The Ricketts Ownership

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Kyle doesn't believe that and apparently thinks Theo plans to run an elaborate keeper league. Possibly a new level of ridiculousness, I can't keep track, but hopefully it makes it easier to ignore this sort of thing.

 

I wonder if Theo plans on being out of here by the time the Cubs might win the World Series because of his machinations. There was that rumor that he wants to wait out the ownership there for a few years and go back to Boston after they sell, which they are rumored to want to do. (Rumor upon rumor, I know).

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's already been well documented that the 2007 and forward type spending was meant to drive up the team's value and wasn't necessarily sustainable.

 

The most recent Forbes estimates was from 2011 and had the Cubs at No. 3 in revenue. I look forward to seeing what the 2012 estimates bring.

 

Ownership cries poor across all of sports, and it's almost universally horsescrotum.

[Tracer Bullet]

 

That can be a plan... it needs to be broken down further.. but if your goal is to win A world series, then the plan should be to be a contender as often as possible and make the playoffs a bunch of times. That's the best way to go about trying to attain the goal of winning a World Series. There really is no other way to approach it.

 

Sure there is. The Marlins and Braves both had a goal of winning a WS in the 90s. They had different plans for doing so. Both were effective. You can argue which was more effective or which is more likely to be effective, I suppose. I know which I prefer for the Cubs.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

That can be a plan... it needs to be broken down further.. but if your goal is to win A world series, then the plan should be to be a contender as often as possible and make the playoffs a bunch of times. That's the best way to go about trying to attain the goal of winning a World Series. There really is no other way to approach it.

 

Sure there is. The Marlins and Braves both had a goal of winning a WS in the 90s. They had different plans for doing so. Both were effective. You can argue which was more effective or which is more likely to be effective, I suppose. I know which I prefer for the Cubs.

 

I've already seen the Cubs try to implement the 1990s' Braves plan. I was hoping for the 2000s Red Sox plan (we're going to build an awesome farm system and almost outspend the Yankees at the same time because we can).

[Guest]

 

That can be a plan... it needs to be broken down further.. but if your goal is to win A world series, then the plan should be to be a contender as often as possible and make the playoffs a bunch of times. That's the best way to go about trying to attain the goal of winning a World Series. There really is no other way to approach it.

 

Sure there is. The Marlins and Braves both had a goal of winning a WS in the 90s. They had different plans for doing so. Both were effective. You can argue which was more effective or which is more likely to be effective, I suppose. I know which I prefer for the Cubs.

 

I'm really not sure what the Marlins were trying to do in 97 (big picture wise - I can't believe that they'd set out to spend a bunch of money, win a world series, and then sell off...but if that was the "plan", then damn, i guess they fulfilled it)....but maybe if they hadn't won that year they don't sell off yet... Hell if I know. Or maybe the attendance was really shitty and they decided they had to get out of all that money.

 

But obviously making the playoffs a bunch is the only smart way to try to win a World Series...because you can't really control what happens once you're in the playoffs all that much (which I assume is why you prefer one for the Cubs).

[Banedon]

 

That can be a plan... it needs to be broken down further.. but if your goal is to win A world series, then the plan should be to be a contender as often as possible and make the playoffs a bunch of times. That's the best way to go about trying to attain the goal of winning a World Series. There really is no other way to approach it.

 

Sure there is. The Marlins and Braves both had a goal of winning a WS in the 90s. They had different plans for doing so. Both were effective. You can argue which was more effective or which is more likely to be effective, I suppose. I know which I prefer for the Cubs.

 

I've already seen the Cubs try to implement the 1990s' Braves plan. I was hoping for the 2000s Red Sox plan (we're going to build an awesome farm system and almost outspend the Yankees at the same time because we can).

 

The Red Sox already had the farm system in place by the time Theo came around though. The Cubs didn't. It wasn't like Theo showed up, snapped his fingers, and suddenly the Red Sox had a good farm system and strong major league talent.

[mookie]

Someone give Kyle his toy back.

[Banedon]

Kyle doesn't believe that and apparently thinks Theo plans to run an elaborate keeper league. Possibly a new level of ridiculousness, I can't keep track, but hopefully it makes it easier to ignore this sort of thing.

 

I wonder if Theo plans on being out of here by the time the Cubs might win the World Series because of his machinations. There was that rumor that he wants to wait out the ownership there for a few years and go back to Boston after they sell, which they are rumored to want to do. (Rumor upon rumor, I know).

 

[expletive] Kyle Says

[Cubswin11]

It's already been well documented that the 2007 and forward type spending was meant to drive up the team's value and wasn't necessarily sustainable.

