Thursday, May 7, 2009

I'll take what he's having.

I’ve never been suspended in my life. Not from school. Not from work. Not from the ceiling… Manny Ramirez sure has been though. 50 game suspension handed down by Major League Baseball for violating their substance abuse policy. As a result Manny will lose approximately one-third of his $25M salary. So he’ll just have to scrape by on $15 or $16M this year. And he gets his summer off. Sort of like school teachers only rich (and stupid.)


Let me ask you, if you could make $15M and have the summer off, would you view that as a punishment? I wouldn’t. I’m going to have to work every season of every year until the day I die to hopefully put one million in the bank to – ironically enough – retire. And that’s if the stock market rebounds and I manage to keep my job. Now let me ask you this: is Manny really being punished? No, he’s not.


So what in the world do we do with all these cheaters in baseball? Let’s look around. How does Laos deal with drug dealers? Firing squad, that’s how. I don’t know about you, but if I ever fire up a meth lab it’s sure as hell not going to be in Laos. They have a pretty low rate of drug use there too. Curious. But seriously, we can’t kill Manny Ramirez. So let’s look at the athletic equivalent: the SMU football-Mustangs. In the mid-80’s these repeat offenders were dealt the death penalty by the NCAA. Football was cancelled. Twenty years later this once perennial contender for the National Championship plays to empty stadiums in a second tier conference. Hmmm. So I submit to you – as an SMU alum – that SMU was really punished.


So I propose this: Dodgers, because of Manny Ramirez’ violation you forfeit 50 games this year. Sorry. All you Dodger fans who bought season tickets? Sorry. We’ll just cancel those games. Ask the Dodgers for a refund. Sorry Frank McCourt (Dodger’s owner) you don’t get gate revenue for those 50 games. Or parking receipts. Or concession sales. Or TV money. Sorry Dodgers local TV affiliate, you have to show reruns instead of games. And lose advertising money. All because Manny did steroids.


Now think about this: sorry Dallas Cowboys, but Pacman Jones just cost you two games for off-field behavior. Hey New York Yankees, pay attention to what A-Rod’s cousin is bringing him from the Dominican Republic because it might cost you 30 or 40 ball games. Listen up Baltimore Ravens, if Ray Lewis kills somebody again you forfeit the 2010 season. Is anybody going to want to take a chance on Michael Vick? Anybody?


What if the penalty for an athlete’s abuse really affected the team rather than just the guy? And don’t give me any lip about Manny’s absence affecting the team because he can't play blah blah blah. When I say affect the team I mean money-wise. Would the Dodgers have signed Manny if they knew he might cost them 50 games worth of money? No. Would professional teams take on troubled, but talented, athletes if they stood to lose substantial income as a result of that athlete’s indiscretions? No. Would the SMU boosters have paid players if they knew it would cost them their football team forever? No.


In this day and age where professional athletes make so much money that no fine or fee is truly punishment I say punish the owners. The owner put that bad apple on the team. Let's hold him accountable. And then we'll get rid of the dopers and thugs. Could my scheme return us to the days when professional athletes could be role models for kids? Listen up Charles Barkley!

1 comment:

cactusflinthead said...

I'll up the ante. What if we made it retroactive to the offense date? Throw out any records of that player, declare the games forfeited and make the penalty on a sliding scale based on a percentage of salary rather than a set fine. Oh and they could do something similar to the Tour de France and show up at their door demanding test samples at any given moment. It all boils down to money. Manny puts butts in seats. The owners are complicit in steroids. They have zero interest in cleaning up the game. If it weren't for Mitchell (as sober a Federal Judge/Senator as I have ever known) and Congress snooping around Canseco would still be considered a liar.