Tweet
One of the many sorrows I have with respect to what happened in baseball, was that both Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb and others were not in baseball after their active, playing careers ended. I have always felt that this was a terrible loss to all of baseball.
Yes, I am well aware of the different reasons why both Babe and Ty got passed over. Leecemark noted that both Cobb and Speaker were probably quietly black-balled as a result of a betting scandal and Babe probably wasn't perceived as the sharpest tool in the drawer, as far as managerial material was concerned.
But even if all that were true, baseball, if it were truly smart, would have set that aside and found them jobs to keep them in the game.
I would have loved to see Ty Cobb managing in the AL from 1928 to 1957, when he got sick with brain cancer. I would have loved to see Babe Ruth manage in the AL from 1935 to 1947, when he got sick from cancer.
Both men would have added so much color, star power, and fan interest that the game would have benefited. But, I have more to my request list.
I also wish that baseball had kept its best brains involved. I wish that Tris Speaker would have managed in the AL from 1929 - 1958. I wish that George Sisler had managed from 1930 - 1973. I wish the AL had featured a managerial roster in the 1930's that included Cobb, Ruth, Speaker, Sisler and E.Collins.
The downfall of Cobb was that he was caught in a betting scandal. To make a long story short, he, Speaker, Joe Wood and Dutch Leonard had bet on a game at the end of the 1919 season, September 25, 1919. The Indians had clinched 3rd place and were playing Detroit, which was still trying to overtake the Yankees and clinch 3rd place. It was understood the Indians were going to break training and party into the night. It was assumed that the Indians would be tired the next day and not committed to playing that hard to win.
In those days, at the end of the season, many games were played silly. Players played out of position. This was such a game. Today, we know that Cobb, Speaker, Wood and Leonard all bet $400. But there was no effort to pre-arrange the outcome of the game. Here is a summary. link
I readily concede that Cobb and Speaker should not have considered making such a dumb bet. Cobb refused to admit he bet during his life. Such was his guilt. But to black-ball 2 such decorated ballplayers for making a dumb decision was obscene. They were ornaments in their leagues and any intelligent person or committee DOESN'T make such a lopsided punishment such as that. That would be like issuing the death sentence for shop-lifting. A much better solution would have been to publicize the facts of the incident to embarrass them and then fine them each perhaps $5,000.
It is understood that for 2 AL managers to bet on a game of such a nature was not only inappropriate, it was unethical. It was wrong, reprehensible, immoral, unprincipled for 2 people in positions of authority to take advantage of inside knowledge and try to profit from it. But it fell short of being illegal, criminal or corrupt. They tried to turn a quick buck based on privileged knowledge. Shady and worthy of exposure and a fine. But there was no rule against betting on games in those days. Although there SHOULD have been. And they all should have known better. In a letter to Wood, Cobb said he never wanted to be part of anything like that ever again. Indicating he realized he did wrong.
To permanently separate them from baseball was to hurt baseball, hurt the fans. It was AL President Ban Johnson who was the responsible party. He should have been retired around 1917. To overcharge a wrong-doing is itself a wrong. To ban 2 great superstars over such a minor offense should itself require the man responsible (Ban Johnson), to suffer the fate he wished to impose of others. Separation from the game.
Now Babe Ruth. He had a hard time remembering names, and called people 'kid'. He wasn't concerned with protocols, discipline, training and things that managers are normally associated with. But for every good rule, there are sometimes exceptions. Babe Ruth might not have made the best manager. That is a definite possibility. But so what? Hundreds of much less deserving men were given opportunities. So, why not let Babe have his shot and see what happened?
Normally, winning is the most important thing in sports. I get that. Fans will normally prefer to support a winning team rather than a team with a star that loses. But winning is not everything. In the 1960's, the Mets lost a lot of games but Casey Stengel was a colorful manager and the fans loved it. They packed Shea Stadium all decade, and supplied the team with so much cash, that by decades' end, the team could buy better players and started to win.
I think Babe Ruth would have given the game so much more than winning if he had been given his chance to manage from 1935-47.
