The Great Lakes gang

Sporting News, The, Sept 19, 1994 by Steve Marantz

The participants say there are two ways to look at the strike of 1994. The owners say it is about economics. The players say it is about politics.

The owners say it is about declining profitability in a weakening industry. The players say it is about power and control in a growing industry.

The two sides may never see it the same way, and indeed, their perspectives may be no more similar and no more different than an Escher drawing. But the last time they reached a collective-bargaining agreement, in 1990, they hired four economists -- former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker among them -- to independently analyze labor/management problems. One of those economists, Henry J. Aaron, of the Brookings Institute, had this to say in the 1992 report:

"The industry of baseball is in political chaos, bereft of any governing mechanism by which clubs can agree to share revenues among themselves in a fashion that will permit all clubs both to compete equally on the field and to have an equal chance to make positive operating revenues.... A governance structure of clubs that is incapable of enforcing greater revenue sharing is the problem. Unless that problem is addressed and solved, labor/management peace will never come to baseball."

If Aaron was right, the strike of 1994 is about ownership politics. And if he was right, the questions of power and control remain the central issues, regardless of whether a settlement is reached, allowing the 1994 season to conclude.

But identifying the problem may be easier than understanding it, which may be easier than solving it.

The politics of baseball ownership, says agent Randy Hendricks, "is more complicated than the combined history of the Germanic nations, the Balkans and Croatia."

That's one view. Another view, acting Commissioner Bud Selig suggests, is that ownership politics are as dull as the 28-0 January vote by which the clubs approved their salarycap plan to the players. "We're more united than we've been in my 25 years in baseball," Selig says.

Most likely, the truth falls somewhere in between, a desolate expanse within which may lie a path to future peace, as well as a road to ruination.

The current political era began with the ouster of former commissioner Fay Vincent in 1992. Vincent's firing resulted from several actions, among them his role in the 1990 labor negotiations, his proposed realignment plan and his criticism of superstation encroachment on local broadcasting markets.

The clubs opposing Vincent were led by Selig of the Brewers, Jerry Reinsdorf of the White Sox, Stanton Cook of the Cubs, William Bartholomay of the Braves and Carl Pohlad of the Twins. Their primary quest -- then as now -- was to curb players' salaries.

The 18-9-1 vote to dump Vincent was taken in Rosemont, Ill., a suburb of Chicago, at a meeting arranged by Reinsdorf. After Vincent was gone, the group installed Selig, chairman of the executive council, as acting commissioner.

The Chicago media dubbed the clique that engineered the coup "The Great Lakes Gang" for obvious reasons. Bartholomay, though representing Atlanta, lives in Chicago and has been with the Braves since their days in Milwaukee. Occasionally, the Blue Jays' Paul Beeston and Cardinals' Fred Kuhlmann are viewed as part of the clique.

The Great Lakes Gang today is perceived by many as the most powerful coalition of owners, with Selig and Reinsdorf at its center. The two talk almost daily, giving rise to some humor. Selig's wife, Sue, once was introduced at a birthday party for Selig, as the "last person Bud talks to at night." But she demurred. "In reality, it's Jerry," she said.

"The two guys with the most influence are Bud and Jerry," says Jeff Smulyan, former managing partner of the Mariners. "They're the two that have the best grasp of the issues. They're the two that spend the most time on the game."

"The coalition is valid," says a current owner, asking anonymity. "Until baseball throws off the yoke of this group, it's not going to function effectively or be able to resolve problems as an institution."

Selig, who started in Milwaukee as a car salesman, is personable, accessible and well-liked. He has managed so far to defuse his personal conflict-of-interest issue -- he is directing industry policy that has a potential impact of millions of dollars on his own club, the Brewers -- seemingly by sheer power of personality. One owner says Selig's power stems from his prodigious "schmooze" capacity. But Selig prefers to minimize his perceived power and that of the Great Lakes Gang.

"It's one of the more misunderstood subjects in my 25 years in baseball," Selig says. "It's hard to interpose in human relationships and assess accurately. People make judgments not based on reality. They wind up creating power where it doesn't exist. They tend to overlook people who have influence.

"I love Jerry Reinsdorf. He and I are amused at what people write.... I talk to Carl as much as anybody. I talk to Stan Cook. Bill is a close friend of mine. But if I explained the last 24 months, you would see how much (the Red Sox's) John Harrington and Paul Beeston are involved.... I regard Drayton McLane as an important new owner. I could go on and on. Ironically, George Steinbrenner and I have known each other the longest, for 20 years, and although we have different perspectives, we can talk. (San Diego's) Tommy Werner is one of the finest young men I've ever known. But as to the question of who influences what and who does what, there's a lot of great fiction around that."