Though some fear a lockout may occur if such a proposal is ever implemented, the days of the same high-salary ball clubs competing for the World Series must come to an end—and fast.

It does not matter how the problem is solved. Salary cap? Fine. Revenue-sharing? Fine. Get rid of all teams that can’t generate over 40 million dollars a year without losing money? Fine. I don’t care. But it is absolutely intolerable to be a Kansas City Royals fan when you know from before the season begins that your team has no hope.

Even worse is what may happen to the Oakland Athletics this year. Oakland was a chic pick to win the World Series this season. However, the team has gotten off to a rough start and currently stands at 14-20-a whopping 11 games behind first place Seattle. As a result, if the team does not shape up, management may be forced to trade young players who could comprise a dynamic nucleus for years to come.

Why? Because the A’s just do not make enough money in Oakland. As soon as the club falters, fan revenue drops tremendously. Only 11,000 fans came out to watch a recent weekday game. If Oakland trades Jason Giambi and Johnny Damon before the year is over, it is not because the organization believes it will be making good baseball deals. Instead, it is because the A’s ownership cannot afford to pay big salaries—even though Giambi and Damon could be cornerstones of a franchise that may have years of success in its future.

The A’s would trade Giambi for future prospects, the only players the team can afford. But when the prospects become top-level players, the A’s will have to trade them too. The same thing happened to the Montreal Expos in 1994.

The Red Sox and Yankees can afford to re-sign their stars. The A’s and Expos cannot. Therefore, the Red Sox and Yankees are annually successful, and the A’s and Expos are not.

For every successful Minnesota Twins story, there is a faltering Oakland A’s franchise.