Rein in free agency

I’m pretty sure I understand the concept of free agency. It allows athletes, for example, to shop their skills to the highest bidder.

I’m OK with that, in some form. At the same time, free agency has damaged the sports viewing experience. A long time ago, it was easy to become a fan of certain teams. You knew everyone in the lineup. Remember when you could name every starter for half the teams in baseball?

Maybe not, if you’re reading this on the Internet.

Anyway, loyalty to teams was largely based on the players those teams had.

Now come the dire warnings of the National Basketball Players Association that the league’s proposed changes would stifle free agency.

That’s OK by me.

I assume that entirely stopping free agency is illegal. But making it tougher to execute? Good idea in my mind. It would keep contracts more affordable and make movement more rare. That way I wouldn’t have to memorize different lineups every year.

Beyond that, it would tie players to their cities. John Stockton and Karl Malone are eternally tied to Utah because of the 18 years they spent here. It’s unthinkable to imagine Stan Musial (St. Louis), Jerry West (Los Angeles), Johnny Unitas (Baltimore) or Bart Starr (Green Bay) playing in other cities.

A move to make that again happen is a move in the right direction.