Enjoy This World Series, It's the Last One

At this time of the season, I, along with the rest of the baseball world save two teams and their fans, usually am thinking about the whole hot stove thing, what we need to do in the offseason to get back in the hunt next year. Last season, of course, was an exception, with my Mets making it to the World Series, and we almost found a way to get in the playoffs this year. However, I'm not thinking about that now, for the very simple reason that I believe there may not be a next year in baseball.

All of you are probably unaware of this fact, but the dreaded Collective Bargaining Agreement expires after the World Series. As you'll recall, the last time this happened, the players went on strike, the 1994 World Series got cancelled (thus snuffing out perhaps the greatest season in the history of the sad, pathetic franchise that is the Montreal Expos), the owners threatened to use replacement players, the 1995 season got 2 weeks hacked off of it, and a lot of fans swore to never see another Major League Baseball game ever again. A lot of you were among those fans, but you came back eventually. Maybe it was Cal Ripken breaking Lou Gehrig's "Iron Man" streak, maybe it was Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa chasing Roger Maris and the home run record. Maybe it was even the recent dominance of the New York Yankees. And in this attempt to once again embrace the sport and its best players, we all blocked out any memories of the strike and any reference to labor negotiations. As such, we all blocked out the fact that the CBA that ended the whole '94-'95 mess is about to expire.

Which means it needs to be renegotiated. Which means you're going to hear the names Donald Fehr, Gene Orza, and yes, Bud Selig a lot more in the coming months. If you think that in the current spirit of cooperation and the excitement that the majors have given us the past few seasons, this new CBA will be a slam dunk, you are sorely mistaken. And the reason may well be the two entities that have thrilled us the most in the past few weeks: Barry Bonds and the New York Yankees.

Here's the simple explanation: the last work stoppage was caused by the efforts of smaller market teams to regain some competitive balance. When baseball stopped its 1994 season, the best team in the American League was the New York Yankees, and the two best in the National League were the Expos and Atlanta Braves. Today, the best team in the AL is STILL the Yankees, and the second best team in the NL is STILL the Braves. Meanwhile, the top NL team is the Arizona Diamondbacks, who since the strike have been come into the league as an expansion team and arguably bought their way to 100 wins in their 2nd season and a World Series in the 4th season. The Expos have plunged into haplessness; they average maybe 28 fans a game, and I believe those 28 actually got lost on their way to the Canadiens and wound up at Olympic Stadium instead. Sure, the competitive balance thing has been proven occasionally by Seattle, Oakland, and Minnesota. Seattle couldn't pay Randy Johnson, Ken Griffey, or A-Rod, and yet they improved every time they lost a star player, and won a record-tying 116 games this year. Oakland won 102 games with a small payroll, and Minnesota turned the only franchise that could rival the Expos into an AL Central contender in one year, on one of the lowest budgets around. However, who's in the World Series? The Yankees, owners of the largest payroll, and the store-bought Diamondbacks. Competitive balance, my Ichiro.

Right now, the argument is true that at least a dozen teams can rule out a shot at the title when spring training opens. Can the NFL say that? Nope. Can the NHL say that? Unless you're the Chicago Blackhawks, no. Can the NBA say that? Unless you're the LA Clippers, no. Hell, even the WIZARDS have a chance, now that they have Jordan. And it's only about to get worse...

Why? Because Barry "73" Bonds is (gasp) a free agent.

After going on and on about how San Francisco is his home and he wants to play for the Giants for the rest of his career, he promptly went out and said he won't sign for anything less than A-Rod money ($25 mil a year). Guess who was the only team who so far has said, "Yeah, we can do that"? The Yankees. Why? Because their payroll is unlimited; their new cable TV deal gives them THEIR OWN NETWORK. Montreal can't even get a radio deal; small market teams are lucky to get 2-3 games a week on the local UPN affiliate. So, you can see the scenario here, the richest team in the world, likely with 4 straight world titles under their fat moneybelts, buys the guy who could easily hit another 70 homers with that short right field porch at Yankee Stadium. And I ask all of you fans of the other 29 teams: Do you think your team even has a prayer of dethroning the Yanks if they have Barry Bonds? Exactly.

