From the Sidelines: The corporate takeover of America's pastime

By Jason Heller

Don't call it a comeback. McGwire-Sosa home run fever did erase the post-strike backlash against Major League Baseball, and fans did come back to the game. The 1998 World Series, however, had unusually low TV ratings. Why? Because--with all due respect to the San Diego Padres--it was no contest.

The New York Yankees' juggernaut rolled through the Series the same way they had rolled through the regular season, making loyal baseball fans change the station as a result. The 1998 Yanks were a boon for baseball because they made fans feel like they were a part of something historic, harkening back to the days of Mantle, Ford, and DiMaggio. But as the Yanks dominated, they became a symbol of something that is terribly wrong with the sport: an almost total lack of competition.

Remember last year's talk of radical realignment? The whole idea behind that plan was to rearrange baseball's divisions to increase competitiveness and bridge the canyon between the haves and the have-nots. The plan was a half-hearted attempt to restructure the game to counter the effects of outlandish free-agent spending by successful teams (Atlanta) and unsuccessful teams (Baltimore) alike. But there is a much greater problem that the owners and pseudo-Commissioner Bud Selig avoid every year.

The problem is corporate ownership. Rupert Murdoch and his corporate empire bought the Los Angeles Dodgers from the O'Malley family last year, Disney owns the Anaheim Angels, and a large Japanese media company owns the Seattle Mariners. And now even George Steinbrenner, the notoriously possessive owner of the New York Yankees, is considering selling his team to Cablevision, a sports and media conglomerate. The price tag? $900 million.

Sure, baseball is big business, but maybe it's gotten too big. What if Disney were having financial problems (this is a hypothetical situation, of course), and decided that the best way to turn a profit would be to spend more on movies and less on the Angels? I'm sure there are plenty of 10 year-olds in southern California who would love to see The Lion King Part VI, Simba vs. the Volcano, even if the Angels began to look like the New York Mets of the early '90s. But that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

By the same token, if Rupert Murdoch wanted his Dodgers to win a World Series, he could take the profits from There's Something About Mary and The X-Files Movie and sign Bernie Williams, Mo Vaughn, Kevin Brown, and Randy Johnson. He wouldn't have to worry about making a profit on ticket sales like most baseball teams--he could just count on Ally McBeal for that.

The point is, when corporations--especially entertainment companies--take over baseball, competition between teams is obliterated. Whichever corporate owner decides to make a run for the title in any given year can do it. H. Wayne Huizenga (who owns, among other things, Blockbuster Video) demonstrated this is with the Florida Marlins in 1997. We all know what happened after that.

Sure, all you Yankee haters out there may have been crying foul last week, whining about how the Yankees bought the 1998 World Series title. But you'll be pining for Steinbrenner if Cablevision takes over. Another entertainment company owning another baseball team. Why wouldn't these companies sign the best, most exciting free-agent players (wait 'til Griffey becomes a free agent) to bring in the ratings? Especially since they own the TV networks and need the ratings. In five years, we could be hearing about players signing $200 million contracts--more than some entire teams are worth today.

It may be trite to offer the tired "big corporations and big money are bad for baseball" argument. But at the same time, it's more important than ever. Baseball owners, baseball media, and even the players are basking in the glow of one of the greatest seasons in major league history. Every television commentator told us how this year has brought back the fans who left after the ugliness of the '94 strike.

But if the corporate takeover continues, will the fans still be around in places like Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Montreal, and Milwaukee, where the teams won't be able to afford high-priced talent? Teams like those could produce decade-long losing streaks and record-low attendance as a result, forcing them out of business or to different cities. The best teams would be owned by the wealthiest corporations, would have the best players locked up in huge contracts paid for with money from corporate ventures outside of baseball, and would draw the biggest crowds. Yet, ironically, even these teams' owners would make little, if any money from baseball. Baseball is nearing an age of a new kind of competition--a competition for survival.

Major League Baseball owners can talk all they want about radical realignment during this offseason. But unless non-corporate owners such as the Padres' John Moores and Larry Lucchino have the courage to stop--or at least slow down--the emerging media takeover of baseball ownership, they'll be bought out themselves. If they can get the type of money Steinbrenner will get if he sells the Yankees, what's to stop them?

Back to Sports...