Arguing against contraction in baseball is foolish. If you truly believe that owners are the only group of people who believe losing two -- or even more -- major-league teams is a good idea, you are out of touch with reality.

If you want to argue against the Twins being contracted, that's another story; but the concept of contraction is sound.

The elimination of teams begins to address a number of problems that plague the sport. Baseball fans will see the quality of play improve. Contraction does not require the elimination of 50 or even 80 jobs on the major-league level; however, it does allow for existing teams to add more quality players to their rosters. Expansion came at a cost and watering down the level of play was a major one. Please don't deny that there are currently players wearing major-league uniforms who should not yet be in Double-A. Even if the Players' Association is allowed to negotiate that jobs be kept with expanded rosters, it hardly means those players will actually be on the field or, better yet, on the mound.

Economically speaking, contraction will alleviate a burden on Major League Baseball to keep failing franchises afloat. Again, I agree the Twins were not the right choice; they do have the capability to survive. There is a wealthy infrastructure in Minnesota and the fans have proven that they will attend games if there is a winning team on the field. However, the fact that in the last two years commissioner Bud Selig has stepped in and virtually saved at least three organizations from going out of business clearly indicates that certain teams not only can't survive, but shouldn't. How is that Major League Baseball is the only industry on the planet that hasn't had a team shut its doors when business failed?

Before one jumps down my throat for blurring the lines between the effects of contraction versus the effects of a more equitable labor agreement, I understand the two are related -- that contraction alone does not solve the game's problems, but only serves to contribute to the beginning of such an outcome.

To suggest that the concept of contraction came out of left field and clubbed the players and the union on the head is wrong. The players have known about the idea for years and the potential implementation since last season ended. During the World Series principals from both sides acknowledged the very real likelihood of eliminating two teams; unfortunately, as history has proven, baseball's tact in delivering such news is not always the proper one. But don't for a minute believe the players were surprised.

And don't think for a second that most players agree that contraction should not take place. Within the past six weeks I've had more than a dozen players tell me that "yes, we need to eliminate teams." You think they enjoy road trips to Montreal to play in front of empty seats? You think any member of the Expos organization wouldn't trade contraction for a different place to play?

Contraction is coming. There will be at least two fewer teams in the major leagues next year. Is it the answer to all the ails baseball? Absolutely not. Is it a proper step in attempting to restructure the economic foundation of the greatest game in the world? Absolutely.

Karl Ravech is the host of Baseball Tonight and College Basketball Tonight.