Here's the scenario: Yankees win it all (again), Yankees sign Bonds (cuz only they can), the other 29 teams cry poverty and declare they cannot win a world title because they cannot outspend the Yankees. The players union won't like this, but the only way to solve all of this and reinstitute competitive balance is a salary cap. The NFL has it, the NBA has it, and they are none the worse for it; in fact, it's fun watching the Cleveland Browns or Chicago Bears ascend to the top just a year after being the laughingstock of the football world. If contraction is needed, do it; we can live without the Expos and Devil Rays. However, the players union has said that they will never accept a CBA that includes a salary cap. If that is the case, then I guess I'm rooting for "labor armageddon", because I side with the owners, and I think I'm not alone. How can you think the players have the right to make $25 million a year for only the teams that can afford to pay them? I make MINIMUM WAGE, for Pete's sake!!! And so, I am not looking forward to the 2002 Mets, because I fear there will not be a 2002 edition of the New York Mets. Call me a pessimist if you will; I prefer to think I'm a realist.

Dave-isms and Random Thoughts

It has come to my attention that a lot of people tend to misunderstand the things (expressions if you will) that I say in these columns. The simple explanation for that is the fact that a lot of these expressions are made up right on the spot. As I always say, "If there isn't an appropriate word or term for a situation, invent one." And so, I have, but I've made up so many of them over time that even I tend to confuse myself. I always told myself that I would someday compile a list of all the terms (Dave-isms if you will) that I have invented, and so here is a partial list...

D.A. (noun) short for dumbass, one of many terms I have "borrowed" from Don & Mike, my favorite radio show

M-T-O: (noun) basic staple of life, especially when you have no food and can only walk to a Sheetz for a meal cuz you have no car

Cincinnatied: (verb, past tense) to have experienced a large amount of industrial, commercial, and residential growth in a short period of time. Some call it suburban sprawl, I call it nice (a very bad perversion of Green Day's "Welcome To Paradise")

ish: (suffix) a measure of time. In my case, to attach "ish" to a time is to give a vague idea of when things will happen. Example: 4ish means anytime between 4:00 and 4:59.

double avoidance: (noun) technique that happens during the tense period of time after you initially ask out someone of the opposite sex and she is thinking it over... you avoid her because you don't want to seem like you're harassing her, and she avoids you because she'll feel she needs to answer if she runs into you

Cham-Hag-Way: (noun) term for the Arbitron market in which I reside, formerly known as Chambersburg-Hagerstown (Cham-Hag for short). However, Arbitron has recently renamed the market Chambersburg-Hagerstown-Waynesboro (cuz Waynesboro is just such a thriving metropolis, ya know), hence Cham-Hag-Way.

yuh-huh: answer in the affirmative; in other words, yes. A combination of the words "yeah" and "uh huh". It is how I answer most questions.

And now that you know what I'm saying when I'm saying it, here's some things that have been floating around my head of late...

Went to the West Genny game tonight. The good news is that they're a really exciting team to watch, they have great speed on offense, and their quarterback is a legitimate college prospect. The bad news is that they still find a way to break your heart, and they still can't shake the fact that they're painfully mediocre. Well, at least the "making the postseason" monkey is off their backs, and good luck to them next week.

Speaking of which, we have one good season at West Genny, and suddenly we have professionally printed programs??? Nice touch. Also, they had a stadium rock band... AWESOME!!! There's just something about hearing "Tie Your Mother Down" while waiting for a kickoff...

Meanwhile, the hoop parents at WG have finally gotten their wish... Jerry Wilcox resigned as head coach, despite his near-.700 winning percentage. He took the job at Liverpool, our archrival, and he was quoted in the paper as saying, "It's nice to go somewhere you're appreciated." Gee, you think that was a shot at the angry, self-absorbed parents who essentially ran him out of town for not playing their kids enough? Way to go, parents, you just killed the program. Bet you all feel so good that you drove a Hall of Fame coach with 2 sectional titles and 3 league titles (including one just last season) out of town. The only thing worse that could happen now is for them to accuse Wilcox's successor, Steve Dunham, of being a "Wilcox clone" and making the same "unfair to my kid" decisions, because then nobody will want to coach West Genesee. They'll be lucky to win 6 games this year, and if Liverpool makes sectionals, then I will laugh the loudest. Well, maybe second loudest...

