Baseball - The Progressive Sport?

Lost in the hysteria of March Madness and the congressional investigation of doping in baseball is the quiet story that that the New York Yankees have hired a female color announcer for their radio network. In fact, Suzyn Waldman is the first full-time female radio announcer in major-league baseball, an item made even more significant since New York is America's largest broadcast market (not counting additional nationwide affiliates, the Internet and XM Radio) and the Yankees are perhaps the most popular (and reviled) baseball team in the world. This and other stories from "America's Pastime" offer both hope and vision to Progressives...

A Small Triumph for Female Broadcasters

Suzyn Waldman has one of those diverse backgrounds that would be funny if it weren't for real. Waldman has a degree in Economics from Simmons College and was a theatrical performer - including two years opposite Richard Kiley in Man of La Mancha. She was the first voice heard on America's first all-sports radio station, (WFAN in 1987) and she worked for fifteen years as an award-winning beat reporter and talk show host before joining the Yankee's television network as a reporter. She has had to face the normal impediments to female sports broadcasters (complete with anti-Waldman petitions) and she is a breast cancer survivor. (YES)

Waldman is both extremely knowledgable about the game and skilled in her ability to articulate the nuances. Her direct demeanor and slight hint of a Boston accent (Yankee fans shudder) give her the ability to hold her own with the manliest of the manly male announcers. Far from being the gratuitous sex symbol role that female broadcasters are often pidgeonholed into, Waldman really comes off as "one of the guys," and it will be interesting the extent to which New York sports fans accept her in this new role.

In the pre-season broadcasts, Waldman's partner and friend, long-time Yankee announcer John Sterling, still seems a bit at odds how to work with this new, different addition to his long and distinguished broadcast career. Waldman, too, lacks some of the fluidity that we might expect from her work on the Yankee's TV broadcasts. But the contrasts between personalities, like sweet and sour chicken or Franken/Lampher, could make for a very flavorful experience. It will be interesting to see how the two of them grow into this new situation and make it their own.

I don't know what Waldman's politics are, nor is it terribly relevant. But as yet another previously closed area opens to women, we can see tangible progress being made in 2005. Perhaps this even bodes well for a Boxer presidential or vice-presidential candidacy in 2008.

The Yankees as a Paradigm for Progressives

The NY Yankees are often derided as a cold, detached, and soulless group of professional mercenaries. But as Benedict Carey reported last week in the New York Times, these qualities may be keys to their success.

Social scientists who have studied group performance under pressure say that often it is decentralized groups (like the Yankees) that prove more resilient than strongly connected ones (like the Red Sox); they are better able to weather outside criticism and internal quarrels.

Evidence from personality profiles and from studies of military, corporate and space flight crews suggests that looser ties between group members can be a strength, if the team includes individuals who can generate collective emotion when needed. And the Yankees have several of them.

Decentralization is certainly an attribute that applies to the dizzying array of Progressive organizations that are springing up around the country. Given that little has changed in the fundamental personality types that gravitate towards Progressivism, the only thing that may need changing is our understanding of the game.

The success of the monolithic Republicans may be attributable to the way they changed the rules of the game in the 1990's. With the Gingrich revolution, they became unwilling to accept permanent minority status and the compromise associated with it. Armed with finely-tuned rhetoric, a carefully constructed support infrastructure and a no-holds-barred attitude, they managed to utterly defeat a complacent Democratic party that was playing by the old rules. This has evidenced itself in the way the Republicans have been able to destroy old-school Democrats like Tom Daschle and exploit pragmatists like John Breaux and Joe Lieberman.

Whether such independent, loosely tied people ultimately succeed as a unit depends not only on strong management, researchers say, but on the presence of individual group members who can circulate through disparate parts of the team, reduce conflict and help generate collective spirit when it is needed.

The lesson may be that our diversity will be a strength in the games to come. We do not need to be more like the Republican gang of thugs. With Howard Dean, we have in place the beginnings of a strong management team and weening from the teat of corporate donations. Perhaps with Pelosi and Reid we have individuals who are able to reduce conflict and generate collective spirit. All we need to do is learn to calmly work together toward the common goal, hit the pitches we're dealt and understand that the old, civil softball match has been replaced by a game of very serious hardball.

