If not Landis, who else? Teddy Roosevelt good? (if earlier)

[DTF955]

Problem with that is if the Union League is the cause you might have so many leagues it'll be hard to figure out who's who. Same with the Federal, if they'd taken off and as a result total chaos ensued.

Better to just have the Supreme Court decision disallow it in 1922. Perhaps an earlier court test under different judges.

On top of that, perhaps just a general willingness for owners to be more farsighted and not so conservative, though that's hard to do. Earlier expansion might help, though.

Who would be good expansion cities in the 1910s besides Baltimore. Indianapolis only lasted a season in the Federal League, though Buffalo lasted both. Milawukee, Kansas City, maybe?

Then 2 divisions in the early '50sat baseball's height before TV started hurting. 1952 sees Houston, L.A., San Francisco, and maybe Minneapolis? Or would they be earlier? I picture the Browns moving to L.A. as a good move, too, in 1940 (a bit before they almost did)

[Bill Burgess]

Branch Rickey would have made an excellent commissioner. In 1920 he hadn't really made his reputation, but MLB should have put him in to replace Landis after his death.

I quite agree that Rickey would have been a better commissioner than Landis.

He would have fought hard to bring integration to baseball in time for all of us to feast on fantastic match ups, like Paige/Ted Williams.

But he would not have done the same about the enslavement of the minors, nor I fear about the accursed Reserve Clause. Guess you can't have everything in one guy.

BB

[Bluesteve32]

Spot On, I am a huge fan of TR.

TR was my g-g-g-grandmother's third cousin.

[64Cards]

Branch Rickey would have made an excellent commisioner. In 1920 he hadn't really made his reputation, but MLB should have put him in to replace Landis after his death.

[Bill Burgess]

Those fellows all seem topnotch and would quickly see the folly in segregation so lets assume that their first act of business would be 'whaddya mean Bullet Joe Rogan can't play cause he's the wrong color? that stops now!' Since they got a little free time on their hands after that no-brainer lets put them to a real test:

So how 'bout we use that Nick Tesla fellow to get an early start on nighttime baseball;

Al Schweitzer to make it an international game that really spans across the globe to make it a true 'World Serious';

The Mahatma to mend the hurt feelings of those young 'Say it ain't so, Joe' WhiteSox fans and disillusioned Ring Lardner types after that very painful wakeup World Series;

That ol' HL Mencken fellow as our Baseball publicist; and,

Mr. Relativity Einstein to figure out an equitable way around the Reserve Clause.

Now you've caught the spirit. Breaking the Color Ban is only the first order of the day. What do you do for lunch? Hmm. You could shatter the Reserve Clause at lunch, and for dinner, find a legal way to stop Jake Ruppert from transplanting the BoSox to the Big Apple.

And maybe then see about keeping the minors free from ML enslavement. Of course, there you might see the Indian Mahatma scuffling with the Baseball Mahatma!

Nice wit. Kudos to your insightful verbal cartoon. Me's likes it swell.

Old fart

[johnny]

LOL, good ones.

Of course, TR being a "man of his times," his "times" would change with baseball integrating in the 1870s and staying that way - Jackie Robinson's actions helped the integration cause in the 1940s-1950s, but then again, baseball was a bigger part of the national psyche than in the 1880s. (Though it *was* growing.)

I think someone's idea to start it off in the 1870s is the best. And with the butterflies involved there, maybe it comes more slowly into being as a national sport because it's integrated. It's hard to say which would come first, the chicken or the egg.

Spot On, I am a huge fan of TR.

[DTF955]

LOL, good ones.

Of course, TR being a "man of his times," his "times" would change with baseball integrating in the 1870s and staying that way - Jackie Robinson's actions helped the integration cause in the 1940s-1950s, but then again, baseball was a bigger part of the national psyche than in the 1880s. (Though it *was* growing.)

I think someone's idea to start it off in the 1870s is the best. And with the butterflies involved there, maybe it comes more slowly into being as a national sport because it's integrated. It's hard to say which would come first, the chicken or the egg.

[johnny]

Who indeed? Most morally qualified candidates were occupied helping life in a larger context, and barely knew baseball. Some names come to mind, if we could have gotten them.

Mahatma Gandhi, 1869-1948, led India to independence from Great Britain via non-violence demonstrations.

Albert Einstein, 1879-1955, German Jew, theories on physics changed his field.

Albert Schweitzer, 1875-65, German Christian philosopher, physician, humanitarian, missionary, musician.

Nikolai Tesla, 1856-1943, Yugoslavian inventor whose ideas underlaid all modern machines.

