It's probably not true, but it's a wonderful idea. The quality of the product would improve so much if there were fewer teams. Where did the idea that every large and in many cases, medium sized, city has to have a baseball team come from?

I wouldn't be terribly upset if they capped the number of teams at say, 20 major league baseball teams. I suppose, you'd have need some sort of geographic spread so that the teams aren't concentrated in one area.

Baseball really stinks now and I think getting rid of a bunch of teams would make it better. Bad teams can never be as bad as they could be because there are so many other bad teams, the Orioles, for example. Put this roster in a 20-team MLB and it would lose 120 games. As it is now, this team will struggle to lose 90.

So many people think having a sports team in their city is a right, when it should be a privilege.

I would do away with only 2 teams or 4 maximum. There is more than enough talent to support 26 teams. The notion that only large cities are worthy of a team doesn't sit well with me. If the smaller market teams are "allowed" to compete and have competent ownership, they can be successful. How can anyone compete when the Yankees can have Clemens-Mussina-Wells-Petitte? All four of these guys are #1 starters on most teams.

Revenue sharing, salary caps and mandatory salary minimums make sense. The NFL is thriving even in small markets because the all fans have hope when the season starts. In MLB, only fans of a handful of teams have such hope. While I have hope the Twins will continue to win, I know that any of our good players will leave as soon as their current contracts are up to make more money.