Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

MLB: Frank McCourt blasts Bud Selig, MLB

How the hell did McCourt get his hands on R. Budd Selig’s manila envelope?!

McCourt also hinted at a possible lawsuit against Selig and Major League Baseball.

“I have not decided exactly what we’re going to do, but we will keep you posted,” McCourt said after meeting with several baseball officials, but not Selig, at the league headquarters in Manhattan. “As I said, I am not going anywhere. This is the team I love and the community I love. These are my hard-earned dollars I put into this franchise, and I am going to protect my rights, obviously.”

McCourt also was asked to clarify a statement he made to a television reporter earlier in the day in which he called Selig “un-American.”

“What I said was un-American was somebody’s property being seized unlawfully,” McCourt said. “There are core values in this country, and fairness is one of them. Transparency is another, and private property is another. Thankfully, it’s not appropriate for one person’s property to be seized by somebody else just because they get divorced or just because of some arbitrary reason. That is one of the great core principles and core values of this country, and that is what I’m referring to when I say it’s just un-American to me.”

Repoz Posted: April 27, 2011 at 11:22 PM | 87 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: business, dodgers, media

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. Jim Wisinski Posted: April 27, 2011 at 11:33 PM (#3811139)
These are my hard-earned dollars I put into this franchise


Actually it's mostly other peoples' hard-earned dollars that you borrowed and can't pay back without dipping into the team's profits.
   2. zachtoma Posted: April 27, 2011 at 11:45 PM (#3811158)
Transparency is another,


Frank McCourt wants to give us a lecture about transparency?
   3. Cyclone Alley Posted: April 27, 2011 at 11:47 PM (#3811161)
I love how McCourt invokes transparency while he's robbing the team blind. Which only came to light because of his divorce.

Ninja'd by zachtoma.
   4. Steve Treder Posted: April 27, 2011 at 11:50 PM (#3811167)
It takes some doing to put me squarely on the side of Bud Selig on an issue. Frank McCourt is just the man for the job.
   5. Neil Kinnock...Lord Palmerston! (Orinoco) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:03 AM (#3811202)
It takes some doing to put me squarely on the side of Bud Selig on an issue.


You should read Pos' piece today blasting Roger Goodell.

A reevaluation of Bud is probably in order. It's very likely he's a bad commissioner, but it's certain that Bud is chronically underestimated by everyone.
   6. Walt Davis Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:11 AM (#3811218)
It takes some doing to put me squarely on the side of Bud Selig on an issue. Frank McCourt is just the man for the job.

McCourt's a sleazeball but I like it that he's fighting back on this. I know this whole enemy of my enemy thing gets confusing but ...

There is a fundamental question at stake here -- to what extent are these individual teams and to what extent is MLB a syndicate? It was one thing for MLB to step in when the Expos were "orphaned." And it was a similar thing when MLB stepped in to "assure an orderly transition" when the Rangers were an asset to be liquidated in a bankruptcy. But here we have an owner of a private business who is not in bankruptcy, is not asking to borrow (more) money from MLB and may have a deal in place with Fox to "solve" his financial problems.

I'll agree the takeover is likely in the best interests of baseball and I'll admit I don't have a clue if it's all covered by franchise agreements, etc. But baseball didn't step in when two ownerships ran the Expos into the ground; they didn't step in when the Trib was going under; they didn't step in during the Padres divorce. Or at least they didn't in such a heavy-handed and public way. They also haven't stepped in while small market teams have chopped payroll and signed crappy TV/cable deals to keep themselves afloat and they haven't stepped in as owners have used all sorts of dodges to siphon money off the teams into their personal accounts ... even though such maneuvers surely impact on the amount those teams "should" pay in revenue sharing, etc. And, of course, they aren't even stepping in (yet) on the Wilpon mess which looks like a much bigger financial ########### than the Dodgers mess.

While it's probably best for the short-term, this is a power grab by Selig and probably a bad precedent to set for the future.
   7. rb's team is hopeful for the new year! Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:15 AM (#3811229)
McCourt put money into the franchise? I'm pretty sure i've put more money into the dodgers than he has, and i HATE the dodgers.
   8. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:22 AM (#3811251)
Frank McCourt is just disgusting. Walt, I would argue the power grab by Selig isn't his taking over the Dodgers, it was allowing McCourt to take over the Dodgers in the first place. He clearly didn't have the capital and had to sign agreements that made him subservient to the commissioner's office. An investor with real skin in the game wouldn't have promised never to sue MLB, etc. Selig conquered MLB years ago. Who knew that doofus looking ############ from Milwaukee had it in him?
   9. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:28 AM (#3811265)
Meanwhile, the clock is ticking on the Mets.

The best case scenario for Mets fans is bankruptcy, I think, so Bud doesn't get to control who takes ownership.
   10. LionoftheSenate Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:34 AM (#3811281)
A reevaluation of Bud is probably in order. It's very likely he's a bad commissioner, but it's certain that Bud is chronically underestimated by everyone.


Agree he is chronically underrated. Disagree Bud has (likely) been bad. Baseball has had many warts during Bud's time, but overall the game has trended up, if unsteadily.

Bud undoubtedly suffers from some of the worst stage presence of any public official since the invention of the camera. Proving how important good photo ops are indeed.
   11. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:45 AM (#3811299)
So in one day I'm on Barry Bonds' side and Bud Selig's side. Quite a day on Primer.

Let's go for the trifecta. There must be a story out there where I would be on Glenn Beck's side. I mean, theoretically it's possible, right?
   12. Justin T's pasta pass was not revoked Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:53 AM (#3811316)
Isn't he off Fox? Take his side against them.
   13. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:55 AM (#3811317)
Despite a complete inability to navigate the Internet Bud was the big push on the mlb website
   14. Bhaakon Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:55 AM (#3811319)
The best case scenario for Mets fans is bankruptcy, I think, so Bud doesn't get to control who takes ownership.


