In the wake of the economic downturn and the Yankees brazenly signing the top free agents without markedly increasing their payroll, there have been more complaints than ever about how less wealthy teams can't compete with the big boys. The most commonly floated solution is a salary cap (coupled in some proposals with a salary floor). I've said before that I don't think the salary cap would be set at a level many small-market teams could easily pay. I also don't see the point in forcing rebuilding teams to spend $40+ million each season on the pieces of their roster they haven't developed themselves. My thoughts aside, there have been plenty of good posts here and elsewhere talking about how a salary cap and floor is in fact viable and necessary.

Let's not get back into that whole discussion, however. Back in July, I put up a FanPost with some silly ideas for MLB to separate fans from their money. Today, I want to focus on MLB cutting costs within baseball. When the amount of money committed every offseason to free agents approaches ten figures, free agency gets a lot of attention as the prime cost of doing business in baseball. There are other expenses, however, and I hardly think they're all essential to running a successful franchise.

Disclaimer: these ideas are impractical, off-the-cuff, and not at all thought through. Some (all?) are impractical and probably not worth the time to read, especially when you consider how the money saved is trivial in the grand scheme of things. Oh well!

1. Including manager Ken Macha, Brewers.com lists nine coaches collectively working to improve Brewers play at the highest level. They're not the only team with that many, and a quick look at other teams around the league shows at least seven coaches everywhere else. Why are there so many? I know bench coaches are supposed to be a sounding board for managers, but can't one of the other guys do that? Managers used to be their own third base coaches. Do you really need a bullpen coach and a bullpen catcher? Why not have the backup catcher warm up pitchers with the coach lending a hand if necessary?
2. Go back to a 154-game schedule. Since there are more teams today than there were in the 1950's it'd be tougher to shrink the schedule, but it's possible. One idea: get rid of interleague play. Do the series that aren't against "local rivals" really fire anyone up more than those against a comparable in-league opponent? Also, playing eight fewer games saves a bit on salary.
3. Require roommates on the road. This used to be standard years ago. Read Ball Four, Catcher in the Wry, or any other book looking back at baseball's past and you see life with roommates wasn't terrible. Sure, you'll always have a few guys who won't get along, but that can be settled, especially when you're halving the hotel bill 100 nights each year. There's just one major problem: it's actually in the CBA that players can't be forced to share rooms when traveling with the team. Shucks.
4. Contract the minor leagues or shrink the number of affiliated teams. Do the Brewers really need to be paying roster filler at every level? Why not team up affiliates between two major league clubs? That way each team is only responsible for players they think might develop into something. The coaching staff can be split between the organizations to limit playing time disputes and concerns about scouting advantages can be resolved by as simple a solution as pairing teams in different leagues or at least different divisions. Furthermore, keep around some of those former affiliates as independent teams that unsigned players can use to impress MLB teams in the hopes of getting signed.
   
5. Put in an effective slot money system for the draft. I'm hardly the first person to suggest this and baseball already has a slot system that it requests, Moleman-like, teams follow. Make that stronger, forcing teams to follow it. If suggestion #4 on this list is followed, teams won't need to draft as many players each year. That allows slot money to be increased somewhat, making draftees happy. If you're feeling especially radical, link the amount a team exceeds the salary cap/luxury tax threshold to draft picks. The more a team is over, the more draft picks (valued at slot money) they lose.
6. This falls less under saving money and more under increasing revenue. You know how teams low in the standings stop playing meaningful games by the All-Star Break? Why not increase interest even in those cities by imitating the minors and letting first-half and second-half winners into the playoffs? One hot stretch could keep even bad teams in the mix much longer. If the same team wins both halves, then the second-place team in each division gets the last playoff spot(s). The two teams in each league with the best overall record get byes while the other four squads duke it out in the first round. Then the remaining four play, and so on. Shorten the regular season schedule to 154 games and make the playoff series go 3-5-7-7 and it might not even extend baseball much longer than the current setup.