What's with the WBC?

by Jaime R on Dec 28, 2005 4:38 PM EST in New York Yankees News

Not since the Bad News Bears travelled the globe to play the Japanese champions has international baseball caused so much grief (besides their spanking at the hands of the scrappy Mexican squad ).

Hideki Matsui. became the second high profile Yankee to officially decline to play in this spring's World Baseball Classic even though he was invited personally by Japan's Babe Ruth Sadaharu Oh.

Matsui follows Alex Rodriguez in declining an invitation. A-Rod, though raised a lot of eyebrows by showing interest in playing for the Dominican Republic. He chose to sit the tournament out rather than choose between the D.R. and the U.S. The stateside rumor mill has George Steinbrenner urging his players not to take part in this extra-curricular activity. The official word from the Yankees is that there as been no pressure as evidenced by Derek Jeter, Johnny Damon, Bernie Williams, and Robinson Cano's commitment to play for the WBC. The Yanks had successfully petitioned for the restriction of Jorge Posada from joining the Puerto Rican team and is working to prevent Randy Johnson and Mike Mussina from playing.

There was more controversy when the Eliot Ness-less Treasury Department refused to allow a Cuban National Team to be formed even by expatriates now living in America. MLB and MLBPAA officials have recently reapplied for Cuban participation.

The World Baseball Classic is in its first year and its impact on the sport overall is a mystery right now. Since baseball is being removed from the Summer Olympic roster this is the only opportunity to see international Baseball competition. On the other hand, the world's greatest players already stock the rosters of Major League Baseball. March is usually the first yawn and stretch out of a winter baseball hibernation. The C out in WBC implies a level beyond where many players' expect to be at that time of year.

Part of the tournament is taking place down the I-5 from me at Anaheim Stadium *wretch* but I don't feel any passion or excitement at the prospects of going to a game. Much like my youthful ennui of going to a WNBA, WLAF, IFL, or XFL event, I shrug my shoulders at sitting in a half empty ballpark watching my favorite players playing a meaningless tournament with a majority of not- ready-for-the-big-leagues "talent" in an ersatz "championship". Sure there are some undiscovered gems in other contries and there will be much celebrating by the winners of the tourney, but who cares? Really?

And if, God forbid, a big time star gets injured that will be the last of this tournament. Not a single team will allow their players to step foot on the diamond of a WBC game. For me the curiosity level ranks up there with alpine skiing on ABC's WIDE WORLD OF SPORTS only here the potential for an injury and the agony of defeat far outweighs any thrill of victory.

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Agree

Here's the thing that initially tipped me off that it could be pretty lame. I looked at the site and it appears thrown together, the logo, the typeface, everything about it seems amateur. There's nothing in the visual treatment that makes it seem world class. If it's supposed to be the World Baseball Classic, make it look like it has some import.

If they play hard, some of the players are going to be injured, before the season. The higher paid players won't risk it, the owners won't like it. So they aren't going to play their best, even for national pride.

Also I saw that Piazza and Mirabelli are going to play for Italy. I've been to Italy and it's just a guess, but I don't think anyone there knows who those guys are. I don't think they will know who anyone on their team is, since they are all Italian-Americans, (several generations removed) they don't really have baseball there. Why are they even fielding a team from Italy?

Then I thought, Oh this is a marketing ploy. How can we get people in other countries to like the MLB more- let's create the World Baseball Classic.

Then the US gov't is going to exclude Cuba? How could it happen without Cuba, their national team is known to be one of the best. It just seems like a disaster.

by Greenfuzz on Dec 28, 2005 9:38 PM EST reply actions

Agree totally

with everything you said. Either make this event truly meaningful or forget it. Who needs a player to get injured? Who needs a team from Italy? A.J. Pierszinski (no clue how to spell this, sorry) is Polish for all I know. Is he playing for Poland? I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous. Let's just start the season without exhibitions, distractions, whatever.

by Yankee Fanne on Dec 28, 2005 11:40 PM EST up reply actions

Adressing the Real Crisis of Baseball

While many might consider the World Baseball Series an attractive event, I'm taking a different take. I see this as more of a PR move to broaden the appeal of baseball worldwide.