I don't think that's entirely true. When the courts forced the Rangers to go to the highest bidder, the bidders still had to be pre-approved by MLB. Bud may not get to hand-select the owner, but he'll get to draw up the short list.
   15. Mr Dashwood Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:00 AM (#3811324)
Bud Skeletor has been bad for baseball. The game got into a mess in the early-mid 1990s because of Bud. The game was in a mess at the turn of the century because of Bud. Baseball was in better shape when Bud seized the commissioner's office than it was for many years after. If he had any sense of shame, he would have resigned after his brinkmanship in 1994-5 damaged attendance for a decade. But he is shameless, and stuck it out long enough for people to forget how badly he started.
   16. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:20 AM (#3811357)
Bud Skeletor has been bad for baseball. The game got into a mess in the early-mid 1990s because of Bud. The game was in a mess at the turn of the century because of Bud. Baseball was in better shape when Bud seized the commissioner's office than it was for many years after. If he had any sense of shame, he would have resigned after his brinkmanship in 1994-5 damaged attendance for a decade. But he is shameless, and stuck it out long enough for people to forget how badly he started.


disagree with pretty much everything there. When Bud took over baseball was second fiddle to the NFL, now it rakes in more revenue on an annual basis, the players have gotten richer, the owners have gotten richer, attendance has set and broken records something like 9 times.

sure he did some things wrong (the Expos fiasco means that no matter how much good he does, he will never be considered a good commissioner. I'm completely ambivalent about the '94 world series, and I have never figured out why anyone cared about a tie all star game, heck I think that should be the goal) about the only steps left for Bud to do is to move a team from the NL central back to the AL and declare interleague play all year long and get rid of the abomination of the unbalanced schedule.
   17. LionoftheSenate Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:20 AM (#3811358)
1994-5 damaged attendance for a decade.


I think attendance rebounded in 1998.

I've asked this before of Bud's detractors, but please list all of the things that Bud did to make the game worse now than when he took over? Bud isn't flawless by any means, he is flawed...but when you list out the pros and cons, turns out he wasn't that bad.
   18. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:29 AM (#3811384)
I do believe Selig presented himself as an ally and then worked to get Vincent out and take the job.

He rationalizes it by believing Faye needed to be fired

But that is LBJ quality scheming
   19. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:30 AM (#3811387)
I've asked this before of Bud's detractors, but please list all of the things that Bud did to make the game worse now than when he took over? Bud isn't flawless by any means, he is flawed...but when you list out the pros and cons, turns out he wasn't that bad


the obvious choices are

1. the Expos
2. no '94 world series
3. dragged his feet on roid testing


after that I can't think of anything, let's see improved umpires by first putting it under a central office then setting up an accountability system after busting their union... I count that as a plus.
Interleague play, it's one of those YMMV type of thing, it's a non-factor.
All Star game another one of those non-issues that is about personal taste than actually good for baseball.
Wildcard, anyone that for a second thinks the wild card wasn't an inevitability doesn't realize how much people love money.

he's a lying sack of crap who tries to extort stadiums from the local populace, but again that is nothing wrong with baseball, new stadiums have been a boon for the game. He's turned MLB.com into a billion dollar piece of property..damn him for increasing the worth of MLB.
   20. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:41 AM (#3811409)
Gotta admit the NL Central has real rivalries. All the teams have a division nemesis and everyone hates LaRussa.
   21. valuearbitrageur Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:48 AM (#3811428)
McCourt might sue? Since when has he ever not sued over a dispute, large or small?
   22. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:51 AM (#3811435)
Gotta admit the NL Central has real rivalries. All the teams have a division nemesis and everyone hates LaRussa.


who could hate a gentle soul like TLR?
   23. valuearbitrageur Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:04 AM (#3811467)
But baseball didn't step in when two ownerships ran the Expos into the ground; they didn't step in when the Trib was going under; they didn't step in during the Padres divorce


Baseball has debt limits on franchises, to prevent them from spending recklessly. McCourt has supposedly taken out over $100m from the team to fund his and Jamies lifestyle (including paying her Hairdresser more than Kim Ng).

When he tried to sign away a huge amount of future television revenue to fund his divorce, it's essentially an attempt to skirt debt limits. He could have borrowed against future revenues, but that's explicitly forbidden. So he tried an end-run signing a multiple-decade Fox deal below market in exchange for a bunch of up front or short term money. This is very dangerous because if Jamie gets a bunch of money and Frank spends the rest, the Dodgers could end up with a net value of less than zero.

The MLB doesn't want to take over a team and have to inject money into a team that's so deep in debt it can't make payroll and interest payments, and cannot be sold because future TV revenues are mortgaged. That's a recipe for bankruptcy, and the greatest possible horror of all for the MLB, a bankruptcy judge conducting an auction of the team, with Mark Cuban obviously winning.

That's why when Frank attempted his second end run around league debt restrictions, borrowing $30m against (get this) an expected settlement of his malpractice claims against the law firm that drafted his postnup, with Fox again being the lender likely in return for some secret quid pro quo, Bud had little choice.

Selig has to bear responsibility for allowing this yahoo to become an owner, but he's doing the right thing here. I would guess Franks lawsuit doesn't go far.
   24. LionoftheSenate Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:13 AM (#3811476)
3. dragged his feet on roid testing


I thought your overall take was fair, even if brief. I do think this point deserves its own list of specifics Bud did or did not do right. If I'm not mistaken the issue had to be collectively bargained. Whereas in the minors he added a relatively strict PED testing agenda.

Does anyone really believe baseball has a worse PED issue than the NFL? Worse PR yes, but no way PEDs aren't more common in "the league".
   25. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:21 AM (#3811492)
I thought your overall take was fair, even if brief. I do think this point deserves its own list of specifics Bud did or did not do right. If I'm not mistaken the issue had to be collectively bargained. Whereas in the minors he added a relatively strict PED testing agenda.

Does anyone really believe baseball has a worse PED issue than the NFL? Worse PR yes, but no way PEDs aren't more common in "the league".


for the record I'm a Bud fan overall, he strengthen MLB better than any commissioner in any sport, only the guy who made the NBA great(Stern?) for a decade has been even close to improving the standing of his sport as commissioner.

the roid issue has to be collectively bargained, and both sides immediately wanted the other side to bring it up, the owners would bring it up to negotiate some minor issue in trade and that was pretty much it. Neither side wanted to be the one that was going to force it to happen. Bud could have just gone to the press and made a big deal about it, talked about the potential health issues and complain about how the players union weren't looking out for the best interest of their own players long term health...etc. and got testing to happen without having to sacrifice anything. Eventually they did get testing and the owners didn't have to sacrifice anything to get it to happen, but the way it happened left a stain on Bud's legacy.
   26. Ron J Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:26 AM (#3811514)
#24 By waiting it out MLB got basically what they always wanted in terms of testing without having to make any kind of concession.