Henry Louis Mencken, 1880-1956, The most prominent newspaperman, book reviewer, and political commentator of his day, Henry Louis Mencken was a libertarian before the word came into usage.

Lots of luck in securing any of their services. Although race is, of course, an imperative issue, there are more issues than that, and a candidate must be grounded in principles in general.

Bill Burgess

Those fellows all seem topnotch and would quickly see the folly in segregation so lets assume that their first act of business would be 'whaddya mean Bullet Joe Rogan can't play cause he's the wrong color? that stops now!' Since they got a little free time on their hands after that no-brainer lets put them to a real test:

So how 'bout we use that Nick Tesla fellow to get an early start on nightime baseball;

Al Schweitzer to make it an international game that really spans across the globe to make it a true 'World Serious';

The Mahatma to mend the hurt feelings of those young 'Say it ain't so, Joe' WhiteSox fans and disillusioned Ring Lardner types after that very painful wakeup World Series;

That ol' HL Menken fellow as our Baseball publicist; and,

Mr. Relativity Einstien to figure out an equitable way around the Reserve Clause.

TR was much more interested in equality than you are giving him credit for. He had a number of dinners at the White House with G.W. Carver and was generally way too liberal on the race front for the Democratic Party's leadership. They frequently counseled him against appearing in favor of improving conditions that blacks lived under in those days.

Unfortunately he had to accept this counsel as it was political suicide in that era to be "soft" on race issues.

My understanding of TR is that he believed in both sides of separate but equal, unlike most Americans who only believed in the seperate part. My understanding is that TR had a formal dinner with Booker T Washington, who was not a strong supporter of integration either.

In the political spectrum of this era you would most likely would have needed a member of the far left to integrate baseball. Maybe someone similar to Eugene Debs.

Unlike FDR, TR was not a Democrat but a Republican.

[johnny]

TR was much more interested in equality than you are giving him credit for. He had a number of dinners at the White House with G.W. Carver and was generally way too liberal on the race front for the Democratic Party's leadership. They frequently counseled him against appearing in favor of improving conditions that blacks lived under in those days.

Unfortunately he had to accept this counsel as it was political suicide in that era to be "soft" on race issues.

I give TR more credit in the area of race relations than many. If memory serves, he took hell for inviting black leaders to formal Dinner at the Whitehouse. But I am also recalling a fairly horrible situation involving Black Soldiers down South that were railroaded. But I could be wrong. All in all, as great a President as TR was, he was very much a man of his times in that he didn't really transcend the racist norms of the period.

[Bill Burgess]

Who indeed? Most morally qualified candidates were occupied helping life in a larger context, and barely knew baseball. Some names come to mind, if we could have gotten them.

Mahatma Gandhi, 1869-1948, led India to independence from Great Britain via non-violence demonstrations.

Albert Einstein, 1879-1955, German Jew, theories on physics changed his field.

Albert Schweitzer, 1875-65, German Christian philosopher, physician, humanitarian, missionary, musician.

Nikolai Tesla, 1856-1943, Yugoslavian inventor whose ideas underlaid all modern machines.

Henry Louis Mencken, 1880-1956, The most prominent newspaperman, book reviewer, and political commentator of his day, Henry Louis Mencken was a libertarian before the word came into usage.

Lots of luck in securing any of their services. Although race is, of course, an imperative issue, there are more issues than that, and a candidate must be grounded in principles in general.

Bill Burgess

[Brian McKenna]

roosevelt didn't like baseball

landis was a staunch conservative - he didn't like anyone who wasn't like himself - baseball had men who had class, were intelligent and who were easy to get along with - under the right conditions these men could have been much more progressive much earlier

[KCGHOST]

TR was much more interested in equality than you are giving him credit for. He had a number of dinners at the White House with G.W. Carver and was generally way too liberal on the race front for the Democratic Party's leadership. They frequently counseled him against appearing in favor of improving conditions that blacks lived under in those days.

Unfortunately he had to accept this counsel as it was political suicide in that era to be "soft" on race issues.

[johnny]

gotta agree

I don't think TR would have had any interest in breaking baseball's color-line. TR was a Progressive, and a firm believer in segragation. If TR were still alive in 1920, he probably would have made a run for the White House and very likely may have become President again.

Sad but true: The only politicians less interested in breaking the color line circa 1920 than the Republicans would have been the Democrats. Pres Woodrow Wilson was a segregationist and the Dem Party during that time frame and until the late 1950's was firmly subject to the whip hand of the southern Dems.

[DTF955]

Good point, that's one thing with him, anything would be a step down from the Presidency.