Remember when you could pronounce the names of your favorite basketball stars? Now because of the influx of international players, jerseys nearly require the phonetical spelling on the backs. I don't have a problem with this, but to be honest I don't really think the answer for baseball is to broaden its appeal overseas--especially when there's a crisis right here in the U.S.

Growing up in the shadows of NYC in the late 60s and 70s, baseball, football and I believe basketball were the only sports available. Today, my son and daughters have hockey, baseketball, baseball, softball, football, gymnastics, and the real killer ... soccer.

Let's face it, baseball is dying in the U.S. Cities are building soccer fields--not baseball diamonds. In fact, in our town, a baseball field was recently converted to soccer. Why? Because the majority of kids are gravitating to soccer instead of baseball.

Baseball is losing (or has lost) its youthful appeal. When I grew up, we lived on the diamond--playing homerun derby, long tossing, etc. Now on Saturday mornings, parents shuttle kids to soccer fields.

Ask high school baseball coaches and AAU coaches and they will tell you that soccer is stealing away tomorrow's major leaguers. Today's kids aren't as interested in baseball. Is it the high salaries, steroids, strikes, pace of the game? I really don't know. But I can tell you that my son (who plays soccer)prefers the faster pace and the "team" concept that soccer brings. According to him, baseball is too "slow" too "one on one".

Before trying to market baseball to an international audience, we need to address the health crisis of baseball on our shores, and get kids' named Smith, Jones, Brown, etc. hungry to play the game again.

Otherwise, we better get used to seeing a dramatic influx of players whose names require phonetical spelling and interpreters.

by 22Ronster on Dec 29, 2005 11:19 AM EST reply actions

Baseball PR crisis

I think you're right, Ronster, about baseball needing to promote itself here in the good old U.S.A. as well as abroad (where would we be without the Latin contingent?). Kids today do prefer the fast pace of soccer and basketball, and baseball's losing out. But MLB faced a similar crisis in the late 70s when Bowie Kuhn was commissioner. The sport was losing kids to college, other sports, business careers, the military. They did this whole recruitment campaign sort of like the army's "We Need You!" and eventually kids came back. I really believe that the popularity of a sport goes in cycles and is directly related to its superstar players. When Michael Jordan was the king of basketball, that sport got hot. Tiger Woods did the same thing for golf. Steroids have hurt baseball because we need heroes, and kids aren't sure their baseball heroes are clean. Plus today's players are so remote and so protected by their entourages. Is Bonds doing for the game what Jordan did for basketball? No. Is ARod? Nope. Ken Griffey Jr? Not a chance. We need the guy on the Wheaties box more than we need a World Baseball Series. And btw, guess who's on the Wheaties box right now? Roberto Clemente. Superstar, yes. But where's the face of a contemporary player? Nowhere to be found.

by Yankee Fanne on Dec 29, 2005 12:22 PM EST up reply actions

Clemente underscores the issue

I do the grocery shopping in my family, and I had my 10 year old baseball loving daughter with me when we saw the Wheaties box you menitoned. Her first words were, "Who is that?"

After telling her about Roberto Clemente and his amazing legacy, she shrugged and said, "Why isn't Jeter on the box, he's still playing?"

Hello!

Fanne, you are right, it is cyclical, but if baseball's marketing strategy is parading a baseball superstar from 30+ years ago in hopes of inspiring our youth, look no further than my daughter's reply ... a shrug followed by, "Why not Jeter."

I encourage you to read my diary posting where I go into greater detail. Thanks, Fanne. I enjoy reading your comments.

by 22Ronster on Dec 29, 2005 12:56 PM EST up reply actions

Fruity "Football"

Soccer is beating baseball in popularity!!!??? In America!!!??
Noooooooooooooooooooo!!!

