goonys evil twin

The Angels won when they were owned by a corporation. What good does it do to have one owner to blame? Accountability...with corporate ownership, there's no accountability. There's only a figurehead. Andy is the president of the Cubs. He's accountable. Jim Hendry is the GM, he is accountable. Baker is the manager, he is accountable. Do you really think it accomplishes anything to have one guy to bitch at when times are tough? Individual owners aren't accountable to anybody. And are you just going to keep ignoring the fact that the Angels won the world series when owned by Disney? Ownership structure is not the reason this team sucks right now. Incompetent management decisions is.

I understand where you're coming from goony, and rationally, it makes sense. But I think people see that what we've had in place at all levels hasn't worked. There's a lot of frustration with the status quo, and the Tribune is a faceless corporate entity at the top of the food chain that's easy to target. The Cubs are a major market team, and if they are bought by a reasonably wealthy individual, with a strong desire to get the team to win, the payroll and such should take care of itself through revenues (or so I tell myself). It may not make an immediate positive difference, but I think people are willing to take the risk at this point. It's probably change for the sake of change. But I'm not sure it can really hurt us much more than we are now...at least record-wise. People have been complaining about sports owners since sports went pro. I think it's pointless. Yes, more pointless than whining about crappy players like Neifi or Pierre, or guys like Hendry and Baker. Pro teams aren't just sold at the drop of a hat. No fan or group of fans is going to be successful trying to talk somebody into buying or selling a pro sports franchise. GM's, managers, coaches and players are replaced on a weekly basis in baseball. How often is a team sold? Once every 3 or 4 years? I think complaining about owners is just a crutch, used by people like Mariotti who don't feel like delving deep into the problem and who only want the easy story. By no means do I think the Tribune has been a great owner. But they've done as much or more as just about any other owner out there (they've certainly done more than Reinsdorf). Their management has failed. The problem is with management. Yes, it is ownership's responsibility to hire the right decision makers, but make no mistake, the problems we deal with are a result of moves by management. The Trib hired a fantastic candidate in Andy MacPhail to run their operations. He gave them no reason to replace him until the Hendry extension. You can't sit back with an objective eye and say Andy obviously had to go before. He was responsible for the resurrection of this franchise, and for bringing them to a spot where fans actually expected success. And he deserves credit for the financial success of the team as well. Ownership gave Andy plenty of resources to get the job done. Andy's faith in Hendry is starting to really hurt the team. But you can't go nuts on ownership for that. Players play. Coaches coach. GM's generally manage, and owners own. I'd say, out of all 4 of those categories, that the owners are the only ones who have done a reasonable job. Not great, but reasonable. Of all the things to wish and hope for in pro sports, ownership change is about the biggest waste of time as any. Fans can revolt on a player and get him traded. Fans can grease the skids for a coach or even a GM by being loud enough. But fans aren't going to cause a pro sports owner to sell. The only possible way to have that happen is to completely abandon a team and force them into financial ruin. And that would defeat the whole purpose of a fan wanting to see the team get better.

Alright fine, bring 'em all up. Take whatever minor leaguers are hitting, and put them in place of Bynum, Theriot and Mabry, who has been awful. Might as well drop back to 11 pitchers and call up another bat as well. i think you actually have to play before you are called terrible. The Riot hasn't had a chance to show anything with the big league team yet. I didn't say Theriot has been terrible. But he wasn't hitting in the minors, he's never hit much in the minors. They aren't playing him anyway, and there is no need for so many backup infielders.

The Angels won when they were owned by a corporation. What good does it do to have one owner to blame?

Alright fine, bring 'em all up. Take whatever minor leaguers are hitting, and put them in place of Bynum, Theriot and Mabry, who has been awful. Might as well drop back to 11 pitchers and call up another bat as well.

I think you're missing the point. I'm arguing that my hate for the Sox will obviously be stronger than someone whose primary allegiance lies with the Bears. Conversely, as a Cub fan first and foremost, I don't harbor any ill will toward the Packers. No, the point is you sound ridiculous when you claim only the most passionately among us can muster the hate of the white sox. I've seen bandwagon jumpers who decide to hate the sox and longtime fans who decide to hate the Sox. Any fan that tries to claim greater fandom or more passion or more devotion, or just that he's a better fan than somebody else, sounds foolish. I'm a huge Cubs fan, and I'm a huge Bears fan, and I don't care about the Sox. The Packers comparison is terrible, not even close. The rivalries aren't even in the same discussion. If the Packers played in the AFC North, and always did, there would be no rivalry.