Driving through Wilkes-Barre on the way up to the 'Cuse this weekend, I saw a new roadside sign on I-81: "Aggressive Driver, High Crash Area." Naw, really? I have previously noted in this column (see #12, by the way) than Northeast PA drivers are the worst in the world, at least that I know of. Need more proof? No prob... I'm stuck in the fast lane having to do 70 after just entering the 55mph zone as you enter Wilkes-Barre. Naturally, nobody is slowing down; that would just be too much of an inconvenience. I can't get over into the slow lane, because I'm passing two cars. The guy behind me starts FLASHING HIS HIGH BEAMS AT ME!!! Mind you, I'm already doing 15 over the speed limit!!! I finally get over into the slow lane, and just for good measure, the D.A. FLIPS ME OFF!!! I think I've made my point.

Speaking of drivers and their need for speed, I have noticed that they have upped the speed limit to 65 on the Camillus Bypass, and the drivers have adjusted accordingly. They're now all doing 75...

And finally, it just occured to me... I work in Cham-Hag-Way, and I have never in two months here, set foot in Hagerstown. Gotta work on that...

State of the Tube 2001

Now more than ever, we as Americans search for escape from the stress of our daily lives, and also from the events happening both in our country and around the world. In this time of war, there is no more American thing you can do than plant your butt down in front of the TV and watch as much of it as possible.

No, seriously, I mean it. I'm not kidding.

The new fall season is here and underway, albeit a bit delayed by the horrible events of September 11, but we have a new slate of shows and a new slate of episodes and plot twists from our familiar series to digest and analyze and criticize. And if there's anything I do extremely well, it's criticize. So, let's have at it...

First of all, I am somewhat behind in my television watching due to the fact that I have to tape much of what I want to see, or else risk being a zombie when I get to work in the morning (it's not easy getting up at 5:15). However, I have watched many of the new shows, and many shows overall, so I am fully prepared to give my unscientific, often unintelligent opinions. Let's go night by night, as I tell you what I am watching so you can compare notes with me. Sunday nights, I am getting into this new Richard Dreyfuss drama, "The Education of Max Bickford". I like it because it was a perfect role for Dreyfuss, reminding many of the movie "Mr. Holland's Opus", in which he plays a high school teacher rather than college professor, but still of the disgruntled, middle-aged, I-once-slept-with-a-student mold. Although the voice-over part is a tad annoying (we know it's you that you're talking about, Max, don't bother making it sound like it's someone else's story), I think this show is a winner. I loved the movie "Wonder Boys" (for more reasons than just Katie Holmes), and besides "Mr. Holland", this show reminds me of that movie as well. Meanwhile, "Alias" is on at 9:00 on ABC, as Jennifer Garner tries to shake off the "hey, weren't you in 'Dude, Where's My Car?'" tag. I like the premise of the show, and the producers are definitely guilty of the "Dark Angel"-Jessica Alba tactic of "let's get our heroine in as many skimpy outfits as possible while she's kicking ass". However, I have yet to watch an episode, basically because I've forgotten to start the VCR rolling at 9:00. More on that later...

Monday nights still find me watching the WB and "7th Heaven". There is no better written family show on television today. After that is "Angel", and while I lost interest in the show last season and stopped watching, I gave it another chance this year, and it sucked me back in. Perhaps it's all those reruns of the first few seasons of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" I've seen lately on FX. By the way, that is clearly the best syndication move of the new season, cuz I missed just about all the first season along with everyone else who heard "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and immediately thought of how pathetic the movie was.