I consider that as destructive to American society as Christian conservative would view gay marriage. Okay, maybe not. But it just doesn't feel right. I remember as a kid hating soccer. I didn't like the kids on my team. I hated the terrible referees that would penalize me for getting too intense (not that my umps were any more tolerant.) I always thought the game was generally stupid and for the kids that couldn't suceed in baseball or basketball.

Call Bush! Call for a constitutional amendment banning soccer! Use the Patriot Act to spy on those terrubke AYSO soccer coaches!

by Lou Reed Is My Hero on Dec 29, 2005 3:53 PM EST up reply actions

You crack me up!

Lou, your point is well taken.
Maybe I got abit too passionate about the subject.
Using the Patriot Act isn't a bad idea though ...

by 22Ronster on Dec 30, 2005 3:16 PM EST up reply actions

The real trouble with baseball is

it's all about waiting and being ready.
Soccer, basketball, football: everyone moves on every play.
With baseball, most of the players won't touch the ball on any given play.
So no one wants to wait for their chance, they want to go try to steal the ball and run down field and score.
But I agree that it is cyclic, and in another few years we'll talk about the great run that soccer had, and maybe someday the great run that football had. As soon as everyone realizes that football has as many 'roid users as any other sport- if not more.

Have faith in the Yankees my son. Think of the great DiMaggio.

by jscape2000 on Dec 29, 2005 5:36 PM EST reply actions

Gallup Poll Data

I was doing research for a paper on Gallup's site and stumbled upon polling data on the amount of Americans that consider themselves baseball fans. Since 1998, there has been a net decline of 8% (from 56 to 48) of self-identified baseball fans.

The polling fits into what everyone has mentioned in this thread, given 1998 was the height of the slugging era and right before the game became tainted by steroids.

As for football, given how intense and violent the game is, it definately has more steroid users than baseball. I remember in high school a lot of the football players did it without any hesitation. Its a shame baseball has to take all the blame.

by Lou Reed Is My Hero on Dec 29, 2005 6:56 PM EST reply actions

It makes me sick

I knew a kid in high school (2 years older than I was) who went to Kent State to play football. He quit the team after the first semester and transfered because he couldn't take all the steroid pressure- from the other players and the coaches.
If it's like that at a non-football school like Kent, I can imagine how it is at USC or the NFL.
I really had some hope when Congress got into steroids that they'd uncover some of this stuff. No luck there. Now New Jersey has passed a law to test high school (and maybe state college?) players, and I hope it makes a difference.

Have faith in the Yankees my son. Think of the great DiMaggio.

by jscape2000 on Dec 30, 2005 2:18 AM EST up reply actions

It is an issue ...

When Congress first announced they were going after steroid abuse in sports, I completely disagreed. What I saw was a bunch of googly-eyed lawmakers rubbing shoulders with today's baseball gods. While I certainly think drugs in sports is an issue that needs addressing, I wasn't so sure I'd fix my wagon of support to our Congress.

I've since softened my attitude when my neighbor returned from a top ACC college football team (that is going to a major bowl). A senior, he's likely to be drafted late in the first round. He's big, strong and fast ... and above all a really decent kid.

I spoke with him over Thanksgiving, and he told me that designer steroids are readily available and for the taking. He was careful to say that his strength and conditioning coaches never actually endorse their use, but in reading between the lines, the pressure to take them is intense.

I guess I shouldn't have been so surprised. I didn't have the guts to ask him if he took anything to enhance his appearance and performance--maybe I should have.

