- Team Pages
- Charlotte Bobcats
- Carolina Panthers
- Charlotte Checkers
- Charlotte Knights
- Charlotte 49ers
- Davidson Wildcats
IN MY OPINION
Note to player's union: Nobody wants Bonds
STAN OLSON
And the Major League Baseball Players' Association probably wonders why the average fan can't stand it.
Once, long ago, almost all of us were in the MLBPA's corner, as players whose salaries averaged $19,000 annually in 1967 fought to get a bigger piece of baseball's huge financial pie.
But in the decades since, through numerous strikes and considerable intransigence, the MLBPA has simply commandeered that pie. Now more than 60 percent of the game's revenues go to the players. Everyone else -- owners, front office staff, grounds crew, minor leaguers, etc., share the rest.
This year, the average player's salary topped $3 million for the first time.
And yet it's never enough for the MLBPA and its leader, Donald Fehr (and loathing). The organization always seems ready to find something certain to tick off those of us who support the game.
The latest incident concerns Barry Bonds, whom I was hoping never to mention again in one of these columns.
Last week, the association "expressed concern" to the baseball commissioner's office over the lack of offers to Bonds, asking for additional information about the offseason's free-agent market.
"We've raised both general concerns and some player-specific concerns," said association counsel Michael Weiner. He added that Bonds was only player specifically brought up in discussions. The implication, of course, was that BarryRoid was a victim of collusion by the game's clubs.
Uh, Mike and Don, let me explain this to you from the viewpoint of a club owner and a general manager:
• Virtually everyone inside and out of the game believes Bonds took steroids. The federal government is so certain of this that it has indicted him on perjury charges for saying he didn't. Because of the court case hanging over him, he would be a huge distraction for any team that signs him.
• Bonds is 43 now, and while he'd likely still be somewhat effective, there's that trade-off. Especially for a team -- like San Francisco, his former club -- that is trying to build with youth.
• Bonds, bulky and slow, can no longer play in the field -- for the past few years, he never played day games following night games, even though his left field job consisted mostly of standing around.
Which means that only AL teams, with their designated hitters, were candidates to sign him to begin with, reducing his chances by more than half.
• Last but in no way least, Bonds is a terrible teammate. He's a me-first guy who props his expensive leather recliner in front of his three lockers (at least he did with the Giants) and does what he wants, when he wants.
His managers there deferred to him -- after all, he was the face of baseball in San Francisco -- but find me another manager who would want that spilling all over their team chemistry.
And, Mike and Don, even the Giants, for whom he set that tainted, shameful all-time home run record, didn't want him back this year.
Guys, that doesn't sound anything like collusion.
It sounds like common sense.
Hopefully, finally, we've seen the last of Barry Bonds, and someday in the not-too-distant future, we'll see his record obliterated as well.
Until then, and for a change, I truly hope the MLBPA thinks before picking its fights.
IN MY OPINION Stan
Olson
