So Barry Bonds' agent, Jeff Borris, and the MLB player's association say they have evidence that team owners acted in concert to keep Barry Bonds out of baseball, thus violating Article XX (e) of the collective bargaining agreement, which states, in part: "Players shall not act in concert with other players and clubs shall not act in concert with other clubs."

Well, well, Bonds is in the news again. I don't think owners acted in unison to keep him - I think it made sense to not offer him a contract. First of all, only American League teams would have any interest in him. He can't play the field any more. So that leaves half the league. Now consider the small-market clubs (Royals, Twins, A's) and they wouldn't touch him with a 10-foot pole. His contract demands weren't cheap for a part-time player.

Now look at young team, such as the Rays. Why have a cancer in the clubhouse who has no interest in anything but himself?  And speaking of cancer, there is the whole business of federal charges stacked up against him. Boy, that's just what a team wants for publicity. Add some drunk driving arrests and tax evasion and it's news any team would want.

So I don't think it was collusion against Bonds, I think it was just common sense. So when do we see him on the show circuit?