It makes me wonder what kinds of health issues are these guys gonna' have when their playing days have ended and they are raising their kids?

by 22Ronster on Dec 30, 2005 3:15 PM EST up reply actions

soccer? you're kidding.....

i don't think the games that people play when they are young has much bearing at all on what they end up being fans of later in life. i live in the southwest, and the soccer craze hit here almost 20 years ago. everywhere you went, all the younger kids were playing soccer. but it's never translated in to any kind of popularity beyond that. professional soccer here has never caught on. i think the appeal of soccer is that it doesn't take a whole lot of skill to play the game, and it's a lot safer than any of the other sports. so for those reasons it appeals to parents, and so you get a lot of young kids playing it.

this is an interesting subject though -- there's no doubt baseball has been falling off in popularity, and i'm not sure what can be done to reverse that trend. i do agree with Yankee Fanne -- the top players today don't have the same appeal that those of the past had. when i grew up every kid worshipped the likes of Mantle and Musial and Mays and Aaron. where are stars like that today? heck, for that matter basketball and football don't really have all that many quality stars either. the NBA has become an outlaw league, and the NFL isn't all that much better. i don't understand why people do prefer other sports to baseball -- i guess i'm too much of a fan of baseball to be able to step back and make an unbiased appraisal of why this is.

by lee on Dec 29, 2005 7:59 PM EST reply actions

Daze of old

Soccer won't succeed in the U.S., but that's not the point. As I mentioned in my diary and on this thread, it's about soccer stealing away kids who once-upon-a-time would have played baseball.

I was in high school when the NY Cosmos were the rage. They boasted of Pele, Beckenbauer and others. They packed out Giants' stadium with 60,000. But what happened? Nothing... at least from a professional league level.

But on the recreational level it's a completely different story.

I'd encourage you to read my diary and give me your thoughts ...

by 22Ronster on Dec 30, 2005 2:18 PM EST up reply actions

baseball is not suffering

you're right -- i did miss your point. i read your diary and see what you are saying -- unfortunately what you posted there apparently got mis-interpreted by some, so rather than reply there i'll continue the discussion here.

i'm not sure i see any evidence of what you are claiming. is "home grown" baseball talent really on the decline? true, the percentage of foreign-born players has definitely increased but that doesn't necessarily mean that the reason is because of a dearth of native-born players. i would argue instead that MLB expansion since 1969 has simply increased the number of players needed faster than the native population could supply them. since 1969 MLB has increased teams by 50%, and a quick check of census data shows the U.S. population has only grown 35% in that time period. plus, the average age is declining, so that percentage is even smaller when you consider just the 20-35 year old bracket. thus, a big part of the reason why there are more international players is simply because MLB has made more positions available than can be filled by the "local" talent pool.

i'd also argue that soccer and other sports are NOT luring potential Mantle's and Dimaggio's away from baseball. again, i can only speak to my region of the country (southwest), but what i see is all these other sports simply attracting the left-overs from the big three (football, basketball, and baseball). the kids that are playing soccer are only doing so because they didn't have the skill set to play one of those three. it's probably true that these other sports may be pulling away some of the mediocre players -- hey, i'm not very good at baseball so maybe i'll give soccer a shot -- but i doubt that any kids that show potential in baseball are giving it up for soccer or some other sport.

bottom line is that i don't see any kind of decline in the overall quality of home grown baseball talent. maybe you could dig up numbers indicating that overall participation is down, but i would argue that's just because there are more options for the less talented kids -- which all things considered is probably a good phenomenon anyway.

by lee on Dec 30, 2005 4:27 PM EST up reply actions

Sheffield

This may be just Gary Being Gary, but in that infamous New York Magazine interview with him during the season, he got pretty hot about how MLB makes a concerted effort to recruit Latin players from other countries but not blacks here in America. He said there used to be a lot of programs to attract inner city kids when he was growing up and that there aren't anymore. I have no idea if this is true, or if - as you say, Lee - we've just stretched the talent pool to its limit here. Does anybody know if there have been cut backs in MLB sponsored programs? I think in discussing this subject, we have to separate interest in baseball as a fan/spectator from interest in the sport as a player. Soccer may be big with kids who either don't have the attention span or the talent to play baseball, but attendance at ballparks proves there's no decline in how much people love the game.