I'm no fan of Selig, but to me the only significant error of his tenure came early in his tenure -- allowing the militants to drive the whole strike process.

Since then ... well he's done a good job for MLB in my opinion. Not least when you consider how MLB's CBA negotiations have gone compared to other leagues.
   27. Kiko Sakata Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:30 AM (#3811520)
I think attendance rebounded in 1998.


Average attendance per game actually dipped in 1999 (only by 166 per-game, but still). Average per-game attendance didn't pass 1994 levels (31,256) until 2006 (31,404) and, with the recent recession, was actually below 1993-94 levels in 2009 and 2010.
   28. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:49 AM (#3811545)
Average attendance per game actually dipped in 1999 (only by 166 per-game, but still). Average per-game attendance didn't pass 1994 levels (31,256) until 2006 (31,404) and, with the recent recession, was actually below 1993-94 levels in 2009 and 2010.


where are you getting those numbers from.

1993 70,257,938(record by close to 15mil)
1998 70,601,147

2000 72,702,420
2001 72,567,108
2002 67mil
2003 67mil
2004 72,968,953
2005 74,385,295
2006 75,959,167
2007 79,447,312
2008 78,584,286
2009 73,401,938
2010 73,124,790

prior to 1993 the number of times that 70mil was broken in a full season. 0, times 60mil broken, 0.

ok, now I see you are going by the rate of 1994 and comparing it, not really fair as you have the early season bump because of renewed energy without dealing with the late season decline as teams fall out of the hunt. Like comparing a current player to a retired player by rate stats, no decline phase.
   29. Accent Shallow lives every week like Shark Week Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:50 AM (#3811547)
I'm with fra paolo in #15. I can't support the commissioner as ally of the owners, rather than steward of the game.

(Not that I long for the return of Fay Vincent, because I do not)

And cardsfanboy's list is quite damning. You don't need a long list of sins when you have three black eyes (mixed metaphors FTW)
   30. Fist Pumping Maniac Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:54 AM (#3811550)
McCourt doesn't have nearly enough money to keep the Dodgers afloat. The Wilpons are just as financially distressed, the only difference is Bud likes Fred, hates McCourt. I just wonder how long the commissioner can keep playing favorites.
   31. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 03:05 AM (#3811572)
Bud undoubtedly suffers from some of the worst stage presence of any public official since the invention of the camera. Proving how important good photo ops are indeed.

Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C

(Zero Albright Content)
   32. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 03:08 AM (#3811575)
And cardsfanboy's list is quite damning. You don't need a long list of sins when you have three black eyes (mixed metaphors FTW


I don't really see it as damning.

you have the one truly damning argument and that is the Expos situation, and no matter how you cut it, Bud Selig is massively involved to the point that there is no way that happens without his help.

The strike/lockout on the other hand is a combo blame, at worse Bug gets 50% of the blame, but honestly it's probably closer to 20% of the blame or even less.

The PED issue again wasn't fully Bud's fault, he couldn't unilaterally implement a policy. He fails by not being brilliant in making it happen, he didn't fail because of his actions.

Meanwhile he's added revenue, he's increased the players pay, he's created the most competitive league of the four major U.S. sports, yes there is still sad sack franchises that he hasn't really attempted to try and force them to try to be competitive, but MLB has the fewest percentage of post season teams in the four major sports and has had largest portion of teams making the post season over the past 15 years. He's embraced the internet like no other sport. (although their website sucks)
   33. Good cripple hitter Posted: April 28, 2011 at 03:20 AM (#3811601)
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C

(Zero Albright Content)


Exhibit D

This thread should just turn into a Bud Selig photo contest. I'd post more, but none of the others I can find could possibly top that one.
   34. Kiko Sakata Posted: April 28, 2011 at 03:34 AM (#3811608)
where are you getting those numbers from.

...
prior to 1993 the number of times that 70mil was broken in a full season. 0, times 60mil broken, 0.

ok, now I see you are going by the rate of 1994 and comparing it, not really fair as you have the early season bump because of renewed energy without dealing with the late season decline as teams fall out of the hunt. Like comparing a current player to a retired player by rate stats, no decline phase.


I'm citing per-game attendance numbers. Attendance surged in 1998 because MLB added two new teams. Use 1993 (30,964 per-game) and per-game attendance still didn't pass it until 2006 (it was 30,404 in 2005); per-game attendance in 2009 (30,218) and 2010 (30,067) were both below 1993 as well.
   35. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:34 AM (#3811709)
This thread should just turn into a Bud Selig photo contest.

Exhibit E

I REALLY don't want to know what the subject of discussion was....
   36. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:33 AM (#3811721)
I'm citing per-game attendance numbers. Attendance surged in 1998 because MLB added two new teams. Use 1993 (30,964 per-game) and per-game attendance still didn't pass it until 2006 (it was 30,404 in 2005); per-game attendance in 2009 (30,218) and 2010 (30,067) were both below 1993 as well.


gotcha, forgot about expansion. wonder what the percentage to capacity numbers were as stadiums have reduced their capacity in recent years.
   37. Good cripple hitter Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:57 AM (#3811725)

Exhibit E

I REALLY don't want to know what the subject of discussion was....


Clearly Selig has just read Ball Four and was attempting to recite Don Hoak's infamous motivational speech.
   38. ptodd Posted: April 28, 2011 at 07:08 AM (#3811733)
It was one thing for MLB to step in when the Expos were "orphaned." And it was a similar thing when MLB stepped in to "assure an orderly transition" when the Rangers were an asset to be liquidated in a bankruptcy. But here we have an owner of a private business who is not in bankruptcy, is not asking to borrow (more) money from MLB and may have a deal in place with Fox to "solve" his financial problems.


