12/21/24
January 26, 2004
Frank McCourt might get his ball club this Thursday.: McCourt, who was practically rejected by the fine people of Boston as quick as Grady, has his eyes now on the Dodgers. [more inside]
posted by jasonspaceman to baseball at 11:20 AM - 5 comments
who was practically rejected by the fine people of Boston as quick as Grady what did we do now?
posted by jerseygirl at 12:10 PM on January 26, 2004
any jackass could come in with little or no assets and buy your team away Anyone want to go in with me on a bid for the Brewers?
posted by rocketman at 12:53 PM on January 26, 2004
The hostile reaction to McCourt over the past two months has debunked the myth that Dodger fans are stupid and apathetic. They haven't bought in to the myth that no owner can be worse than News Corp. And after years under that ownership, they will surely recognize when the future of the team is being trashed. - via Dodger Thoughts. This is an interesting point. A great deal of the National baseball audience have bought into the notion that Dodger-fans aren't really fans. You hear the same things about Laker fans. The most common response when asked for clarification is that Los Angelenos leave games early, or whenever the team is doing poorly. Not true. This phenomenon extends well beyond L.A. county lines; and is fairly rampant in stadiums worldwide. Don't shit in our dugout and tell us its chew. That's right: Our Dugout. The sale of Chavez Ravine would be catastrophic to the franchise. Let me repeat that. The sale of Chavez Ravine would be catastrophic to the franchise. The Dodgers franchise is old enough to be closely aligned with the history and development of MLB in and of itself, tearing it away from it's historic home removes the luster of a time honored organization. And for what? Condos? If McCourt demolishes Chavez Ravine and moves the Dodgers, he ought to rename them. Hell, he might as well move them to another state. They certainly won't be the Dodgers anymore. Maybe the Brooklynites who remember can help us cope.
posted by lilnemo at 02:31 PM on January 26, 2004
One more thing I'd like to point out: McCourt might not be that bad. It's true that he seems to be buying the team on loans, which makes me nervous, but then look at what Snyder did with the Redskins. Wait, that didn't come out right... All I'm saying is give the guy a fair chance. He might not destroy the stadium. He might not be so bad.
posted by rocketman at 08:55 PM on January 27, 2004
Just how is he going to pay for this team? Through loans until his real estate sells. The same real estate that has sat for 25 years, waiting for a developer to bid on it. Even then, it is projected he will not be able to make payroll as his assets are questionable. Love them or hate them, this viewer sees this as the middle of the end of a storied franchise. Why should you be concerned? Because any jackass could come in with little or no assets and buy your team away (well, all things considered, some teams would be easier than others). Now, things are being done a little too late. Fans and the media (even fans from other teams) have jumped on the anti-McCourt wagon way too late. Is this last ditch effort enough to sway the other baseball owners? Doubtful. The whole hoopla around it is leaving a bad taste in my mouth. Supposedly, MLB had a gag order which prevented McCourt from talking about his plans and purchase ... then there was a rumor that there was not a gag order. Dodger fans are now left in the dark. McCourt has made no effort to ease our fears and set a few things straight. Does he have to? No. But should he? Yes. Expect a huge sigh of relief or a huge moan come Thursday when baseball owners vote on the sale of the Dodgers. Keep up on the story at Dodger Thoughts, who is trying to keep an optimistic outlook.