by Yankee Fanne on Dec 30, 2005 6:14 PM EST up reply actions

MLB in the community

i suspect that might have just been "Gary Being Gary" as you say. the MLB web site lists a ton of community projects that they sponsor:

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/official_info/community/programs.jsp

you read through some of that, and they appear to be very active. but then the source there is obviously going to be slanted -- how much real meat is there, i have no idea.

by lee on Dec 30, 2005 6:48 PM EST up reply actions

Thanks, Lee

Yeah, I got chewed up a bit.
I see their point, but it certainly wasn't my intent.

by 22Ronster on Dec 30, 2005 6:58 PM EST up reply actions

Out here

Here in southeastern VA (home of David Wright, Michael Cuddyer) AAU baseball is pretty strong. But I was talking to Gary Lavelle (former NL closer of the year) a while back, and he stated that our area is not the norm.

He felt (as do I) that in the inner city especially, blacks are gravitating away from baseball toward basketball and football. He thought it was really hurting the local talent pool in the U.S.

I sort of do agree with Lee who doesn't think we are losing the DiMaggio's and Mantle's. But I do wonder if we'd see even more if not for soccer and such.

by 22Ronster on Dec 30, 2005 6:57 PM EST reply actions

Basketball & Football

It seems that most sports commentators believe basketball and football attract the greatest atheletes in the country. Baseball will always be the sport most close to my heart, but its hard not to admit that there is some truth to that notion.

I think there are a number of reasons for this.

Basketball and football are more physical. As a result, they require a greater amount of conditioning and training. I am not saying that baseball players don't train hard. We all know they do. Its just with basketball and especially football, the bar seems to be raised a tad bit higher.

Sheffield's criticism seems valid. Baseball isn't connecting with blacks on the level football or basketball are. This isn't just something Sheffield has addressed, hall of famers like Joe Morgan and Frank Robinson have expressed their disappointment at MLB's failure to reach out to the black community.

I think as the game cleans itself up, we'll see an increase an interest for baseball. Whether that increase will include blacks, remains to be seen.

by Lou Reed Is My Hero on Dec 30, 2005 10:21 PM EST up reply actions

baseball is the skill sport

<< basketball and football attract the greatest atheletes in the country. >>

i don't buy that at all. yes, basketball and football are more physical games than baseball. but baseball requires far, far more skills. (Disclaimer: as a youth i played a lot of basketball and baseball, but very little football -- so i am biased some!) in football, i would argue that the only skill positions are QB and receiver -- all the other positions are virtually all based on pure physical abilities. basketball does require more skills -- but it's still dominated by physical traits, particularly at the NBA level where all it takes to be a star is to be 6'10" and 250 lbs., in great condition and have a fair amount of co-ordination. but baseball requires skills that mere mortals don't have. heck, i can throw a pass 30 yards and i can sink 15' jump shots all day long. but hit a 95 mph Randy Johnson fastball or a Mariano Rivera cutter? i can't even imagine having the skills to do that. or how about going deep in the hole to catch a grounder going 90 mph and then twirl and make a pinpoint throw to first base while falling over? or scaling a 10' outfield fence and reaching over it to steal a home run? those are all skills that far surpass anything you see in basketball or football. not even close!

by lee on Dec 30, 2005 11:46 PM EST up reply actions

Baseball, Football, & Basketball

When I said "atheletes," I was referring to raw physical ability more than any specific skill.

Without question, baseball requires an immense amount of skill. Hitting a major league fastball is the hardest thing to do in sports.

But if we are talking about just raw physical talent, football and basketball currently have more of it than baseball. Look at Michael Vick, Reggie Bush, TO, Lebron James, or Ben Wallace. On a pure physical level, can you tell me anyone that comes close to them save maybe A-Rod?

by Lou Reed Is My Hero on Dec 31, 2005 6:43 AM EST up reply actions

skills vs. physical abilities

i certainly agree with you about which sports require more "physical talent". where i disagree -- and it's really just semantics -- is what defines a "great athelete". for me, it's skills. i can see how others would define it by physical talents. still, for me baseball players are the "greatest athletes" because they are the most skilled athletes.