Speaking of "Buffy," she's on UPN now, and alive once again (don't ask me to explain the season premiere, I only have so much space here). I figured that when your namesake character dies, that is the ultimate "jumping the shark" moment (don't ask me to explain THAT, either), not to mention the switch to the United Pathetic Network. However, the show still has some steam left in it, however next week's premise that she has to start a "slay for pay" policy shows that the principal characters aren't exactly kids anymore. Afterward is "Roswell", another WB transplant. Jury still out on that one, as I haven't watched the tape of the season premiere yet (see what I mean on this whole thing).

Wednesday nights, I started out watching "Grounded For Life" on Fox. I got hooked on this show over the summer, very well done and very funny characters. However, baseball playoffs have intervened, and so I am now watching "Dawson's Creek" again. It's basically a killing time move; speaking of "jumped the shark", this show has. At 9:00, it's over to ABC for "The Drew Carey Show", a show I've been meaning to start watching on a regular basis, but it wasn't until I started getting to see the show in syndication that I could A) see it and B) like it. Afterward, in a very savvy move by ABC, they have put "Who's Line Is It Anyway?: Too Hot For TV", which is much more edgier, and much closer to the original British version in that respect. I, however, think they should bring back "The Wayne Brady Show", which did very well over the summer, and put that in the 9:30 slot.

That's because we already get an hour of "Whose Line" at 8:00 on Thursday, and that's what I watch on Thursdays. Meanwhile, on Friday, I'm always away calling football games, so I never get to watch anything live. Once again, the playoffs have affected my viewing choices, but at the same time, it has saved me from myself, as after remembering to tape the season premiere of "Dark Angel", I forgot about the second one, and forgot about tonight's episode too until I realized that it had been pre-empted. This was a great move by Fox, by the way, putting "Dark Angel" on Friday nights, because there is NOTHING ELSE ON. This finally shows that they are starting to do something about that huge void that always exists on Friday and Saturday nights. Also to that end, ABC has "Thieves" on at 9:00, and just when you started to ask, "Whatever happened to John Stamos?" there he is. OK, I'll bet none of you actually wondered that; I certainly didn't. However, it's still a good show, and he's good as a wiseass, that's his best kind of role, other than being Rebecca Romijn's wife, of course.

Saturday still has not been solved, at least not that I know of, I'm too busy watching college football or sleeping to notice. That would be because I never had a reason to watch the networks on Saturday before, why should I start now? I don't even know what is on that night. Let me go check... nope, nothing. Maybe "Citizen Baines" on CBS at 9:00, maybe I'll check that nout next week, via videotape of course.

Now as to the other highlights/lowlights of the new fall season. Yes, "Survivor" is back, but every reaction I've heard about the first episode says the show is sliding in popularity fast. Nothing like a little real reality like a national tragedy followed by nightly updates on air strikes to turn people off to the sanitized controlled "reality" of "Survivor". However, people are getting into "The Amazing Race", so maybe there may be some life in the genre after all. Certainly not helping matters is the fact that the WB is now presenting "Popstars 2", as they look to replicate the formula that gave the world Eden's Crush (because of course, they were a HUGE success...)

Meanwhile, CBS is lining up a series of nostalgic pieces designed to suck in the classic TV buffs like myself. They'll observe the 50th anniversary of "I Love Lucy", and there will be yet another "Carol Burnett Show" reunion. However, the "Gilligan's Island" docudrama is a bit much. Considering the fact that there is a "Starsky and Hutch" movie in the works, I'm surprised that the "Gilligan's Island" flick didn't go straight to Hollywood. What tributes to the year 2001 will we see on the tube 30 years from now? If they even dare to do a "Survivor" retrospective, you can bet it will probably be portrayed as when the decline of Western civilization began. Just a guess...

When Bad Teams Happen to Good Players

It's a busy time in the sporting world. As baseball heads toward the playoffs, records are being broken, careers are ending. Football is cruising along at the pro and college and high school levels. The NBA is abuzz with the news that Michael Jordan is coming back yet again, and the NHL is underway, although I, like most of the country, won't care a bit about it until the playoffs start next April. The headliners and big names of the moment include Jordan, Cal Ripken, Tony Gwynn, Rickey Henderson, and Barry Bonds, among others, and it struck me that there is one thing that links them all together. They all play for teams that won't be playing in the postseason this year. Not only that, but Gwynn, Henderson, Ripken, and perhaps even MJ are playing for teams for whom they are pretty much the only drawing card. Not including Rickey, of course; Rickey is the only one who shows up to watch Rickey, and he'll be the first to tell you that.

