Curtis Flood's Free Agency Scandal

Curtis Flood’s Free Agency Scandal

The 1960’s was a pivotal decade in the history of baseball. In the middle of all of this social change was one man, St. Louis Cardinal’s centerfielder Curt Flood. Influenced by the chaos of his times, Flood started his own social movement, a single ball player’s struggle for freedom on the baseball diamond. Flood, an accomplished baseball player, had experienced twelve years in the Major Leagues, a victim of discrimination in a country that was still racist. In 1969, Flood made a historic decision that ended his baseball career at the age of 31. Against the advice of the Major League Baseball’s Players Union, Flood refused to accept his trade to the Philadelphia Phillies after the end of the 1969 season. Following Flood’s refusal to be traded was a Supreme Court case. When the case finally made its way through the courts system, Flood’s baseball career was finished, but a whole new era of baseball had started. Flood is an important figure in today’s Major League Baseball.

The story of Curt Flood is full of sacrifice and courage. It is the story of a ball player giving up the game he loved for nothing more than a principle. Flood’s main reason for rejecting being traded, was he didn’t want to be treated as property any longer (Lore 1). Wanting the freedom to choose what team he played for, Flood would not accept the concept that he had no control over his own destiny as a baseball player. “When the Cardinals traded him to Philadelphia, Flood received no warning, nor was he offered any input on where or for whom he could earn his livelihood” (Lore 1). Flood, however, stood alone in his fight. Flood surely could have used backing from his contemporaries (Sandomir 2). He was dismissed from the game and even ran out of his country. Flood moved to a place in Majorca, a Mediterranean island away from the disapproving public and the baseball establishment who criticized his actions. Flood went to battle in his Supreme Court case, ultimately losing his fight with baseball in 1972, but paved the way for future ball players to enjoy new freedoms in the sport.

Born in Houston, Texas, to a poor hardworking family on January 18, 1938, he was the youngest of six children. He began playing on baseball fields in Oakland, California. Showing talent in his childhood, Flood spent his youth competing with his peers on the base paths and displaying a strong swing that led him to a career in the Major Leagues. Flood’s road to professional baseball was not without trials. He became used to overcoming adversity from the very beginnings of his career. Being smaller than the average major league player, Flood battled with his size in an attempt to prove himself on the baseball field. He managed to snag seven Gold Glove awards, which are given to the league’s best fielder at each position (Flood v. Kuhn 2). He came to be defined as one of his generation’s best centerfielders. “Flood rose to fame as a center fielder with the Cardinals” (Flood vs. Kuhn 2). Flood’s severe determination helped lead his charge into greatness.

Flood also experienced the same racial hatred that most African American’s in the 1960’s were put through. Spending his minor league career in the South, Flood came across the adversity of racism and segregation on the ball fields as well as off of them. Upon his arrival to the North and his entrance into the Major Leagues, Flood still found inequality. Flood, however, did not take racism lightly. In 1961, Flood, along with teammates, demanded that the St. Louis organization combine its Spring Training facilities so both the teams white and African American players could stay in the same place. Continuing the never-ending battle for equality and freedom, a brave Flood was the one to inform the St. Louis owner that the team’s African American members were being forced to stay away from the team on road trips and not allowed to use the same public facilities. Flood challenged baseball’s establishment and society without fear. He felt that the game was in need of change. Personally for Flood, his roots of African American descent were the reason he attacked baseball and society so fiercely.

The time period of Flood’s challenge against baseball was another important factor. Flood objected to his 1969 trade to Philadelphia on three accounts. The first was the degrading way in which he was informed of the trade, which was by the lower management. The second was Philadelphia’s reputation of treating African-American baseball players with hostility. The third was his abhorrence as being treated as property that had no control over his own fate. These were the reasons why Flood denied being traded to Philadelphia in 1970. Bowie Kuhn, the opposition of Flood in the Supreme Court case, explained his side of the case. His reasons for disagreeing with Flood were that the reserve clause was set up by the owners of teams and used as a system. Flood argued that the system was a violation of his basic rights as a free citizen and that the system was imperfect legally (Lore 1). No players opposed Flood’s claim that the system was unfair to the players, but none would come to back him in his case. They were all afraid of putting their own careers on the line, thinking that the current system was better than the possibility of being kicked out of the league. The one player that did speak on Flood’s behalf was Hall of Fame legend Jackie Robinson. Robinson was familiar with breaking down barriers and opening up opportunities, and he supported Flood for his efforts of trying to change the game. Robinson’s attempts to help Flood’s cause failed. Flood himself asked for the support of other ball players. The superstar players didn’t come to his defense, but Flood still fought to get his message exposed.

