book, Mr. Costas manages to make a case for baseball...a "fan's case" that is. These ideas, though maybe never put into practice, will at the very least stir up the argument more. Perhaps during players negotiations and owners meetings, these ideas will gradually make their way to the table. Hopefully we will then have a game that will incorporate what was great about baseball in years past to what is great about the game today. Every one of Costas' ideas has strong evidence to support it. As always, he has done is homework. He stays focused and makes a strong case even addressing those that might criticize his plans as being radical and unrealistic. His ideas are radical, but only in that the changes that have already ocurred in prior years were equally radical--Mr. Costas is only trying to set things right before baseball is terribly harmed. Being a baseball cynic since the strike of '94, I doubt that the owners nor the players have the foresight to care about anything else except their immediate gains. I still love the game and always will. But, I will long for what it was in my youth and in my father's youth. And hope and pray that Mr. Costas will take a pay cut and someday become commissioner.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
You gotta love baseball to love this one, March 19, 2001
Bob Costas has carved out a niche in the American sports society as the ultimate baseball fan, so when I saw his book "Fair Ball: A Fan's Case for Baseball," I immediately knew it would be worth reading. It didn't let me down.Despite being a member of the media, Costas definitely has the credentials and the subjective mindset to write this book. During his time working with NBC and HBO, Costas has proven himself intelligent, unbiased and knowledgeable about the game of baseball. This book is an extension of that. Costas wrote the book as a response to a pervasive feeling found amongst baseball fans that the game is about to crumble, due to the amazing amounts of money being spent and the inability of small-market teams to compete financially with their large-market peers. Costas points out the basic problems with the structure of the collective-bargaining agreement between the players and the team owners, as well as the problems that have developed with the lack of revenue sharing. Costas takes fair look at those problems and proposes several solutions on how to even the disparity that is found in the game. The ideas that Costas offers are logical and if followed would be the start to leveling the playing field. They're not perfect ideas, but they're a start. This book is only for the hardcore baseball fans at heart, not the avid Yankees or Braves fan, but the avid baseball fan. It's for the guy who will stay up all night to watch the Padres play the Expos, simply because it's baseball. You have to already have an understanding of what the game has been through in the past decade in order to understand this book. This book is easy reading, despite its sometime complex subject matter, and will give you a deeper, better grasp of what's going on in the great American pastime.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
|
|
| |
|
|
|
