Reinstating Pete Rose Would Immediately Stamp Rob Manfred's Place in History
How does Rob Manfred want to be remembered?
For now, it seems Major League Baseball's newest commissioner just wants to be remembered, period.
Though Manfred is former commissioner Bud Selig's hand-picked successor, his ideas for how to improve pace of play, amplify offense, increase youth involvement and possibly expand MLB globally, make it clear that he wants to forge his own legacy.
TOP NEWS
Assessing Every MLB Team's Development System ⚾
.png?w=256)
10 Scorching MLB Takes 🌶️
Yankees Call Up 6'7" Prospect 📈
But there's one thing Manfred could do right now that would give him a lasting mark right off the bat: reinstate Pete Rose.
[Lets sentence linger in the air for effect].
Alright, let's talk about this.
As you well know, Rose is serving a lifetime ban from baseball that was handed down by late commissioner Bart Giamatti in August of 1989. It's Rose's punishment for betting on games while managing the Cincinnati Reds in the 1980s, a scandal that was meticulously investigated by John Dowd.
By all accounts, Selig never came close to lifting Rose's ban. And when Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports posed the Rose question to Manfred in January, he deemed it "inappropriate" to talk about until a request from the all-time hit king was on his desk.
Well, guess what's currently on his desk.
Less than two weeks ago, Rose issued a formal request for reinstatement to Manfred's office. Manfred has acknowledged as much and said he would consider the merits of it.
"I want to make sure I understand all of the details of the Dowd Report and Commissioner Giamatti's decision and the agreement that was ultimately reached," said Manfred last Monday, via Mark Saxon of ESPN.com. "I want to hear what Pete has to say, and I'll make a decision once I've done that."
So, here we are. Rose has been out, and now he officially wants back in. And though Manfred has hardly promised anything, he's at least made like Mary Swanson and indicated there's a chance.
In all honesty, this probably isn't happening. Manfred granting Rose's request at any point is hard to fathom. And though Rose and all those who want to see him at the 2015 All-Star Game in Cincinnati will surely disagree, time isn't really of the essence.
But we can ask what if. And in this case, one can easily picture what the future would hold for Manfred if he chooses to grant Rose's request.
He would be both loved for it and hated for it, but either way, he would be creating an everlasting controversy that would make him forever known as "The Pete Rose Commissioner."
You know that cliche about time healing all wounds? The Rose ban might be proving that.
Take a listen to what's being said, and you'll get the sense that there's more support for Rose's reinstatement than there's ever been. For those willing to argue, the overarching sentiment is that the point has been proved.
While Rose obviously hasn't served a lifetime ban, a quarter of a century is a long time. And as Joel Sherman of the New York Post argued, Rose's ban has been an effective deterrent. There hasn't been a gambling scandal in MLB since, a clear indication that the point has been roundly made.
From a more practical perspective, MLB need not worry about Rose directly harming the league's integrity if he were to be reinstated. As Rob Neyer of Fox Sports and Craig Calcaterra of Hardball Talk have argued, it's not as if Rose would be able to find another job in baseball. That ship has sailed.
For many others, reinstating Rose is as simple as it being a travesty that a guy with 4,256 career hits is not in the Hall of Fame. For others still, Rose's gambling looks petty in comparison to the steroid era in terms of attacking baseball's integrity.
Let there be no doubt about it. If Manfred reinstates Rose, the "huzzahs" will be loud and many. There's a veritable army of people who want it to happen.
But across from it, of course, is the veritable army of people who don't want it to happen.
As far as this army is concerned, Rose's case doesn't come with any ambiguity. He agreed to his lifetime ban, and the scope of his misdeeds is as extreme as it is certain.
To this end, the second part of the Cincinnati Enquirer's three-part series on the Dowd investigation is essential material.
Read that, and you'll know that not only is there no doubt whatsoever that Rose was a habitual gambler, but that he was a full-blown addict who—despite his frequent insistence to the contrary—might have actually bet against his own team and been involved with cocaine to feed his gambling addiction.
So the notion that Rose gambled for love of the game? Nah. And the notion that he got a raw deal? Also nah.
This is assuming the Dowd Report is ironclad, of course, but that might be where doubt is scarcest. As the Enquirer noted, attempts to downplay its veracity have gone nowhere.
"They have all been hoping for some crack in the dam, but there aren't any," said Dowd.
Dowd also went on record saying he does not want Rose's ban to be overturned. With him in that camp is Marcus Giamatti, who wrote in 2014 that he believes his father, who tragically passed away mere days after announcing Rose's ban, would want the ban to continue. Part of that is because his father was a man of "genuine convictions." and another is a belief that Rose hasn't earned forgiveness.
There is also a widespread belief that Rose hasn't earned forgiveness. Rose didn't even admit to betting on baseball until 2004, and moments of remorse have been shockingly few and far between. Rather than on remorse, Rose has frequently landed on denial and defiance as being in his best interests.
Speaking of which, there's no question that he stands to gain more from his reinstatement than baseball does.
As Jonathan Bernhardt noted at The Guardian, Rose's reinstatement and eventual election to the Hall of Fame would allow him to up his memorabilia prices. With memorabilia and his brand in general being all he has left, that's no small motivation.
The final argument against Rose's reinstatement is also the simplest: If his ban is working as a deterrent for others to bet on baseball, how would ending it be a good idea?
There seems to be no straddling the fence on this issue. Baseball fans and thinkers either want Rose back in baseball, or they don't. And if he is reinstated, whatever side of the argument you're on at the moment will likely be your stance as the debate continues to rage on.
And rage on it will. If Manfred makes Rose his first major act as commissioner, he will never hear the end of it.
Sure, he could go on to do other things. Maybe he would succeed in speeding up the pace of play. Or increasing offense. Or bringing back the youth demographic. Or growing the game globally. Or doing any number of things to further contribute to baseball's escalating revenue stream.
But it wouldn't matter. The only thing that ages as well as a first impression is controversy.
Manfred need only look to his predecessor to see this concept illustrated. For all the great things Selig did during his tenure, his legacy will probably always be defined by the 1994-1995 strike and the league's collective 'roid rage in the late '90s and early 2000s.
So if Manfred doesn't want to go down as "The Pete Rose Commissioner," it's quite simple. He'll wait.
No, he can't do anything to discredit the Dowd Report or to downplay the reality that Rose himself agreed to a "lifetime" ban. But with public opinion seemingly shifting in favor of Rose's reinstatement, it wouldn't hurt to let it keep shifting that way. And if Manfred earns some trust and goodwill with other notable acts first, even some of Rose's critics could give him the benefit of the doubt.
As hard as it is to imagine Manfred granting Rose's request for reinstatement, he's given off every indication that he's not afraid to be bold.
And if it's a place in history he strives for, reinstating Rose now would definitely do the trick. Whether you think bring Rose back into the fold is a fearless or a reckless way to a place in history, there's no denying it's the quickest way to get there.
If you want to talk baseball, hit me up on Twitter.
.png?w=480)
