Monday, February 25, 2013
Globe: In nonprofit game, many athletes post losing records
(www.boston.com)
posted on February 25, 2013 at 07:36 PM by villageidiom to charity, dodgers, nba, nfl, olympics, red sox, yankees
|
62 comment(s)
A decent read, if only scratching the surface of the issue. I’ve always been curious just how much money raised goes to charities directly, versus going to fund activities which in turn help the charity, versus going to fund “administrative costs”.
In some cases athlete charitable foundations are accomplishing a lot, sometimes after very non-productive starts. In other cases, calling them charities is being… er, charitable.
Read More......just 37 cents of every dollar raised by the Josh Beckett ...
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) posted on November 06, 2008 at 05:24 PM # hit 0 | hit 0I would, however, be happy to watch a World's Fastest Strike competition (you could do this from 60 feet with a metal strike zone, and perhaps a second distance from centerfield with a larger zone to hit), and a Furthest Hit Ball competition off of a tee. Those seem more in the spirit of the thing.
Coulda fooled me.
No kidding. The expectations being set up for him are absurd.
I don't remember this. The NYC effort was mostly smoke and mirrors, contingent on all sorts of things that never came to pass.
Assuming that Wrigley's still standing in 2016, they're welcome to the Olympics. I don't want the Sox to have to go on some crazy road trip and/or get the field all torn up for the Olympics.
I really hope Chicago doesn't get the Olympics. Traffic's bad enough already.
The house Rezko built?
Heh. NPR ran a piece this morning about how expectations for Obama are sky-high, and he'll have a hard time not letting people down.
Chicago is the odds on betting favorite.
And NPR only just now discovered this?
You laugh, but they had quotes from one Obama rally. According to his supporters, Obama's going to end the war in Iraq, catch Osama bin Laden, fix the health care system, fix the economy, lower taxes, balance the budget, lower university tuition, provide millions of jobs, and make our nation's schools better. Presumably in one term.
Still, I think it's absurd to believe that our president has much at all to do with what sports are in the Olympics.
The expectations might be impossibly high for some but they're also the most likely to believe that the expectations were met regardless of facts. All Obama really needs to be is noticeably better than Bush - a low bar to jump over - and the swing voters will be satisfied.
It's not the swing voters that are in danger of being disappointed.
Conventional wisdom says it would force a huge upgrade in the public transportation area. I'm skeptical.
Certainly, there will be many, many happy Alderman and Daley cronies carrying bags of cash monies.
It'll be ugly.
Fixed
You know, sometimes, true outrage can only be expressed by 127 exclamation points.
You laugh, but they had quotes from one Obama rally. According to his supporters, Obama's going to end the war in Iraq, catch Osama bin Laden, fix the health care system, fix the economy, lower taxes, balance the budget, lower university tuition, provide millions of jobs, and make our nation's schools better. Presumably in one term. And Mike Crudale.
That's why the slogan was "Hope" and not "Confidence". I hope at least one of those things happens. Well, except lowering taxes, there's no need to do that.
Certainly, there will be many, many happy Alderman and Daley cronies carrying bags of cash monies.
"Alderman" is someone's name? Perhaps a superhero, born when an ordinary alderman was bitten by a radioactive Vrdolyak.
I have to admit, this thread has given me a modicum of hope that the Obamites will be extremely disappointed in four years.
Or simply that Obama will reveal that his policies are similar to Bush's? I agree, that would be extremely disappointing to the majority of Americans. So, keep hoping for it to happen.
After 9/11 until about a month or two before the Iraq War, observers of Olympic trends were saying that New York was all but unbeatable simply due to the Sympathy/"Honor" vote. Then Iraq came, and with the Anti-Americanism, along with the realization that New York would be a crappy place to have the Olympics, infrastructure-wise, killed it.
I forgot about this period of time. I was traveling in Europe almost immediately after 9/11 - felt like a celebrity after telling anyone that I was from NYC. Pretty soon after that kids started sewing Canadian flags to their backpacks.
Hey, a useless, wiseass drive-by post from one of the non-existent, oppressed BTF rightwingers. Someone for flournoy to consider not hating.
Nicely done.
Uh, a guy that has international opinion of him that ranges from "dislike" to "actively despise" with pretty much nobody above that is not a good spokesman for something internationally. Especially on something like this. It doesn't really do anything for a country/leader that dislikes him to help him out here (unlike say, a foreign policy initiative where they seem some benefit at the end of the tunnel.) Hell, this is something they could deny him just because they can and they want to piss him off.
I really do not know who the people are who are expecting Obama to be a more wonderful president than, say, Bill Clinton.
People who don't remember Clinton. I work on a college campus (UT), and the expectations for Obama are pretty amusing. Even the ones who are smart enough to know better generally have kidded themselves. Now, Obama's got a majority to work with, so hell, maybe they'll be right. But I don't expect to see a President better than Clinton, to my taste, probably in my lifetime (I'd have voted for him a third time, a fourth time, and probably every time until he stopped running if they let me.) I sincerely hope I'm proved wrong, of course.
I also agree that the president probably doesn't really affect anything about the olympics, but if the U.S. gets the Olympics the chances of it including baseball has to go up regardless of the President.
It's Alderman Tom Alderman of the 46th Ward. Alderman Alderman didn't actually run for City Council, but in an unfortunate set of circumstances during the 1983 election, where there were 37 people running, he "won" when 9% of confused voters wrote "Alderman" in on their ballots, good enough for second place and a runoff. When the top candidate was jailed for money laundering, Alderman Alderman won and has been a fixture in City Hall ever since.
I live in rightwing breadbasket(Co Springs), surrounded by military bases, Academys, moutains, Focus on the Family or Kansas. Flournoy was being gentle. Instead of lurking here for insightful convo and baseball, I have been playing WTF are you saying on our newspapers'website. Thinking I might change someone's opinion to vote Obama.
The last thing Barack needs to be thinking about right now is the Olympics, let the man get a breathe.
Dah DAH!!!!
Law and Order
He's stealing my schtick. I hate him.
EDIT: Note though, that I have never claimed to be oppressed.
Well-played, as we say.
Look at the violence inherent in the system!
If the past is any guide (and it typically is), he'll start running for that on January 21, 2009.
Bloody peasant.
(Actually, Olympic tug-of-war would be awesome. It could be to the summer games what curling is to the winter games!)
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.