 

The most recent Forbes estimates was from 2011 and had the Cubs at No. 3 in revenue. I look forward to seeing what the 2012 estimates bring.

 

Ownership cries poor across all of sports, and it's almost universally horsescrotum.

Revenues might be top in the league but the Cubs have to have some of the largest debt in all of MLB due to the recent purchase.

 

As we talked about in the other thread, who really knows what that debt service is but what if the initial intention was for the added advertising/signage to take care of the debt service on the loans required for purchase while the exisitng revenue would continue to fund the baseball operations?

 

I know this is all guesswork/assumptions but a big part of their business plan might be under major re-evaluation with not being able to get the added revenue in place by now along with looking at the likely burden of personally being on the hook almost 100% (when at the time I'm guessing they were thinking the city would kick in money in some form) for any renovations in the near future.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If you are trying to make the playoffs a bunch, I don't think passing on several seasons is a good idea.

 

That's ultimately my criticism of "the plan." The math just doesn't add up.

 

Epstein has talked about "8 in 10" or whatever, and I just don't see how he gets there without convincing the rest of the division to stop trying. There's only one bad GM in the division at this point, the Brewers.

 

It looks to me like we're going to miss the playoffs in 2012-2014 and then go on some sort of 5-in-10 run that gives us a total of 5-in-13, which puts us like half a playoff appearance ahead of Hendry's tenure (adjusted for the same number of seasons).

[Guest]

I maintain that you don't deserve Theo and should be a Marlins fan.

 

Agreed.

[Guest]

It's already been well documented that the 2007 and forward type spending was meant to drive up the team's value and wasn't necessarily sustainable.

 

The most recent Forbes estimates was from 2011 and had the Cubs at No. 3 in revenue. I look forward to seeing what the 2012 estimates bring.

 

Ownership cries poor across all of sports, and it's almost universally horsescrotum.

 

And yet, their TV deal pales in comparison to that of other big market teams (and plenty of mid-market teams) and their in-stadium ad revenue is almost non-existent compared to other teams.

 

So their revenue is essentially #3 based almost entirely on ticket sales when other teams have all of these huge advantages (and plenty of them draw really well too)?

 

It's not like anyone is crying poor. People are arguing that they can't realistically spend as much as the Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, etc. That's far from crying poor.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's already been well documented that the 2007 and forward type spending was meant to drive up the team's value and wasn't necessarily sustainable.

 

The most recent Forbes estimates was from 2011 and had the Cubs at No. 3 in revenue. I look forward to seeing what the 2012 estimates bring.

 

Ownership cries poor across all of sports, and it's almost universally horsescrotum.

Revenues might be top in the league but the Cubs have to have some of the largest debt in all of MLB due to the recent purchase.

 

As we talked about in the other thread, who really knows what that debt service is but what if the initial intention was for the added advertising/signage to take care of the debt service on the loans required for purchase while the exisitng revenue would continue to fund the baseball operations?

 

It's possible that debt service is robbing the Cubs of spending power, but that doesn't mean that the old payrolls were unsustainable. That just means that Ricketts can't sustain them.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

And yet, their TV deal pales in comparison to that of other big market teams (and plenty of mid-market teams) and their in-stadium ad revenue is almost non-existent compared to other teams.

 

So their revenue is essentially #3 based almost entirely on ticket sales when other teams have all of these huge advantages (and plenty of them draw really well too)?

 

It's not like anyone is crying poor. People are arguing that they can't realistically spend as much as the Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, etc. That's far from crying poor.

 

People specifically argued that the $130-140 million from the late Tribune years was unsustainable. That's not Boston/NY/Dodger money.

 

The Cubs also sold 2.8+m tickets with the highest average ticket price in the NL, scalped their own tickets, owned part of the TV station making money off their broadcasts and got ticket revenue from people not actually sitting inside the park.

[SouthSideRyan]

The plan is to build an organization capable of being a strong WS contender every year.

 

That isn't a plan, that is a goal.

 

I disagree. The goal is to win the WS in year X (my guess is 2016-ish). The plan is to build an organization capable of contending for a WS on an annual basis (probably beginning in 2015/16) through a number of things, not all of which we're privy to, but some of which seem clear. I don't want to get into the mess of the details but wanted to focus on whether kyle actually believed that the long-term big picture plan was what Theo keeps saying it is. Kyle doesn't believe that and apparently thinks Theo plans to run an elaborate keeper league. Possibly a new level of ridiculousness, I can't keep track, but hopefully it makes it easier to ignore this sort of thing.

