One of the best things about sports is that just about anyone with a TV and an asshole opinion can feel like an expert. Fans like me always know which quarterback a team should have played, free agent needs to be signed, rookie should be drafted, and rule changes that need to be implemented. Heck we don't even need to do any research. After all, it's not like politics where shooting your mouth off and making decisions without any real knowledge or evidence can lead to serious consequences. No one would ever do that with something so important.

Don't forget that everyone really wants to hear what you have to say.

But sports are safe. A bar stool philosopher can devise any cockamamie theory and spout it as often and as loud as he wants. In fact, the more he repeats his idea and the more volume he uses, the more likely it will be accepted. Either that or his friends will just mindless nod along to get him to shut up... not that this would ever happen to me.

So please, pull up a bar stool and prepare to hear me shout about how to solve a major problem with Major League Baseball.

That is right I said "a" major problem. I only have one quarter bottle of whiskey left. I can't possibly solve all of the problems of a sport whose lack of a time limit and leisurely pace has turned from charming to nearly excruciating. I don't know how to turn back the hands of time and make the average age of a baseball viewer decrease from a 57 year old member of AARP to a 27 year old member of PLRLPB (Party Like a Rock Star while Living in Parents' Basement). I don't know how to get the Commissioner to see that replay is killing the game or to find a way to present the game in three second highlights that match the attention span of most Americans.

What was I saying?

So why did I ask you to sit down next to me while the barkeep pretends to clean just so he can avoid making eye contact that might result in my shouting about my crazy idea to him as well?

I'd like to incoherently scream at you about the weather.

Lucky you!

Through April 15th, there were already 20 baseball games postponed due to the weather (there were 25 all last year). Six were postponed on that day alone. Many others have been played in conditions that can only be described as... super shitty. There have already been 22 games played with an opening pitch temperature below 40 degrees.

Last week, my once beloved White Sox played a regular season baseball game in front of 974 people. That is not a typo. No zeroes are required. Did you ever wonder what 974 people in a stadium that seats 40,000 looks like? Probably not, because that would never happen... until it did.

On April 9th, the White Sox tried a new promotion. All invisible people got in for free. Rumor has it, it was a very successful event. But it was hard to tell by the looks not on their faces.

Like any good barroom genius, I will immediately disarm your argument. Yes. 162 games is obviously far too many. In today's fast paced world, no one has time to watch 162 games. It would be far wiser to reduce the number of games, start the season May 1st and crown a champion during the first week in October. Each game would be more meaningful, they would be played in "baseball weather", and the pitching would be far less watered down. But it also would be better if the outfielders were all leprechauns riding unicorns and the beer vendors were super models who are really into fat guys with farmers' tans... but that isn't happening.

Reducing the number of games would also reduce the owners' and players' profit. Its very easy for a saloon loudmouth me to say that the owners should think of the long term health of the game. They should realize that taking less now will lead to a more popular product and more sustainable income in the future. But this is reality. In reality it is very hard to ask someone to walk away from a significant amount of money now in exchange for what might happen in the future. Neither the players nor the owners are going to leave millions of dollars on the table.

They need that money for these types of altruistic activities.

So here is my solution. Can you hear me? Should I shout louder? Should I have another drink of whiskey to make me smarter?

Teams that play outdoors in cold weather cites should play the vast majority of their April games in Florida or Arizona. These teams should start on the road for the first week. Then they can have a home opening day the second week of April. There can be a scheduled off day (for the inevitable postponement of the home opener) followed by a second, and final, game of the series. Then they pack their bags and play several home games at or near their spring training facilities. One or two more road trips later, they can return to their home town to play in front of fans who don't have to risk frostbite in order to enjoy a game.

The White Sox and Dodgers already share Camelback Ranch, a state of the art facility in Arizona that holds 13,000 fans. If that isn't good enough, the cold weather teams (or MLB) can pool their money and build even better stadiums that can be used for spring training and the start of the season.

Maybe you thought I said "cameltoe" but I clearly said "Camelback".

Such a plan would help in at least three major ways.

1.Preventing injuries.

Since we are in a bar, and I don't really need any evidence, let me just state that it is an absolute fact that more players get injured when it is cold. It is easier to pull a muscle or hurt your throwing arm. A player could slip on an icy or damp field. An icicle could fall off of the garage…and hit you in the eye, and break your glasses.

In addition, if many games are postponed and need to be made up later in the year, that will lead to more back-to-back games with players getting less rest. When players are fatigued, they are more likely to be injured. If you don't believe me, I will just yell it louder and louder until you do.

Yeah I know this has nothing to do with the cold but this is funnier.

2.Fans

10,000 fans paid for that White Sox vs Rays game on April 9th. 974 showed up. Why punish season ticket holders by forcing them to buy tickets they can't even give away? Instead of 81 home games with 10 being completely valueless, why not just charge them for 71? (Why 71? I have no idea. I don't need reasons!)

Tickets to these special games in Arizona or Florida could become a hot commodity. Many people already travel to see their teams practice during spring training. It seems logical that even more would love to plan a vacation centered around watching their team play someplace warm.

To make it even more special, teams could charge a premium for these scarcer tickets and provide perks for the fans who travel to see their team. Perhaps they could have autograph session or meet and greets with the players after the games. I would imagine advertisers would love to offer giveaways promoting their products to people with enough disposable income to travel to see their favorite team play.

Fans watching on TV would also benefit. Not only would they not have to suffer through watching a game played by bundled up players competing in front of fans disguised as empty seats, it would be far more likely games would not be canceled. If someone planned on watching a game at 7:30, they would not have to worry about having to watch The Planet from Outer Space on Rain Delay Theater instead.

If it were really cold, we would all be deprived of this.

3.Money (The only one that really matters)

Empty seats don't buy beer or hotdogs. They also don't pay for parking or buy souvenirs. Many teams would relish the opportunity to play in front of a packed house of 13,000 fans instead of 974. In addition, companies don't pay premiums to advertise on Rain Delay Theater. And don't forget all of those outfield walls that are ripe for advertisements or naming rights for these stadia (yeah that is a plural of "stadium" see I told you I'm a genius once I have enough whiskey in me).

Some may argue that popular cold weather teams like the Cubs will lose out on 10 home games. However, that also means that those reaming games all just became more valuable. I distinctly remember a barroom brawl breaking out when two guys foolishly strayed away from sports and decided to scream about economics instead. During it, I'm pretty sure one of them yelled that if supply goes down and demand stays the same, price goes up.

Cha ching!

OK the room is spinning now. I am getting a little light headed (must be from all of the screaming). While I rest my voice, I will blankly stare at you while you scream your counter arguments.

Go.

Images 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8