What do you think? Where do you stand? Would baseball have been healthier, better if it had allowed both Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb to manage after their playing careers?
Yes, I am well aware of the different reasons why both Babe and Ty got passed over. Leecemark noted that both Cobb and Speaker were probably quietly black-balled as a result of a betting scandal and Babe probably wasn't perceived as the sharpest tool in the drawer, as far as managerial material was concerned.
But even if all that were true, baseball, if it were truly smart, would have set that aside and found them jobs to keep them in the game.
I would have loved to see Ty Cobb managing in the AL from 1928 to 1957, when he got sick with brain cancer. I would have loved to see Babe Ruth manage in the AL from 1935 to 1947, when he got sick from cancer.
Both men would have added so much color, star power, and fan interest that the game would have benefited. But, I have more to my request list.
I also wish that baseball had kept its best brains involved. I wish that Tris Speaker would have managed in the AL from 1929 - 1958. I wish that George Sisler had managed from 1930 - 1973. I wish the AL had featured a managerial roster in the 1930's that included Cobb, Ruth, Speaker, Sisler and E.Collins.
The downfall of Cobb was that he was caught in a betting scandal. To make a long story short, he, Speaker, Joe Wood and Dutch Leonard had bet on a game at the end of the 1919 season, September 25, 1919. The Indians had clinched 3rd place and were playing Detroit, which was still trying to overtake the Yankees and clinch 3rd place. It was understood the Indians were going to break training and party into the night. It was assumed that the Indians would be tired the next day and not committed to playing that hard to win.
In those days, at the end of the season, many games were played silly. Players played out of position. This was such a game. Today, we know that Cobb, Speaker, Wood and Leonard all bet $400. But there was no effort to pre-arrange the outcome of the game. Here is a summary. link
I readily concede that Cobb and Speaker should not have considered making such a dumb bet. Cobb refused to admit he bet during his life. Such was his guilt. But to black-ball 2 such decorated ballplayers for making a dumb decision was obscene. They were ornaments in their leagues and any intelligent person or committee DOESN'T make such a lopsided punishment such as that. That would be like issuing the death sentence for shop-lifting. A much better solution would have been to publicize the facts of the incident to embarrass them and then fine them each perhaps $5,000.
It is understood that for 2 AL managers to bet on a game of such a nature was not only inappropriate, it was unethical. It was wrong, reprehensible, immoral, unprincipled for 2 people in positions of authority to take advantage of inside knowledge and try to profit from it. But it fell short of being illegal, criminal or corrupt. They tried to turn a quick buck based on privileged knowledge. Shady and worthy of exposure and a fine. But there was no rule against betting on games in those days. Although there SHOULD have been. And they all should have known better. In a letter to Wood, Cobb said he never wanted to be part of anything like that ever again. Indicating he realized he did wrong.
To permanently separate them from baseball was to hurt baseball, hurt the fans. It was AL President Ban Johnson who was the responsible party. He should have been retired around 1917. To overcharge a wrong-doing is itself a wrong. To ban 2 great superstars over such a minor offense should itself require the man responsible (Ban Johnson), to suffer the fate he wished to impose of others. Separation from the game.
Now Babe Ruth. He had a hard time remembering names, and called people 'kid'. He wasn't concerned with protocols, discipline, training and things that managers are normally associated with. But for every good rule, there are sometimes exceptions. Babe Ruth might not have made the best manager. That is a definite possibility. But so what? Hundreds of much less deserving men were given opportunities. So, why not let Babe have his shot and see what happened?
Normally, winning is the most important thing in sports. I get that. Fans will normally prefer to support a winning team rather than a team with a star that loses. But winning is not everything. In the 1960's, the Mets lost a lot of games but Casey Stengel was a colorful manager and the fans loved it. They packed Shea Stadium all decade, and supplied the team with so much cash, that by decades' end, the team could buy better players and started to win.
I think Babe Ruth would have given the game so much more than winning if he had been given his chance to manage from 1935-47.
What do you think? Where do you stand? Would baseball have been healthier, better if it had allowed both Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb to manage after their playing careers?
Comment