Baseball as the Progressive Sport?

Along with this little news tidbit comes a legitimate question about whether anything as trivial as professional baseball should have any significance to Progressives. It's illusory mom-and-apple-pie image often seems more appropriate to jingoistic conservative rhetoric and it's corrupt, hypocritical Good ol' Boy ownership group (of which W was a member) offers little to inspire people who truly value accountability and character.

But Progressives love their mothers and apple pie too. Much of baseball's appeal is a mythology that represents things we would like to believe about America. And alot of the realities are surprisingly Progressive as well:

  • Baseball has a long association with the civil rights movement. Jackie Robinson became a civil-rights hero when his talent made it impossible to continue to ignore black baseball players and Robinson continued to be active in the civil-rights movement after his retirement in 1957. (LOC) Hank Aaron's steroid-free breaking of Babe Ruth's home run record in 1974 occurred in the face of racist taunts and death threats. (SN) Frank Robinson's ascendency as major leagues baseball's first black manager (Cleveland Indians - 1974) beat the NFL's Art Shell (Raiders - 1989) by 15 years. The storied and segregated Negro Leagues have become a cultural icon for many African-Americans.
  • Baseball has one of the last strong employee unions. While this has led to problems like the steroid controversy, perennial threats of work stoppages and competitive imbalance, union strength affords freedoms to baseball players that football and basketball players can only wish they still had. The minimum salaries negotiated by the union provide a fair share of revenue for the multitude of players that never achieve multi-millionaire stardom. Baseball has escaped the anti-free-market salary caps that reduce other pro athletes to items on a ledger. Florida Marlins first baseman Carlos Delgado has long protested the American invasion of Iraq by remaining seated during the playing of the National Anthem. No such behavior would ever be permitted from a football or basketball player. (Common Dreams)
  • Baseball values age and experience. Baseball players have much longer careers than football and basketball players. Baseball teams also have larger coaching and support staffs than other professional sports and this provides more high-profile opportunities for players after their retirement from playing. And if Bush has his way with Social Security, they will need to keep working.
  • Baseball is a game that values history. Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of baseball knows Ruth, Gehrig and Mantle. Many still speak with awe about Walter Johnson, a dominating pitcher who's halcyon days were almost a century ago. Few football or basketball fans can name a professional player from before 1960. Progressives often seem to have a greater respect for history than our Conservative brothers. And history is on our side.
  • Baseball is the least violent professional team sport. In football, when things go right, people come off the field on stretchers. In baseball, people only get hurt when things go wrong. Bench-clearing brawls are uncommon and are punished by baseball authorities. Mutual respect and personal friendships often transcend team affiliations. People who believe in nuance and non-violent resolution of problems should identify with a game of nuance and non-violence.
  • Baseball is a slow, thoughtful game that relies both on quantifiable fact as well as faith. Baseball players are notoriously superstitious, since so much of their success depends on factors beyond their control. But they are judged with an extraordinary array of statistics that provides a somewhat more objective picture of performance than in other sports. Almost no one fails up. Progressives are generally pretty good with the numbers. It's the faith we need work on.
  • Baseball is more accessible than other pro sports. Because there are more games, the ticket prices, while not cheap, are significantly below those of basketball and football. It is possible to get a pair of bleacher seats in Yankee stadium for $24. A scalper outside the Garden would laugh if you offered him that for Knicks tickets. Minor league teams, which many people enjoy more than major league ball, are present in almost every community of meaningful size and provide a very economical and enjoyable way to spend a summer evening with the family. Families are something Republicans TALK about, but families are something Progressives DO something about.
  • Baseball is regional and decentralized. Like new the Progressive move towards grassroots, Baseball's appeal is largely regional. Football teams have national audiences, but a baseball team's fan base is largely concentrated in the geographical area surrounding the team's home. This is one reason baseball playoff games get relatively poor ratings - if the home team isn't in the race, most fans don't care. All politics is local.
  • Baseball players are often good role models. While there is no legitimate reason why professional athletes should serve as role models for children or adults, the fact is that they held up as such. There are certainly boorish scoundrels and narcissistic conservatives in the bunch, but there are also devoted family men and ambassadors that use their wealth to help the impovershed communities they came from. Players are rewarded richly for their accomplishments, not their father's name. The players that are most beloved by audiences are usually venerated for their work ethic and attachment to the community. Charity work is not only common but expected from any player of even modest stature. Even the most respected players have occasional moral failings, but that's something Progressives are willing to accept unhypocritically about everyone.
  • Baseball, like politics, is a team game based on individual performance. Unlike the currently hot children's team sport, soccer, baseball requires a hierarchy of skills and a willingness to defer gratification while working for the greater good. It requires acceptance of the fact that even if you are playing well, you will fail in two-thirds of your at-bats. It is a paradigm the Republicans have mastered. It is something the Democrats desperately need.
  • Baseball is unifying and bipartisan. Personalities as diverse as conservative commentator George Will and socially-conscious filmmaker Spike Lee speak eloquently about baseball. While many owners are sterotyped as cronies of W, people associated with blue-state Boston Red Sox and NY Yankees both gave overwhelmingly to Democratic candidates in 2003. It is notable that while Democrats have been notorious for being willing to compromise with Republicans, there is no Republican equivalent to the DLC and centrist Republican legislators in congress are becoming as rare as natural breasts in Hollywood.
  • Baseball teams and coaching staffs are multiracial and international. Players of every color put aside their ethnic differences for the good of the team. Ultimately, the only thing that matters is whether you can contribute to success that is shared by everyone. Sounds Progressive to me.
  • Baseball did not create the Castro dictatorship. Although Fidel Castro is a huge supporter of baseball, the legend that Castro's hatred for America stems from his failed tryout with the Washington Senators is a myth. Castro never had such a tryout or even played the game professionally. Castro's hatred for America comes from his own meglomania and our support for the corrupt Batista regime. Sounds Conservative to me. (Snopes)

