Last July I suggested that Citigroup (NYSE: C) should cancel its $400 million deal to put its name on the new New York Mets stadium. Although previous CEO Chuck Prince inked the 20-year deal, I called for it to be canceled after Citi posted $17 billion in losses for the first half of 2008. Not surprisingly, it took more than my blog post to push Citi to cancel the $400 million deal.

After getting $45 billion in government bailout cash and another $305 billion in loan guarantees; and canceling the delivery of a $50 million corporate jet, it comes as no surprise that Citi is beginning to realize that times have changed. But as I suggested last July, there is a rich history of companies naming stadiums after themselves and soon ceasing to exist. For instance, there used to be a stadium in Houston named after a little energy trading firm you may have heard of -- Enron.

The New York Times reports that Citigroup (NYSE: C) plans to commit $400 million to its naming rights deal for the stadium of the New York Mets. I say stop this deal!

Why? There are so many examples of companies that got into trouble after they named stadiums after themselves. In Boston, the stadium where the New England Patriots play was named after Gillette -- but Gillette doesn't exist anymore -- Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG) bought it in 2005. And we had the Fleet Center, where the Boston Celtics play -- but Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) bought Fleet in 2003. And we also had the Tweeter Center, a concert venue -- named after Tweeter Home Enterprises which filed for bankruptcy last June. Fortunately, Boston's other world championship team, the Red Sox, has the good sense to deny naming rights to any company for its Fenway Park.

Now for Citi. According to the Times, it made its 20-year deal for the Mets naming rights back in November 2006 under previous CEO, Chuck Prince, after netting $5.3 billion in 2006's third quarter. But in the past three quarters, it has lost $17 billion - including a $2.5 billion loss reported on Friday.

Baseball is not always a perfect metaphor for life, but it is a good one for investing.

Good teams know how to find value where others may not see it. Spending gobs of money on expensive players does not always pan out and successful companies do the little things well. There is no better illustration of this than the current sad state of the New York Mets and New York Yankees.

Despite investing more money than the GDP of some small, developing countries on high-priced talent, the New York Mets and New York Yankees are being outperformed by teams from the vast baseball wasteland known as Florida. The pain being felt by New York sports fans pales in comparison to the anguish in the executive offices of Walt Disney Co. (NYSE: DIS)'s ESPN and News Corp. (NYSE: NWS)'s Fox Sports, which spent big bucks tor the rights to broadcast baseball games. I bet ESPN and Fox ad sales representatives would break out in a cold sweat at the thought of an all-Florida World Series.

What's ironic is that the people in Florida don't seem to like baseball. More than 80,000 people showed up to watch the football games of powerhouses University of Florida and Florida State in 2006. Last year, the American League Rays attracted an average of 17,148 fans to their games and the NL Marlins drew 16,919, according to the Baseball Almanac. That's roughly a third of the 52,739 who went to see the Yankees or the 47,579 who went to watch the Mets.

Each bull market has its unique way of demonstrating enthusiasm for stocks. In the late 1920s, it was stock market chatter at the local barbershop that was an indication of stock market excesses. In the 1990s, The Beardstown Ladies, an Illinois-based investment club filled with seniors, graced the covers of news publications.

What about this bull market? It appears it is jock stock pickers. Lenny Dykstra, of the 1986 New York Mets World Series championship team, writes for the TheStreet.com in its News & Analysis section. What does Lenny write about? The buying and selling of options on semiconductor and related stocks. Wow! That's not too risky.

It is time to take all those MBA diplomas and throw them out the window. Forget Graham & Dodd and the Efficient Market Hypothesis, go out and sell naked puts with Lenny Dykstra.