That says it all really.
   39. Juan V Posted: April 28, 2011 at 08:09 AM (#3811736)
How much of the '93 figures come from the Rockies? They were bringing a lot of people to the ginormous Mile High, IIRC.
   40. villageidiom Posted: April 28, 2011 at 11:26 AM (#3811752)
And it was a similar thing when MLB stepped in to "assure an orderly transition" when the Rangers were an asset to be liquidated in a bankruptcy. But here we have an owner of a private business who is not in bankruptcy, is not asking to borrow (more) money from MLB and may have a deal in place with Fox to "solve" his financial problems.
The Rangers were on dangerous (to MLB) ground because they were bankrupt, but not too dangerous because Hicks was willing to sell the team before it went to bankruptcy court. Had it gone that far, the books would've been opened, and the court would likely pick the new owner in a way that maximized short-term return for creditors rather than long-term interest of MLB. What prevented that was Hicks' willingness to stick with the MLB ownership "rules" and sell off the team before all that happened.

Both Hicks and the Wilpons were doing what they thought was in the best long-term interest of their respective teams, but they were just plain wrong. On the flip side, at no point have the McCourts shown that they are interested in doing what's in the best interest of either the Dodgers or MLB. Surely they will do what is in their own best interests. At this point it seems they are doing what's in their best short-term interest, at the expense of the team's long-term interest. They are, to be blunt, raping the Dodgers. I suppose Selig could just say, well, that's their right as owners. But it seems to me that this is exactly when a commissioner should step in.

Selig is damned either way: either he's wrong to intercede now, or he was wrong to approve of the McCourts in the first place.

I didn't like the '94 Series being cancelled, but to that point the perennial MLBPA attitude was, "Demand the moon, and call the owners' bluff because it's not like they'd cancel the Series." It was horrible in the short-term interest of the game, but cancelling the Series helped bring labor stability for the last 17 years. Even when the sides argue, they're much more reasonable than in the past.
   41. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 11:53 AM (#3811765)
I've asked this before of Bud's detractors, but please list all of the things that Bud did to make the game worse now than when he took over?


Also:

Six teams in the NL Central, four teams in the AL West
Interleague play
Stadium extortion
Spider-Man bases
Illegal ownership collusion (2003, I think? They paid a settlement to the MLBPA.)
Ruling on Brewers-related matters before disposing of his stake in the team
Permitting seventeen alternate jerseys per club, including some awful ones, like the Padres' camo shirts and the Pirates' tomato suits
Helping to defraud a charitable trust during the sale of the Red Sox
Selling broadcast rights to the highest bidder, even if it means lousy broadcasts and no national coverage of any teams but the Red Sox and Yankees, ultimately decreasing the value of those rights in the long run
Using PEDs and relocation as threats against the MLBPA, at the expense of the reputation of the sport
Scheduing playoff games so late that they'll end after midnight, making it impossible for kids to stay awake
Etc.
   42. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:02 PM (#3811767)
I'm no fan of Selig, but to me the only significant error of his tenure came early in his tenure -- allowing the militants to drive the whole strike process.

Since then ... well he's done a good job for MLB in my opinion. Not least when you consider how MLB's CBA negotiations have gone compared to other leagues.
I think there's a good case to be made that the strike and the loss of the World Series is so bad that everything even 20 years of reasonably good stewardship afterward can't balance it out. The attendance numbers in Kiko's posts #27 and #34 bear out the empirical evidence for that position.

When I look at the current NBA and NFL, though, I think baseball fans aren't grateful enough for the real labor peace that's been achieved in the last decade. It's not all Selig, but he's overseen it, and it's been good for the game.

I also agree with vi that Selig handled the Texas situation well and so far seems to be doing a fine job with LA. I'm hopeful that Sam M is right about the Mets and we'll see a good outcome there within the next year. Obviously this is all contingent on good outcomes, but there's reason for relative optimism.
   43. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:06 PM (#3811768)
I didn't like the '94 Series being cancelled, but to that point the perennial MLBPA attitude was, "Demand the moon, and call the owners' bluff because it's not like they'd cancel the Series." It was horrible in the short-term interest of the game, but cancelling the Series helped bring labor stability for the last 17 years.

I think you have it backwards. The players liked the status quo - it was the owners who wanted things to change. The CBA was set to expire after the 1994 season, and the owners were set to use their anti-trust exemption to unilaterally impose things they wanted, including a salary cap. When the MLBPA tried to contact the owners to negotiate a new CBA, they were ignored.

The players went on strike during the season for greater leverage in negotiation. They figured the threat of losing the postseason would bring the owners to the bargaining table. It didn't work, and ultimately it took a court order to force the owners to bargain in good faith.

In the end, the owners realised that the tactic they tried cost them millions, if not billions, of dollars, and accomplished precisely nothing. So in that regard, the strike did help to impose labor peace - everyone realised that a work stoppage hurts everyone.
   44. True Blue Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:10 PM (#3811773)
We need a remake of the Frankie Goes To Hollywood video of "Two Tribes" with Seligula and McCourt replacing Reagan and Chernenko.
   45. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:11 PM (#3811775)
Scheduing playoff games so late that they'll end after midnight, making it impossible for kids to stay awake

#### the kids, it's hard for me to stay up for those games.
   46. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:13 PM (#3811776)
I didn't like the '94 Series being cancelled, but to that point the perennial MLBPA attitude was, "Demand the moon, and call the owners' bluff because it's not like they'd cancel the Series." It was horrible in the short-term interest of the game, but cancelling the Series helped bring labor stability for the last 17 years. Even when the sides argue, they're much more reasonable than in the past.
Yeah, I'm with Dewey on this one. What "moon", specifically, were the players demanding?

The strike happened because owners proposed a salary cap and wouldn't budge. The players' counter-offer was a luxury tax and revenue sharing. MLBPA offered a compromise, the owners rejected it. Selig made a mistake of going with the hard-liners, and he's learned his lesson in the years since.
   47. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:22 PM (#3811779)
The late start times of playoff games wouldn't be such a problem if they didn't take four ####### hours to play. Unless they go extra innings, there's no reason a baseball game should take more than 2 1/2 hours.
   48. Ron J Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:43 PM (#3811785)
Further to #43, it's worth noting that the players also offered a no strike, no lockout deal.
   49. Ron J Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:47 PM (#3811789)
#23 It's worth noting that baseball had been (at best) selective in its enforcement of debt limit rules in the past.