Conclusions

In a time where our country and the people of the world face a huge threat from a regressive corporate elite with almost unlimited political power, perhaps baseball should be the least of our concerns. But as Kos says, all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy or girl. You can do worse in your diversions than baseball. It's nice to step away from the computer once in awhile and dream a little.


Display:


Yankees and Red Sox = not progressive (none / 0)

at least as far as baseball goes.  Progressives don't use a huge purse to crush everyone else, as these two teams do when they bid up the price on, and then buy every desirable free agent they can.

I congragulate the Yanks on hiring a female radio broadcaster, however.

"You say the world has lost it's love I say embrace what it's made of" -Dar Williams
by Valatan on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 10:18:52 AM EST

I second that (none / 0)

As a Pirates fan, it is absolute hell to watch a team that has farmed some of the best players in the game lose them year-in-year-out because they just can't compete.

Until the revenue structure is fixed, baseball ain't progressive.

by jcjcjc on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 11:01:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Revenue (none / 0)

As with many things involving conservative business interests, I suspect the envy for the Red Sox and Yankees is actually misdirected rage that should be targeted at owners, not teams or players. "Competitive imbalance" is more complex than a big market/small market dichotomy and focus on this wedge issue overlooks the numerous actual and metaphorical progressive elements in baseball - which I detailed in the diary.

Three of the past five World Series winners (Marlins, Angels & Diamondbacks) were not the much-envied big-market Red Sox or Yankees. The Red Sox hadn't won a series since 1918. Prior to their late 90's reign, the Yankees had a long succession of bad teams despite their huge financial resources.

The key to winning has as much to do with HOW money is spent as it does with HOW MUCH money is spent. The 90's Orioles and Mets made and spent huge amounts of money on bad teams. No one can say that buying Mo Vaughn or Jason Giambi equaled buying a division title. In 2004, Buck Showalter worked miracles with an extremely weak pitching staff and the season featured a number of surprisingly competitive races featuring mid-market teams. Since Progressives lack the financial resources of Conservatives, I'd say there's a lesson in there for us.