<< Hitting a major league fastball is the hardest thing to do in sports. >>

and fielding a major leage groundball is the second hardest thing to do in sports. and catching a fly ball while on a dead run is the third hardest thing. and stealing second on a pitcher with a decent move to first base is probably the fourth hardest thing to do in sports. and on and on. :) heck, laying down a good bunt is a lot harder to do than blocking a defensive lineman when you are 300 lbs or dunking a basketball when you're 7' tall!

well, i did tell you earlier that i was biased here......

by lee on Dec 31, 2005 11:25 AM EST up reply actions

Good point

I agree that hitting a baseball is the hardest thing in sports. I played pro ball for several years, and I saw dozens of really talented ballplayers come to the painful conclusion that their careers were over because they couldn't hit a pro curve or slider.

Thankfully I was a pitcher, because I couldn't hit. Not so sure about your other points, though.
I watched Tiki Barber effectively block a 350 pound lineman the other day, and it was impressive.

by 22Ronster on Jan 2, 2006 11:53 AM EST up reply actions

appeal of basketball and football

<< blacks are gravitating away from baseball toward basketball and football >>

i'm not so sure it's just the inner city and blacks -- i suspect the same can be said of whites as well, and suburban areas too. but i also think those are trends that might be in the process of changing. football enjoyed a huge spurt in popularity back in the 60's and 70's due to great marketing by guys like Tex Schramm. then in the 80's and 90's the NBA was the hot sport, due mainly to Michael Jordan. but i think basketball may have peaked, and you got to believe that the steroids issue is going to hit football at some point. so maybe there will be an opportunity for baseball to regain it's rightful place as America's Pastime. maybe that's what the powers that be are thinking with this whole WBC thing.

by lee on Dec 30, 2005 11:42 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed

I think the WBC is a PR move. I just wonder if it will capture the hearts and minds of U.S. youth. I suspect not--given the myriad of other choices and the fact that we have MLB right here.

I think a better plan to capture the kids is needed.

I will add this. I was looking into taking my daughter to see the Yankees in April, and quickly realized that it would cost me a small fortune. Was this always the case? It recall going to hundreds of Yankees games as a kid and it wasn't terribly expensive. Could the dramatic rise in ticket prices have something to do with the loss of interest with young kids?

Just a thought.

by 22Ronster on Jan 2, 2006 11:58 AM EST up reply actions

Ticket prices

have nothing to do with whether kids are into baseball, in my opinion. Attendance was more than healthy last season, and a Saturday afternoon game in the Bronx is always packed with kids. Besides which, there's more baseball on TV than ever, so kids have plenty of chances to watch. I still feel this all has to do with cycles of what's hot and what's not, and that the sport needs a face, a role model, a Michael Jordan, a Sampras-Agassi, a Tiger, someone kids emulate. This happens locally, I'm sure, with kids in NY wanting to be Jeter and kids in Boston wanting to be...well, not sure who they want to be in Boston (Damon? Gone. Nomar? Gone. Oh well).

by Yankee Fanne on Jan 2, 2006 12:47 PM EST up reply actions

there are cheap seats

that are 20 bucks, and you can then generally sneak down to the better seats with impunity. Some people I know sit several levels down from their real seats. If season ticket holders show up, you just apologize and move elsewhere.

But I didn't say that.

The other thing is that cheap seats in section 1 are still great seats. It's behind home plate and you can see everything. I know people who intentionally sit in row x because they love it. Generally if I have seats in row x I try to move down. It's loud up there with the roof.

by Greenfuzz on Jan 5, 2006 12:11 AM EST up reply actions

A different take

While searching for statistical data, I came across an interesting article that you all might enjoy. It's a slightly different take why soccer is beating out baseball.

by 22Ronster on Dec 30, 2005 7:45 PM EST reply actions