Interestingly they seem to have become serious in the wake of a Forbes article on the overall level of debt in MLB.
   50. Greg Pope Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:49 PM (#3811791)
Things like late starts and long playoff games, combined with too many days off, is the kind of thing that both sides can point to. The revenue is increasing, but it's likely leading to a worse future for the game. So, which should Bud be concerned about? Do we really want the commissioner to say, "I don't care about the game in 20 years, I want higher revenue now!" I don't. I agree that the commissioner should be the keeper of the game, not an owner representative.

My son is 13 and I don't think he's ever seen a playoff game all the way through to the end. Even when the Cubs were in it. Think he's going to grow up a die hard fan?
   51. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:52 PM (#3811792)

My son is 13 and I don't think he's ever seen a playoff game all the way through to the end. Even when the Cubs were in it. Think he's going to grow up a die hard fan?


Given the Cubs' recent playoff history, he's better off...
   52. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:54 PM (#3811794)
Yep, Greg was playing the classic straight man there.
   53. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: April 28, 2011 at 12:54 PM (#3811796)
My son is 13 and I don't think he's ever seen a playoff game all the way through to the end. Even when the Cubs were in it. Think he's going to grow up a die hard fan?

I never bought this argument. As I've said before, the World Series used to air during the day, when kids were in school. That didn't prevent kids from becoming fans (as always, no anecdotes about how Sister Mary Elephant would wheel the TV in from the AV room).

Baseball garners fans during the regular season, not during the playoffs. It's legitimate to complain that baseball games shouldn't run so late, but the "think of the children!" argument is lame.
   54. zack Posted: April 28, 2011 at 01:51 PM (#3811820)
I don't like Bud Selig, but he's been a pretty good commissioner the last decade. Not the kind of commissioner we want, obviously, but of the only kind we're going to get, he's been good.

Here's an exercise. Name a current or recent head of a major sports league who is better than Bud Selig. Goodell? Stern? Bettman? Don Garber?
   55. Dan Evensen Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:06 PM (#3811832)
To add to #41:
The Baseball Network (luckily, it failed)
Taking "Jackie Robinson" day to the extreme (really, does EVERY player need to wear #42? How is that honoring his memory?)
Threatening contraction the week after the incredible 2001 World Series
Helping guys like Loria acquire teams

I didn't like the '94 Series being cancelled, but to that point the perennial MLBPA attitude was, "Demand the moon, and call the owners' bluff because it's not like they'd cancel the Series."

That's a pretty interesting (and unique) interpretation of history. The same goes for cardsfanboy's "20% of the blame" statement. I'm interested in seeing the justification for each statement.

My son is 13 and I don't think he's ever seen a playoff game all the way through to the end. Even when the Cubs were in it. Think he's going to grow up a die hard fan?

Technically, that's not Bud's fault. Bowie Kuhn first started sticking all those World Series games in the evenings, and we haven't had an afternoon WS game since 1987, before Bud's time. Selig, however, did allow a few absolutely senseless decisions in the name of television ratings. Remember the 2007 NLCS? I do, with starting game times as late as 9 PM MST. I was a college student in Utah at the time, and even I had a hard time staying up for those games. Ironically, the ratings were horrid.

Baseball garners fans during the regular season, not during the playoffs.

I'd say this point is extremely debatable. The playoffs still bring higher ratings across the board than the regular season -- hell, during that "Baseball Network" debacle, the networks were trying their hardest to avoid having to show any regular season games. People tend to remember postseason moments more fondly than regular season moments.

You are right, though, that the "think of the children" argument is pretty lame. Kids liked watching baseball in the late 1970s, when the parks were full of inebriated morons who would run out onto the field from time to time.

Then again, when you had World Series games on in the afternoon, it was always possible to catch the end right after school / work. Is it really better that we can catch the beginning before going to bed? I doubt that it's even been better for ratings. It seems to me that the networks saw high ratings for night World Series games (relative to day games) in 1971 and 1975, and simply never looked back.

improved umpires by first putting it under a central office then setting up an accountability system after busting their union... I count that as a plus.

Uhh... what? Wasn't there a thread on here a few weeks ago about how umpiring has declined in quality over time? Also -- busting the umpire union? What exactly are you referring to?

he's a lying sack of crap who tries to extort stadiums from the local populace, but again that is nothing wrong with baseball, new stadiums have been a boon for the game.

We've certainly got divergent opinions on what "good for the game" means. What exclusively benefits ownership at the expense of taxpayers (and, one would assume, potential fans in the future) does not qualify as "good for the game" in my book. We've had a couple of threads in the past few weeks now about whether the high priced designs of the new plastic mallparks are actually better for the "fan experience" than the old style stadiums. I do understand your point -- but, when the next generation of owners starts whining to cities again in 20-30 years about needing new stadiums, will we still remember Bud's public funded stadium spree fondly?
   56. Guapo Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:22 PM (#3811841)
My idea (for those of us who fondly remember World Series day games) is MLB should develop the "Fall Classic" (modeled on the NHL's terrific "Winter Classic"). Pick one game of the World Series, schedule it for a weekend day, and market it as the "Fall Classic." If you turn it into an event (within an event), I bet the ensuing hype and nostalgia would drive up interest to the point where you'd get high enough ratings to justify the move.
   57. Infinite Yost (Voxter) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:22 PM (#3811843)
Taking "Jackie Robinson" day to the extreme (really, does EVERY player need to wear #42? How is that honoring his memory?)


I have never understood why people get so worked up over this. It's a thing. It happens once a season, then it's done. Is it beautiful? No. It also doesn't hurt anybody.
   58. Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt! Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:31 PM (#3811850)
I have never understood why people get so worked up over this. It's a thing. It happens once a season, then it's done. Is it beautiful? No. It also doesn't hurt anybody.

QFT, Voxter. Besides, Jackie Robinson is so cool, if they made all of New York City wear #42 to work for a day, I'd be ok with that.
   59. bob gee Posted: April 28, 2011 at 02:37 PM (#3811856)
to #43: the players said "we will not strike during the season, when we have leverage, if you promise not to lock us out afte the season, when you have the leverage". the owners said no.


i wish doug pappas could add something to this thread.
   60. OsunaSakata Posted: April 28, 2011 at 03:19 PM (#3811892)
Exhibit F.

