Ownership Approval Poll - December 2015

[David]

This poll occurred to me as I was looking for a thread to post the Ricketts radio appearance from yesterday in.

 

Obviously, this is a pretty good time to be a Cubs fan, so I've got a pretty good guess as to how this poll will ultimately end up, but I'm wondering how people overall feel about ownership now after about 6 years.

 

There's been plenty of (deserved) criticism of the Ricketts ownership (and support) on this board, and there have been several missteps (why the [expletive] was Hendry kept around so long? the renovation stuff was a clown show early on, etc.), but given how ecstatic we all are to be where we are now, with a kick ass young team beyond any of our wildest expectations, a kick ass front office, and soon to be kick ass facilities (some of which are already here), how does everybody feel about our creepy Ted Cruz lookalike overlord's tenure? Are you glad the Ricketts family owns the Cubs and are you satisfied with what they've done with the franchise over their first 6 years and the direction they are headed?

 

P.S. Obviously, a lot of these improvements were long overdue and any ownership group would have pursued them, but it's still so nice to finally see them coming to fruition after decades worth of stagnation.

[Guest]

Also, in searching for a thread to post that interview in, I came across that one thread from a few years ago by JoseHernandez18 asking if the Ricketts were the worst thing to ever happen to the Cubs.

 

search.php?author_id=10905&sr=posts

 

his last two posts are kinda funny.

[Sammy Sofa]

I am currently tolerating the Ricketts.

[SouthSideRyan]

Yeah, approval is such a strong word.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm very suspicious of the whole "we were spending all the money we could in the past, then we decided we wanted to win go for it so we just asked the business side if they could find some extra money for us" and suddenly payroll goes up $40m.

[Guest]

i'm not sure who the first no was, but i'm pretty sure ssr was the second one, just based on timing.

 

60-40 between he and kyle.

[UMFan83]

I approve because we are good. If we suck again, then I choose to disapprove.

[Guest]

I'm very suspicious of the whole "we were spending all the money we could in the past, then we decided we wanted to win go for it so we just asked the business side if they could find some extra money for us" and suddenly payroll goes up $40m.

 

i mean even if it was an active decision to tank and the financial restrictions were completely made up, if the outcome was a 99 win true talent team where over half the key contributors are 26 and under, i ain't even mad (anymore).

 

http://s3media.247sports.com/Uploads/Assets/716/449/449716.gif

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm very suspicious of the whole "we were spending all the money we could in the past, then we decided we wanted to win go for it so we just asked the business side if they could find some extra money for us" and suddenly payroll goes up $40m.

 

i mean even if it was an active decision to tank and the financial restrictions were completely made up, if the outcome was a 99 win true talent team where over half the key contributors are 26 and under, i ain't even mad (anymore).

 

http://s3media.247sports.com/Uploads/Assets/716/449/449716.gif

 

I'm mostly there, but at best I'm giving all that credit to the front office and continuing to disapprove of Ricketts' creepy conservative rich whiteness.

[Guest]

I voted yes because there were only two options. "meh" would have been my preferred choice.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, most of my good feelings towards the Cubs right now are due to the FO; the Ricketts are just sort of there, building hotels that will smell like McDonald's grease.

[Guest]

at the very least, they deserve credit for identifying and hiring that FO, and probably doing borderline tampering type stuff to get them here, and then letting them do their thing pretty much unencumbered (especially if the belief is now the tanking thing was more a decision than a product of circumstances).

 

it seems like a low bar, but there are plenty of idiot meatball owners who would've hired the wrong guys for one reason or another ("baseball" guys or guys with organizational ties like reinsdorf). for an organization that had especially bad/neglectful ownership for almost a century, just not having complete incompetence is kind of a refreshing thing. (yeah, the tribune spent, but they were shitty at hiring the right people - maybe post dallas green, whatever happened there - and they didn't do near enough to modernize the organization both in terms of facilities and faculty).

 

i obviously take away credit for taking 2 years to start the overhaul of the baseball operations. if they recognized the deficiency there immediately, they should've acted immediately, but whatever. and they have looked like bumbling idiots more than once and were passive for far too long re: the renovations and the rooftops.

Edited December 15, 2015 by David

[Sammy Sofa]

at the very least, they deserve credit for identifying and hiring that FO, and probably doing borderline tampering type stuff to get them here, and then letting them do their thing pretty much unencumbered (especially if the belief is now the tanking thing was more a decision than a product of circumstances).

 

it seems like a low bar, but there are plenty of idiot meatball owners who would've hired the wrong guys for one reason or another ("baseball" guys or guys with organizational ties like reinsdorf). for an organization who had especially bad/neglectful ownership for almost a century, just not having complete incompetence is a good thing. (yeah, the tribune spent, but they were [expletive] at hiring the right people - maybe post dallas green, whatever happened there - and they didn't do near enough to modernize the organization both in terms of facilities and faculty).

 

i obviously take away credit for taking 2 years to start the overhaul of the baseball operations. if they recognized the deficiency there immediately, they should've acted immediately, but whatever. and they have looked like bumbling idiots more than once and were passive for far too long re: the renovations and the rooftops.

 

So, yeah, tolerate them. Owners should be like managers; unless they're REALLY good, I kind of just want to forget that they're there.

[Guest]

Actually, maybe I'm giving the Tribune too much credit for spending, even.

 

Through the 90's, I don't think our payroll ever matched up with our market size, did it? I could be talking out of my ass here a bit since I'm trying to remember things as I perceived them when I was in my early teens and I wanted us to sign albert belle.