Flood was more than just fearless in his challenge of baseball’s establishment, he was dignified. He knew his chances of winning were small, but Flood also recognized the need oppose the issue for the benefit of future baseball players. Flood had three goals in mind when he filed his lawsuit: to cancel his trade to Philadelphia, gain free agency, and remove the reserve clause from baseball. Often players and coaches would warn Flood that it would be unlikely for him to achieve his objectives. At that time, baseball owners complained that Flood’s greed would ruin the game of baseball, but now, Flood is remembered as an unselfish man who gave up his professional career for the better of the game. He signed his first contract without an attorney or agent to advise him (Flood vs. Kuhn 2). Curtis began his major league baseball career in Cincinnati with the Reds for $4,000 (Flood vs. Kuhn 2). During Flood’s baseball career he had many accomplishments. Flood was an All Star, proven by his 223 consecutive errorless games (Flood vs. Kuhn 2). He also helped the Cardinals win a World Series in 1964 versus the New York Yankees (Curt Flood 1). Flood was a very unselfish person. He gave up his $110,000 salary the year he was forced to sit out during the year of his case (Flood vs. Kuhn 3). Flood also sacrificed all possibilities of being a Hall of Fame baseball player.

Changing the structure of the sport was a difficult task, let alone for a single man. The tradition of owning ball players had been in existence in the old game. Baseball’s argument against Flood’s attacks was that taking away the reserve clause would do permanent damage to the game. They felt removing the reserve clause would create an unfair advantage. More prestigious clubs would get all of the best players. Flood battled for his rights, explaining how the reserve clause was in conflict with the First and Thirteenth Amendment Rights. On June 6, 1972, “Flood lost the case by a 5-to-3 vote” (Sandomir 1). The ruling wouldn’t end Flood’s impact on the game. In fact, the battle of human rights in baseball had just begun.

With this weak decision handed down, people began inspecting the reserve clause in baseball. League owners would be forced to weaken their control over players. Following Flood’s case, owners agreed to salary arbitration, allowing players to negotiate with owners over their salaries. Salaries in professional baseball began to sky rocket. Even though Flood lost his case and his playing career, he initiated the change in relationships between players and owners.

After Flood’s loss in the Supreme Court case, Flood’s quality of life decreased. He soon moved to a small island outside of Spain and opened a bar (Boman 1). Flood became an alcoholic and he became depressed. Flood would attempt to turn his life around and return to America. “He returned to California in 1976 and worked for several years as a sportscaster but never truly recovered from his revolutionary action” (Boman 1). Flood continued to receive criticism for a couple years following his return to America. “Eventually, he turned his life around and received belated recognition from players who profited from his efforts against the reserve clause” (Sandomir 2).

Following Flood’s case, there were many positive effects. One of the main changes that occurred after the case was free agency. Free agency allowed players to have atleast a minimal say in where they were getting traded or even being traded at all. This allowed players to feel less like property and more like a human being. Another effect that evolved from the case would be increased salaries for better players. Subsequent to the case ruling and the changes that were eventually made in baseball, the better performing players would earn more money according to their performances. With the salaries increasing, the paramount players would earn way more than a middleclass worker. Without Flood’s case, there is a possibility that today’s major league baseball would not be as successful.

Unfortunately, there were negative effects that Flood’s case allowed to happen. The salary changes allowed big market teams to have an advantage over the smaller market teams. More prestigious teams such as the Yankees would be able to afford better teams of players than the smaller market organizations. Another negative outcome from this case would be the enormous increase in ticket prices. Ticket prices rising are going to deny lower and middle class families the opportunity to attend major league baseball games. Overall, there are more positive effects than negative that came from this case.

Flood’s efforts changed baseball forever. His determination for fairness and equality was the reason why he was so diligent in his efforts and willing to sacrifice so much in his life. Flood gave up the rest of his baseball career to allow future major league baseball players the opportunity to be treated equally. His mission for basic rights as a free citizen was contested by many people both racially and emotionally. Flood’s opposition believed his motivation was greedy and selfish. When in reality, this act was one of the most unselfish and courageous movements in the history of society and baseball. The most remarkable part about this case was one baseball player could make a huge difference in a sport. If Flood would have won the case, he would have achieved free agency a few years earlier (Sandomir 1). There were many effects that came from the Flood case, most of them being good. Overall, the sport of baseball would be a totally different game had Curtis Flood not had a say in the outcome.