Make your own caption.
   61. Ron J Posted: April 28, 2011 at 03:46 PM (#3811922)
The real key to the Expos fiasco was allowing Claude Brochu to become the managing partner when Bronfman got out. Brochu didn't have any personal wealth (he was staked to his share by Bronfman) and was paid a bonus every year by the other partners (tremendously wealthy, but no real interest in baseball) to refrain from making a cash call.

Meaning that while the Expos were profitable they always had tremendous cash flow issues. And this specifically caused problems when it came to new contracts. It was for some reason advantageous for foreign players to have their deals structured with a large percentage of the contract as a signing bonus (don't know the details as to why) and the Expos couldn't do that.
   62. bigglou115 is not an Illuminati agent Posted: April 28, 2011 at 03:52 PM (#3811933)
My biggest problem with the move to take over the Dodgers was touched on earlier. The Marlins have been chronically mis-managed, but they stay competitive(ish). The Royals used to be a proud franchise and have been run into the ground. The Pirates (no need to say more). There have been at least a half-dozen instances in Selig's reign where ownership was doing its best to destroy a team. In my mind Selig is codifying the idea that there are first tier and second tier franchises and that the league prioritizes those first tier franchises. I understand it, financially I might even think its good for the game and I don't want to see MLB take over a team every two years. But its still disheartening to know that the people in charge of baseball care more about four or five teams than my team.
   63. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 03:52 PM (#3811934)
What "moon", specifically, were the players demanding?


Io's pretty neat. If they didn't ask for that one, they should've.
   64. Randy Jones Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:10 PM (#3811955)
Io's pretty neat. If they didn't ask for that one, they should've.


Io is cool, but I would've gone for Titan or Europa personally.
   65. Tom Nawrocki Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:21 PM (#3811968)
Besides, Jackie Robinson is so cool, if they made all of New York City wear #42 to work for a day, I'd be ok with that.


They could just change all the street signs to read "42nd St." I'm sure no one would mind that.
   66. Styles P. Deadball Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:27 PM (#3811980)
Io is cool, but I would've gone for Titan or Europa personally.


Maybe I'm twitchy from the Poz-rock band thread, but I fully expect a bunch of Primates to jump on and crap all over Jupiter's moons. Then they'll name some rinky-dink twin moons of Haumea with Japanese names as "obviously" the best and if you don't recognize that, then you're just not doing astronomy.
   67. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:44 PM (#3812001)
They could just change all the street signs to read "42nd St." I'm sure no one would mind that.


It would make it harder to tell all the boys that I will soon be there, that's for sure.
   68. Stevis Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:46 PM (#3812003)
What's the point of Europa? You can't land there.
   69. North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:50 PM (#3812008)
In my mind Selig is codifying the idea that there are first tier and second tier franchises and that the league prioritizes those first tier franchises. I understand it, financially I might even think its good for the game and I don't want to see MLB take over a team every two years. But its still disheartening to know that the people in charge of baseball care more about four or five teams than my team.


That's fairly ironic considering Bud's former ownership of the Brewers, wouldn't you say? I think it's more FOX, TBS, ESPN, et al that are behind that, given that they want the ratings for something like Yankees-Red Sox that drives the rest of us crazy. Perhaps Bud is complicit simply because of the money coming from the broadcasters, but I can't imagine Bud really wants to screw the small-market teams.
   70. Greg Pope Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:50 PM (#3812009)
You are right, though, that the "think of the children" argument is pretty lame. Kids liked watching baseball in the late 1970s, when the parks were full of inebriated morons who would run out onto the field from time to time.

Then again, when you had World Series games on in the afternoon, it was always possible to catch the end right after school / work. Is it really better that we can catch the beginning before going to bed? I doubt that it's even been better for ratings. It seems to me that the networks saw high ratings for night World Series games (relative to day games) in 1971 and 1975, and simply never looked back.


Sorry, but I just don't agree. A sport needs to cultivate the kids' interest from a young age. It's in the best long term interest of the game to have kids watch. Especially with Tivo these days, it's way better for the viewing audience to start games earlier. My kids get home from school at 4. If the game started at 2 or 3, we'd Tivo it and get to watch the whole thing. Now, I'm not suggesting that is the best solution, but games with "start time"s at 8 which really don't have the first pitch until 8:45 are just not going to get a whole lot of kids. As was mentioned above, half the adults can't stay awake for the end of the game.
   71. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:50 PM (#3812010)
I just think it's creepy that the moons of Jupiter are named mostly for women and young men that he raped.
   72. Infinite Yost (Voxter) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 04:58 PM (#3812017)
The late start times are a problem for everybody. Unless the Sox are involved, I can rarely stay awake for west coast playoff games.
   73. True Blue Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:01 PM (#3812022)
#54 You can debate whether IndyCar is a major sports league but in the year since he's been running it, Randy Bernard has turned out to be first rate. Willing to listen to fans over owners when the latter wanted "lucky dogs" in restarts and sided with the fans. Trying to go back to classic tracks like Milwaukee and New Hampshire. Getting more manufacturers involved with aero kits for next year's cars instead of the boring spec series. Trying to get outsiders like NASCAR, Rally car or motorcross guys to enter the final race and win $5 million if they should win. The man came into the sport after turning Professional Bull Riding into a solid money maker with little knowledge of racing. But he listens and reads what fans tell him.

Unfortunately he may not be long for the job as one of the sisters and Mari Hulman George is bringing his predecessor Tony George, along with several cronies, onto the board. If you think Selig, Bettman, Stern etc are bad, they are Pericles compared to the ineptitude of Tony George. Baseball could do a lot worse if they hire Bernard to replace Seligula once the temporary commissioner for life retires. And they probably will.