Hate the Yanks as much as you wish, but look at the elements other than cash that have made them successful.

I'd be happy to talk about "Revenue Structure" if the discussion didn't always lead back to artificially constraining worker's salaries and rights. A-Rod is blasted for his $250M contract, but how much did Tom Hicks make for being stupid enough to give him that contract?

As a legalized entertainment monopoly, the finances of pro baseball are opaque and without open books it is not possible to know what the financial situation really is. We are left to trust a bunch of whiney millionaire owners who seem unwilling to make SMART investments in their clubs. For all of Steinbrenner's myriad faults, he puts his money where his mouth is and his investment has paid off - at least in attendance, ratings and on-field performance. If you build it, they will come.

When owners are willing to talk about PROFIT caps, I'll support SALARY caps. When owners are willing to propose some kind of system that provides accountability for owners rather than simply redistributing capital from well-run teams to poorly-run teams, that would be a step forward. Fairness is a Progressive value.

Unfortunately, I don't think we can expect anything so egalitarian from ownership. This leaves baseball with a rather twisted system of pseudo-capitalism. Like the real thing, it's an awful system but it's the best we've got. If you don't like it, there's plenty of other places to spend your entertainment time and money. And that is one of the many things Progressives and Conservatives love about America.

by ProgressiveChristian on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 06:03:41 PM EST

I agree with your main point (none / 0)

And the Mets of the last couple of years are far more of a disgusting problem than the Yankees...

But Steinbrenner continuously wastes money on bad investments, and can deal with it by burying his problems under more money.  Remember the MOndesi deal, Javy Vasquez?  Jeff Weaver?  

It's easy to win, if when Jason Giambi turns sour, you can just turn around and sign Gary Sheffield.  You have problems with Kevin Brown, ok, just throw a bunch of money at the diamondbacks until they give you randy johnson.  You ignore that the Yankees can compete this way, whilst the A's and Twins are stuck with player developement and clever signings and trades, to make up for this mountain of cash.

And the Red Sox and Angels are only marginially better.  So, eh, the Marlins and Diamondbacks were able to be exceptions to the rule (both with ultra-exceptional indiviudal pitching performances as much as teamwork)

"You say the world has lost it's love I say embrace what it's made of" -Dar Williams
by Valatan on Tue Mar 15, 2005 at 08:34:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree with your main point (none / 0)

I will completely agree that having lots of money and BEING WILLING TO SPEND IT gives The Boss much more tolerance for error and flexibility when dealing with the vagaries of staffing. I will even add that, as in the Johnson case, the Yanks consistent ability to compete attracts deals from players that might otherwise not get made.

But again, I point to the past four years of record Yankee payrolls to make my case that you can't buy the ultimate symbol of success - a championship - despite the advantage given by cash. The Yanks were completely absent from the from '82 - '95 series with the same owner, same free-agent system and same pot of revenue. This year's pitching staff is ancient and is only two serious injuries away from being guaranteed second or third place in the division.

The Yankees are one team out of 30. They are in the same division as the Red Sox. There are six divisions and two wild card slots. How can the Yankees or BoSox be blamed for the failings of the Giants or the Rangers?

I think the frustration should be directed at the owners, not the Yankees. I believe there are other owners who have the cash to compete but aren't willing to invest in their team - something I can't prove because baseball finances are kept private and probably are as shady as all show business dealings. Philly is a huge market with a devoted fan base, but McClatchy hasn't made the investment.

If you put a cheap product on the field, audiences aren't going to waste their time and money watching the home team lose. That's not George's fault, that's your owner's fault. There have been plenty of situations where a surprise team attracts a large spike in attendance and ratings (and therefore revenue) when they start to win. The Yankees sell out everywhere they go - demonstrating that there are fans everywhere willing to pay to see a winner.

As a Progressive capitalist, I think the focus should be on ways to grow everyone to the level of the best, not shrink the successful to an equal level of mediocrity. Propose a fair and practical systemic solution that does this and generations of baseball fans everywhere will thank you.

by ProgressiveChristian on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 12:02:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.