It's kinda depressing when you think about it. There won't be one last run through October for Cal's Orioles or Tony's Padres, not that there were many to begin with. Ripken won a world championship his second year, but that was it. There were two trips to the ALCS in the mid-90s, but Jeffrey Maier and Tony Fernandez kiboshed any hopes of more World Series memories for Number 8. As for Gwynn, there were two one-sided World Series losses, first to the '84 Tigers and then the '98 Yankees, and a first-round playoff exit in 1996. Bonds has never been to a World Series, and most of the world holds him completely accountable for that, but hey, who thought Sid Bream could score from second on a single? The difference, perhaps, with this is that the world roots for Cal and Tony, they root against Barry. They feel bad that Gwynn never won the big one, but they're happer than hell that Barry never has, and they probably wish Rickey never did. Tony Gwynn, meet Ernie Banks, meet Ted Williams. They never even made a World Series, so perhaps Tony has been blessed more than we would think.

Still, it does seem that too many of the "bad guys" (I just keep throwing Rickey as an example, cuz it's just so easy) win titles, and not enough of the "good guys" win titles. Leo Durocher had the famous line, "Nice guys finish last", and maybe that's true for some, but it doesn't seem right. You work hard your entire career, bang out hits and home runs, craft a Hall of Fame-worthy resume, but you get surrounded with nothing but scrubs and you wind up watching the Luis Sojos of the world win it all (nothing against Sojo, but he's no Tony Gwynn).

This extends to all sports at all levels. Karl Malone and John Stockton will likely finish their careers as Utah's greatest stars since Brigham Young, but no rings. We hear all the time about good kids with high GPAs and character sheets with accomplishments that make us all jealous and a little guilty that we didn't do more than drink during our college years, and yet they wind up on teams that go 2-9 or 3-8. If you're of truly good character and ability, you might get another shot at winning in the NFL, but not always. Dan Fouts... helluva QB, great stats, good guy, no Super Bowl appearances, let alone rings. Hell, the city of Buffalo has a soft spot in its aching sports heart for all of those Bills and all of those Sabres who came oh so close to the holy grail, only to watch a field goal sail wide right or a questionable goal call.

The best of characters stand up to the losing with their heads held high and a no quit attitude. I have seen two examples of this so far this football season. First, in the college ranks, where my Susquehanna University Crusaders are unfortunately threatening to flip my 8-2 prediction upside down; they're halfway there at this point, 1-4. It's frustrating to say the least; they haven't had a season like this in 16 years, but they're not fighting with themselves. Sure, there is an occasional scruff between one SU player and an opponent who may have grabbed or shoved a little too long, but that can just be chalked up to the heat of battle. Meanwhile, I spend my Friday nights calling Shippensburg High School football games. The Greyhounds, to put it mildly, are not that good. In fact, tonight was the first chance I got to practice my touchdown call in three weeks because it had been that long since they had scored a point. They're 0-6, probably headed for 0-10, but they just go about their business week after week and hope they can get it all right long enough to squeeze a win.

And what if they did? "Feel-good" stories like that unfortunately don't transcend well when you're 1-9 instead of 0-10, it's just the way our society is. The real "feel-good" story for them is to go from 0-10 to 10-0, or at least into a contender. But maybe we just don't look for all the real "feel-good" stories out there, and instead we focus on the most unbelievable, the ones that make us feel the best. How about instead we settle for the much more plentiful ones out there that involve good guys getting what they deserve, getting something positive for all of the hard work they put into their chosen sports. I always consider the little victories in life to be just as important as the major victories, because the little victories happen much more often, and it's the little victories that get you through your day or week or life.

Now that I think about it, maybe all those players I mentioned before (except MJ, of course) have more than enough of those more minor, more underappreciated "feel good" stories in their memories to be able to deal better with the lack of a ring on their finger. Perhaps.