I just think Jackie Robinson day looks silly when I turn on a TV and see everyone wearing 42 with no player names on the back. Makes you wonder if the NHL will have Willie O'Ree day. Or the NBA can have Earl Cooper and the two other guys who can claim to be first black player depending on drafted, signed or played in a game.
   74. True Blue Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:01 PM (#3812023)
#54 You can debate whether IndyCar is a major sports league but in the year since he's been running it, Randy Bernard has turned out to be first rate. Willing to listen to fans over owners when the latter wanted "lucky dogs" in restarts and sided with the fans. Trying to go back to classic tracks like Milwaukee and New Hampshire. Getting more manufacturers involved with aero kits for next year's cars instead of the boring spec series. Trying to get outsiders like NASCAR, Rally car or motorcross guys to enter the final race and win $5 million if they should win. The man came into the sport after turning Professional Bull Riding into a solid money maker with little knowledge of racing. But he listens and reads what fans tell him.

Unfortunately he may not be long for the job as one of the sisters and Mari Hulman George is bringing his predecessor Tony George, along with several cronies, onto the board. If you think Selig, Bettman, Stern etc are bad, they are Pericles compared to the ineptitude of Tony George. Baseball could do a lot worse if they hire Bernard to replace Seligula once the temporary commissioner for life retires. And they probably will.

I just think Jackie Robinson day looks silly when I turn on a TV and see everyone wearing 42 with no player names on the back. Makes you wonder if the NHL will have Willie O'Ree day. Or the NBA can have Earl Cooper and the two other guys who can claim to be first black player depending on drafted, signed or played in a game.
   75. Shohei Brotani (formerly LA Hombre) Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:02 PM (#3812024)
What's the point of Europa? You can't land there.
Especially since all the other worlds are ours, to be used together and in peace.
   76. McCoy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:02 PM (#3812025)
Sorry, but I just don't agree. A sport needs to cultivate the kids' interest from a young age. It's in the best long term interest of the game to have kids watch. Especially with Tivo these days, it's way better for the viewing audience to start games earlier. My kids get home from school at 4. If the game started at 2 or 3, we'd Tivo it and get to watch the whole thing. Now, I'm not suggesting that it the best solution, but games with "start time"s at 8 which really don't have the first pitch until 8:45 are just not going to get a whole lot of kids. As was mentioned above, half the adults can't stay awake for the end of the game.

If you get a kid to play baseball at a young age he will watch baseball as an adult. Little League is vastly more important to baseball's bottom line than trying to ruin the game for the millions of adults by pandering to the 6 year old audience.

What is the difference between a game in August and the World Series to a 6 year old?
   77. DCW3 Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:07 PM (#3812032)
Technically, that's not Bud's fault. Bowie Kuhn first started sticking all those World Series games in the evenings, and we haven't had an afternoon WS game since 1987, before Bud's time.

Yeah, this has been going on for a while. I became a fan in the late '80s, and I wasn't allowed to stay up to see the end of a playoff game until middle school. I really don't think this is any kind of a "problem," though.
   78. Conor Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:19 PM (#3812045)
Yeah, this has been going on for a while. I became a fan in the late '80s, and I wasn't allowed to stay up to see the end of a playoff game until middle school. I really don't think this is any kind of a "problem," though.


Yeah, I agree with this, right down to the time frame, though a tad later. (Was born in 84, the first World Series I have any recollection of even happening was the 90 world series, but it wasn't until a year or two later I had any real idea w hat baseball was, and I probably wasn't staying up late to watch playoff games until maybe 97 or 98 or something.

I definitely think there are legitimate beefs; the games take too long, and i think the playoffs stretch out too long. But I think the child thing is overrated.
   79. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 28, 2011 at 05:54 PM (#3812094)
In my mind Selig is codifying the idea that there are first tier and second tier franchises and that the league prioritizes those first tier franchises. I understand it, financially I might even think its good for the game and I don't want to see MLB take over a team every two years. But its still disheartening to know that the people in charge of baseball care more about four or five teams than my team.

MLB's concern isn't just that the Dodgers are poorly run, or not maximizing revenues. It's more that McCourt is looting the franchise to fund a lavish lifestyle by taking on debt that could hamper the Dodgers for decades. McCourt's operation is barely a half-step above a classic Mafia bust out operation.
   80. Randy Jones Posted: April 28, 2011 at 06:05 PM (#3812119)
What's the point of Europa? You can't land there.

Especially since all the other worlds are ours, to be used together and in peace.


Oh, Europa is ours too. Manifest Destiny, #######!
   81. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: April 28, 2011 at 06:14 PM (#3812133)
If you get a kid to play baseball at a young age he will watch baseball as an adult.


Just like soccer!
   82. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 06:16 PM (#3812140)
Also:

Six teams in the NL Central, four teams in the AL West
Interleague play
Stadium extortion
Spider-Man bases
Illegal ownership collusion (2003, I think? They paid a settlement to the MLBPA.)
Ruling on Brewers-related matters before disposing of his stake in the team
Permitting seventeen alternate jerseys per club, including some awful ones, like the Padres' camo shirts and the Pirates' tomato suits
Helping to defraud a charitable trust during the sale of the Red Sox
Selling broadcast rights to the highest bidder, even if it means lousy broadcasts and no national coverage of any teams but the Red Sox and Yankees, ultimately decreasing the value of those rights in the long run
Using PEDs and relocation as threats against the MLBPA, at the expense of the reputation of the sport
Scheduing playoff games so late that they'll end after midnight, making it impossible for kids to stay awake
Etc.


and almost all of those are personal aesthetics.

I love interleague play think it is great. The spiderman bases was a great idea, but Bud acceded to public opinion. Dislike the 4/6 division format, but of course the only way to fix that is either expansion, contraction or relocating a team to the al from the nl and having interleague play all year long. I like the last option the best, support expansion, hate the concept of contraction.
   83. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 06:23 PM (#3812155)
Uhh... what? Wasn't there a thread on here a few weeks ago about how umpiring has declined in quality over time? Also -- busting the umpire union? What exactly are you referring to?


I can't imagine anybody actually thinks umpiring today is worse than it was in say 1995. The umpires have grading system, they have conditioning requirements, they have standardized rules across the leagues. The union got busted a while back(there is a new umpires union I think, but they tried something so monumentally stupid, actually thinking that the players "union" would back them up when they walked out)

Are there really people who think that the umpires are worse now than 20 years ago, when you had guys the size of blimps, and no quality control on the strike zone?