 

In the 2000s, things seemed to get better, climaxing with the Zell-imposed spending spree to allegedly drive up the value. For [expletive]'s sake, we should've been able to sign Beltran after 2004, especially if we were going to run Sammy out of town (which didn't end up being terrible timing given his production, admittedly). Now I'm off on a tangent.

Edited December 15, 2015 by David

[Guest]

at the very least, they deserve credit for identifying and hiring that FO, and probably doing borderline tampering type stuff to get them here, and then letting them do their thing pretty much unencumbered (especially if the belief is now the tanking thing was more a decision than a product of circumstances).

 

it seems like a low bar, but there are plenty of idiot meatball owners who would've hired the wrong guys for one reason or another ("baseball" guys or guys with organizational ties like reinsdorf). for an organization who had especially bad/neglectful ownership for almost a century, just not having complete incompetence is a good thing. (yeah, the tribune spent, but they were [expletive] at hiring the right people - maybe post dallas green, whatever happened there - and they didn't do near enough to modernize the organization both in terms of facilities and faculty).

 

i obviously take away credit for taking 2 years to start the overhaul of the baseball operations. if they recognized the deficiency there immediately, they should've acted immediately, but whatever. and they have looked like bumbling idiots more than once and were passive for far too long re: the renovations and the rooftops.

 

So, yeah, tolerate them. Owners should be like managers; unless they're REALLY good, I kind of just want to forget that they're there.

 

Fair enough.

[UMFan83]

Actually, maybe I'm giving the Tribune too much credit for spending, even.

 

Through the 90's, I don't think our payroll ever matched up with our market size, did it? I could be talking out of my ass here a bit since I'm trying to remember things as I perceived them when I was in my early teens.

 

In the 2000s, things seemed to get better, climaxing with the Zell-imposed spending spree to allegedly drive up the value. For [expletive]'s sake, we should've been able to sign Beltran after 2004, especially if we were going to run Sammy out of town (which didn't end up being terrible timing given his production, admittedly). Now I'm off on a tangent.

 

Read the book Entangled in Ivy if you haven't. I know some people don't like George Castle as an author, but its a pretty good look into the Tribune Ownership and MacPhail FO through the 90's and early 2000's.

[Guest]

Actually, maybe I'm giving the Tribune too much credit for spending, even.

 

Through the 90's, I don't think our payroll ever matched up with our market size, did it? I could be talking out of my ass here a bit since I'm trying to remember things as I perceived them when I was in my early teens.

 

In the 2000s, things seemed to get better, climaxing with the Zell-imposed spending spree to allegedly drive up the value. For [expletive]'s sake, we should've been able to sign Beltran after 2004, especially if we were going to run Sammy out of town (which didn't end up being terrible timing given his production, admittedly). Now I'm off on a tangent.

 

Read the book Entangled in Ivy if you haven't. I know some people don't like George Castle as an author, but its a pretty good look into the Tribune Ownership and MacPhail FO through the 90's and early 2000's.

 

Will give it a whirl. Hopefully it's on Kindle. Thx.

 

LOL side note: Goerge Castle now writes for that sports mockery blog hahahahahahahahha

[SouthSideRyan]

Actually, maybe I'm giving the Tribune too much credit for spending, even.

 

Through the 90's, I don't think our payroll ever matched up with our market size, did it? I could be talking out of my ass here a bit since I'm trying to remember things as I perceived them when I was in my early teens and I wanted us to sign albert belle.

 

Payroll differentials really weren't as much of a thing back then. My recollection is we were fairly in line. I'll have to try to hunt that down later.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

We were always a little light in the 90s and early 2000s. MacPhail really didn't want to annoy the other owners by giving out any huge contracts. We were really good at making reasonable bids that didn't win free agents. I wanted Mike Hampton so bad.

[Sammy Sofa]

Actually, maybe I'm giving the Tribune too much credit for spending, even.

 

Through the 90's, I don't think our payroll ever matched up with our market size, did it? I could be talking out of my ass here a bit since I'm trying to remember things as I perceived them when I was in my early teens.

 

In the 2000s, things seemed to get better, climaxing with the Zell-imposed spending spree to allegedly drive up the value. For [expletive]'s sake, we should've been able to sign Beltran after 2004, especially if we were going to run Sammy out of town (which didn't end up being terrible timing given his production, admittedly). Now I'm off on a tangent.

 

Read the book Entangled in Ivy if you haven't. I know some people don't like George Castle as an author, but its a pretty good look into the Tribune Ownership and MacPhail FO through the 90's and early 2000's.

 

Will give it a whirl. Hopefully it's on Kindle. Thx.

 

LOL side note: Goerge Castle now writes for that sports mockery blog hahahahahahahahha

 

The only saving grace of that [expletive] show is that they don't have a comments section.

[Guest]

We were always a little light in the 90s and early 2000s. MacPhail really didn't want to annoy the other owners by giving out any huge contracts. We were really good at making reasonable bids that didn't win free agents. I wanted Mike Hampton so bad.

 

That was actually one case where we were pretty much tied with the Rockies wasn't it?

 

I'm remembering the offers being basically equal and him opting for the schools in Colorado or some stupid [expletive].

 

side note: mike hampton had ugly peripherals

[Guest]

Based on what we talked out here, they appear to be living up to their promise that new revenue gets funneled into the team. You can argue about the baseline that they're working from I suppose, but if they're going to run a 150 million dollar payroll this year that's 1) certainly competitive and 2) consistent with their statements and the public info we know, so I'm satisfied.

[davell]

Its not hard to see WHY they're letting payroll move up, with the attendance jump, the increased ticket prices, the jump in their current TV deals.....They're at least giving Theo the ability to do the necessary things he wants to do. Tolerate seems like the best word use here, it'll get interesting once we DO have our new TV money, the renovations are done......To see how they stack up at that point.