Talk:Commissioner of Baseball
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Commissioner of Baseball is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of baseball and baseball-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|||
[edit] Selig as acting commissioner
Perhaps it is worthwhile explaining why Selig was acting commissioner for such a long time? I would certainly be curious to hear this explanation. - Jord 22:46, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
After Landis, the owners didn't want an independent commissioner any more. That's why they canned Chandler. Then they had Frick and Eckert and Kuhn, who pretty much did what they wanted. But after having had several more "independent" commissioners (Uebberoth, Giamatti, Vincent) the owners weren't going to permanently hire someone until they were sure he would do their bidding. It took awhile for them to decide that Selig was their guy. I doubt you would want to word it quite this way, though. Wahkeenah 23:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Bud Selig from my understanding, was fairly reluctant to become commsisioner at first. I don't know if it was because Selig was aware that you couldn't completely independent from the owners (hence people like William Eckert and Fay Vincent being forced out after relatively short terms), or knew that it meant that he would have to sever his ties the Milwaukee Brewers. Fay Vincent as gone on record to say that Major League Baseball should've had his deputy, Steve Greenberg to replace him (just like Vincent replaced Bart Giamatti after Giamatti's untimely death). I supposed that the owners woudn't have wanted Greenberg because it would've been more in their "best interests" go into a completely different direction (as opposed to an underling from the recently disposed regime).TMC1982 27 April 2006
- He wasn't reluctant enough to turn it down, though, eh? I would concede, though, that any comments of Vincent's are colored by the way he was dumped by MLB... not that he's incorrect about any of it, though. Wahkeenah 23:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Based on Andrew Zimbalist's book, In the Best Interests of Baseball, and giving Mr. Selig the benefit of the doubt, it would seem that the owners, at least in part in deference to Congress in order to justify MLB's anti-trust exemption, wanted to preserve the appearance of a strong commissioner who had the theoretical to act in the public interest. While serving as acting commissioner, Mr. Selig was reportedly well liked by the owners, and so was able to push them towards consensus. As a result, the owners prevailed upon Mr. Selig to become the commissioner in 1998, so that someone who they generally trusted could guide the direction and growth of MLB. --Isaac Lin 07:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Articles of Confederation
"The Black Sox scandal was seen as a failure of the National Commission. The Commission was in some sense baseball's equivalent to the Articles of Confederation: a good start, but ultimately scrapped and replaced with a more powerful and centralized government."
Is this section really important to the topic?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jon Darden (talk • contribs) 07:15, 3 September 2006.
That bullshit isn't NPOV. It's an opinion and total garbage taht doesnt have a place on an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.42.165 (talk) 07:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Opinion Statements
In this article, there are opinion statements made by one of the contributors. I do not believe that has a place in any article in Wikipedia, and should be reworded not to sound so opinionated if the statements can be backed up or removed if they cannot be proven. Debateking1 06:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