We've certainly got divergent opinions on what "good for the game" means. What exclusively benefits ownership at the expense of taxpayers (and, one would assume, potential fans in the future) does not qualify as "good for the game" in my book. We've had a couple of threads in the past few weeks now about whether the high priced designs of the new plastic mallparks are actually better for the "fan experience" than the old style stadiums. I do understand your point -- but, when the next generation of owners starts whining to cities again in 20-30 years about needing new stadiums, will we still remember Bud's public funded stadium spree fondly?


didn't say it was good for the fans, but yes the public financed stadiums were good for baseball. The fans get a new stadium, the owners pay jack squat for it, how is that not good for baseball?
   84. cardsfanboy Posted: April 28, 2011 at 06:33 PM (#3812174)
Io is cool, but I would've gone for Titan or Europa personally.


was watching the daily show online yesterday and reviewing all the times they let Beck make himself look foolish, and he is arguing that god made the moon and earth is unique...He actually said "you don't see Mars with the moon" as his argument.
   85. valuearbitrageur Posted: April 28, 2011 at 06:47 PM (#3812193)
McCourt doesn't have nearly enough money to keep the Dodgers afloat. The Wilpons are just as financially distressed, the only difference is Bud likes Fred, hates McCourt. I just wonder how long the commissioner can keep playing favorites.


The difference is that the Wilpons didn't milk their franchise to fund a lavish personal lifestyle, and they didn't attempt an end around to debt constraints. My guesses that the MLB is a bit more flexible on debt limits if you are a responsible owner working honestly with them, rather than the opposite.

McCourt is ducking the real issues, he's trying to spin this as big bad MLB taking a mans hard earned property away to avoid talking about what a film flam artist and horrible owner he is, and the consequences to the team if he's allowed to suck out most of the teams future revenues.
   86. Fernigal McGunnigle Posted: April 28, 2011 at 07:41 PM (#3812251)
I just think it's creepy that the moons of Jupiter are named mostly for women and young men that he raped.


Jupiter was an immoral hedonist because he didn't believe in a supreme deity.
   87. phredbird Posted: April 28, 2011 at 08:07 PM (#3812281)
arbitrageur, your comments have been very helpful.
   88. cHiEf iMpaCt oFfiCEr JE Posted: April 28, 2011 at 08:17 PM (#3812293)
The difference is that the Wilpons didn't milk their franchise to fund a lavish personal lifestyle, and they didn't attempt an end around to debt constraints.

...which of course explains why Selig continues to be on good times with the Wilpons while at war with McCourt.
   89. Home Run Teal & Black Black Black Gone! Posted: April 28, 2011 at 10:24 PM (#3812421)
My biggest problem with the move to take over the Dodgers was touched on earlier. The Marlins have been chronically mis-managed, but they stay competitive(ish). The Royals used to be a proud franchise and have been run into the ground. The Pirates (no need to say more). There have been at least a half-dozen instances in Selig's reign where ownership was doing its best to destroy a team. In my mind Selig is codifying the idea that there are first tier and second tier franchises and that the league prioritizes those first tier franchises. I understand it, financially I might even think its good for the game and I don't want to see MLB take over a team every two years. But its still disheartening to know that the people in charge of baseball care more about four or five teams than my team.


It's like the Business Judgment Rule in corporate law--the Royals and Pirates have been run poorly but as a result of making bad business/baseball decisions, but out of some kind of fraud or negligence or ethical lapse. You're allowed to suck as long as you're trying to be good (no reason the fans have to like it, just saying I wouldn't be for Bud booting ownerships just because they field bad teams).

Marlins are tricky. I think if they were (a) hugely profitable AND (b) awful, then Selig should step in. I don't like what the Fish are doing business-wise either and I'm in favor of Loria & the Rat Pack being leaned on, but until they abandon all pretenses of fielding a competitive team I don't think you should use the big stick. Montreal, on the other hand...

Finally, instances like the Dodgers demand the commissioner step in. As others have pointed out, ownership was trying to destroy the value of the Dodgers as an asset. They would have been severely damaged for 20+ years.

The Mets are iffy. I don't think the Wilpons are trying to sink the Mets, but at some point their personal situation becomes such a black hole that it can't help but suck the rest of their assets into it. That time is nearing.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
James Kannengieser
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-30-2021
(14 - 10:55am, Jul 30)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

Hall of Merit2022 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(157 - 10:42am, Jul 30)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

NewsblogNBA 2021 Playoffs+ thread
(3463 - 10:38am, Jul 30)
Last: My name is Votto, and I love to get Moppo

NewsblogBaseball Hall of Fame denies Curt Schilling's request to be removed from ballot for 2022 vote
(1 - 10:34am, Jul 30)
Last: zenstudent

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - In Which Euro 2020 Is Played in 2021
(793 - 9:53am, Jul 30)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale

NewsblogLos Angeles Dodgers finalizing deal to acquire stars Max Scherzer and Trea Turner from Washington Nationals, sources say
(9 - 9:32am, Jul 30)
Last: Tom Goes to the Ballpark

NewsblogMets’ agreement with Kumar Rocker suddenly in jeopardy
(55 - 9:23am, Jul 30)
Last: dave h

NewsblogBoston Red Sox acquiring outfielder Kyle Schwarber from Washington Nationals, source says
(8 - 9:00am, Jul 30)
Last: Jay Seaver

Sox TherapyGathering Crowds
(36 - 8:24am, Jul 30)
Last: Jose Is An Absurd Balladeer

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-29-2021
(13 - 7:00am, Jul 30)
Last: Starring Bradley Scotchman as RMc

NewsblogRyan Tepera heads to White Sox from Cubs as Chicago rivals make deal
(7 - 12:49am, Jul 30)
Last: Brian C

NewsblogPadres deep in talks to get Scherzer
(17 - 12:25am, Jul 30)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogYankees To Acquire Anthony Rizzo | MLBTR
(20 - 11:47pm, Jul 29)
Last: Meatwad

NewsblogIs Thursday OMNICHATTER really that important? IT IS, for July 29, 2021
(15 - 7:20pm, Jul 29)
Last: Tom Nawrocki

NewsblogNew York Yankees set to acquire Joey Gallo from Texas Rangers for six minor leaguers, sources say
(22 - 5:35pm, Jul 29)
Last: Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66)

Page rendered in 0.7020 seconds
48 querie(s) executed