re: Player salaries.. Vet players/players union absolutely have to come to grips with the fact that they have to go to bat for the young guys who are coming up now or haven't even been drafted yet to make significant change in the salary structure. The problem is that there's too many guys who simply want to get theirs, and don't give a hoot if some young John Doe 5 years from now gets paid in pre-arby for what he's doing now. The veteran who is 32 NOW wants to get paid NOW, and wants to make change to the structure of the game NOW because it's hurting him NOW. These guys don't (or refuse to) understand that the best way to change the game in a meaningful way is to lay groundwork for the young guys coming up to get paid sooner, rather than later, so that what we're seeing now doesn't happen again. And they don't want to do that. re: homeruns/bunts. I don't believe that a large portion of fans find bunting and station to station more exciting than homeruns. I do, however, think we're at a saturation point for dingers where the average fan is going to say "ho hum, another homerun", and that's not necessarily good for baseball. Mannfred can say "fans love offense", and that's probably true. You can take an exciting thing, make it very doldrum, and take away how fun and exciting it is by making it very commonplace, and I think homeruns have reached that point. I think there's a point where the aesthetic value of baseball, for some people, maybe a lot of people, isn't what they want it to be, with the 3TO nature of the game. Baseball is, by and large, a lot of standing around, and when you replace a lot of the balls in play with walks and strikeouts and homeruns, then there is by nature, even more standing around, and then for some people, there is a downtick to the aesthetic of the game. I may not agree with that, but I understand it.