 

And if it's not by 2016, and instead is 2022, who cares?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Red Sox already had the farm system in place by the time Theo came around though. The Cubs didn't. It wasn't like Theo showed up, snapped his fingers, and suddenly the Red Sox had a good farm system and strong major league talent.

 

But by the late 2000s, they still had a strong farm system, and it was built during a time when they were winning WS. I don't see why we need to be bad to build a farm system.

[Tracer Bullet]

The plan is to build an organization capable of being a strong WS contender every year.

 

That isn't a plan, that is a goal.

 

I disagree. The goal is to win the WS in year X (my guess is 2016-ish). The plan is to build an organization capable of contending for a WS on an annual basis (probably beginning in 2015/16) through a number of things, not all of which we're privy to, but some of which seem clear. I don't want to get into the mess of the details but wanted to focus on whether kyle actually believed that the long-term big picture plan was what Theo keeps saying it is. Kyle doesn't believe that and apparently thinks Theo plans to run an elaborate keeper league. Possibly a new level of ridiculousness, I can't keep track, but hopefully it makes it easier to ignore this sort of thing.

 

And if it's not by 2016, and instead is 2022, who cares?

 

Yes Kyle that's exactly what I said

[Cubswin11]

It's already been well documented that the 2007 and forward type spending was meant to drive up the team's value and wasn't necessarily sustainable.

 

The most recent Forbes estimates was from 2011 and had the Cubs at No. 3 in revenue. I look forward to seeing what the 2012 estimates bring.

 

Ownership cries poor across all of sports, and it's almost universally horsescrotum.

Revenues might be top in the league but the Cubs have to have some of the largest debt in all of MLB due to the recent purchase.

 

As we talked about in the other thread, who really knows what that debt service is but what if the initial intention was for the added advertising/signage to take care of the debt service on the loans required for purchase while the exisitng revenue would continue to fund the baseball operations?

 

It's possible that debt service is robbing the Cubs of spending power, but that doesn't mean that the old payrolls were unsustainable. That just means that Ricketts can't sustain them.

Haven't people on both sides (Zell's/Trib's guys prior and now Rickett's) said that 2007-2009 payrolls were unsustainable and basically there as a front to increase the team value and that they didn't realistically fit into a budget with the revenue at the time?

 

If their revenues have stayed relatively the same since then and now they have this massive debt service burden added with questions of when (if ever) they can see large increases in revenue (new tv deal, added advertising through renovations, etc.) their spending power certianly is lower and means prior payrolls aren't sustainable with the old revenue model and the added debt.

[SouthSideRyan]

I mean, is it that people are afraid they're going to get their smart Cub fan card taken away if they disagree with Theo, or is it just because Kyle is on the opposing side(and uses too much hyperbole to get his point across)

[Guest]

I don't really think the Ricketts family needs baseball revenue to pay off the debt on the team.

 

I'm having the damndest time finding it now, but I remember reports that the debt was taken on for tax purposes. That family is not hurting for cash.

 

That said, maybe they're spending baseball revenue on other things that people might expect them to pay on their own, like the renovations they want to fund on their own, the upkeep on the stadium thus far, the Dominican facility, the other purchases they've made as an investment in the future of the team...

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Just because it's not happening in *our* lifetimes doesn't mean they aren't planning for it to happen.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Haven't people on both sides (Zell's/Trib's guys prior and now Rickett's) said that 2007-2009 payrolls were unsustainable and basically there as a front to increase the team value and that they didn't realistically fit into a budget with the revenue at the time?

 

That's just something sports owners say.

[davell]

The Red Sox already had the farm system in place by the time Theo came around though. The Cubs didn't. It wasn't like Theo showed up, snapped his fingers, and suddenly the Red Sox had a good farm system and strong major league talent.

 

But by the late 2000s, they still had a strong farm system, and it was built during a time when they were winning WS. I don't see why we need to be bad to build a farm system.

Until you acknowledge that the changes in the CBA actually matter, you never will. And we've been over this way too often as it is, so I don't want to do it again.

[jersey cubs fan]

I maintain that you don't deserve Theo and should be a Marlins fan.

 

Agreed.

 

This is such a stupid point of view.

 

 

You have to be for tanking multiple seasons or you don't deserve the front office that is tanking multiple seasons. Trying to ridicule any fan who has the audacity to want his team not to suck for multi-year stretches.

[Tracer Bullet]

I mean, is it that people are afraid they're going to get their smart Cub fan card taken away if they disagree with Theo, or is it just because Kyle is on the opposing side(and uses too much hyperbole to get his point across)

 

Disagree with Theo about what?