Don't even try to pretend you're more passionately devoted to the Cubs than anybody who isn't obsessed with hating the White Sox. I'm absolutely more passionately devoted than the guys who claim a stronger allegiance to other teams - that's my point. No, you're not. Get over yourself. Wanna bet? Bet what? I'm a huge Cubs fan. And I don't really care much about the White Sox. According to you, you're a more passionate Cubs fan than me. Sounds more like you're just more passionately obssessed with the Sox.

Don't even try to pretend you're more passionately devoted to the Cubs than anybody who isn't obsessed with hating the White Sox. I'm absolutely more passionately devoted than the guys who claim a stronger allegiance to other teams - that's my point. No, you're not. Get over yourself.

brutal. that would make the '06 outfield look good. No doubt. But seriously, the way things are going, why not call up Luis to platoon with Jones now? Dump Bynum and send Theriot back down, and then maybe call up Hoffpauir. You'd still have plenty of middle infield help, with Walker and Cedeno backed up by Neifi and Hairston. If they refuse to shake up the coaching staff despite all the losses, and they refuse to make a trade because they think they'd overpay, then why not give a couple hot hitting prospects a chance to do something? And don't just call them up to sit the bench, let them play.

Don't even try to pretend you're more passionately devoted to the Cubs than anybody who isn't obsessed with hating the White Sox.

It's great and all that you still believe. But suggesting that other fans who don't share your opinion are pathetic is, well, pathetic. Gooney go and visit other Cubs blogs and then come back and we can discuss this. Yes, Cubs fans right now are upset but reality is: 1. Dusty will be here for the next 2 years. (extention probably) 2. Hendry will not make any significant trades to turn this team around. 3. People will still sell out Wrigley just to boo our team. 4. The tribune will never sell this club. (see 3) So maybe, maybe you might wanna believe in something that isn't in the stat book. Believe that this team might, might have a chance if they begin fighting tomorrow night. Were the White Sox the most talented team last year? No Let miracles happen. Don't expect them. How does this justify your absurd claim that the team might be struggling because the fans are pathetic? What is the point of that list? First off, it's not reality, just your opinion. Second, why are you telling me to believe in something other than a stat book. You worry about yourself. Don't ever tell me how to be a fan.

Seriously, though what is up with the guy? What a letdown. As one of his biggest fans, I'm baffled by his start as well. He' not getting many good pitches, and isn't doing anything with the ones he's getting. His swing at most everything approach is easily exploitable unless you make adjustments.

In all seriousness, any word? If he's still just around 25 pitches I'd be pretty upset.

It's great and all that you still believe. But suggesting that other fans who don't share your opinion are pathetic is, well, pathetic.

Nope. % of capacity will be down this year because of last year. Attendance totals are a different matter since there are more seats now. It will fall further in 2007 if they keep sucking in 2006, especially if Baker and Hendry return. You might see a bump in 2008 if they win 85 in 2007, but attencance lags success (or lack thereof). Ticket sales went through the roof in 2004 because of the postseason run of 2003, not the 88 wins of 2003 or 89 of 2004. Attendance stayed high in 2005 because of expectations built off those last two teams.

If they suck the rest of 2006, win 85 in 2007 and then struggle to start 2008, and Hendry has extended Baker or hired a new manager, I would be willing to bet he isn't brought back again. A bad 2006 along with the return of Hendry and Baker in 2007 will guarantee lower attendence (despite the myths it does happen when the team struggles), which will piss off ownership to no end. And they will force Andy to make a change. Andy has fired Lynch, he's fired Riggleman, he's fired Baylor, coaches, trainers, Sosa and others. They made a mistake in extending Hendry. They will not do it again unless he improves the team.

That's just ridiculous.

When discussing franchise futility, sure. But when discussing current ownership? No way. They've only been in charge since what, the early 80's? Lots of teams have had similar or worse success since that time.

No way. If Hendry is allowed to either extend Baker or sign a new manager, and the team still sucks, that will have been his last chance. If they were willing to sign him to a new contract now, I'm not assuming anything. They signed Hendry to a new contract during a good start, following what they considered to be one off year. If they suck in 2006, 2007 and 2008, they won't consider it an off year or a fluke. Hendry will pay by then. Cubs GMs don't last long into years of struggle. Dallas Green was fired after a couple losing seasons following the 84 season. Frey wasn't even given 2 years after the 89 season. Larry Himes did his damage early and was gone in 2.5 years (despite one moderately successful season). Lynch was given 4 years to get things going under the new Andy regime, but was fired just 1.5 years after the 98 wild card. Hendry's teams won 88 and 89 games and looked to be on the way up. 2005 was a down year, they thought it was a fluke. If 2006 and 2007 end up with similar results, he probably won't be back in 2008, let alone allowed to hire a new manager after 2008.

Actually I think they do crunch numbers, but they do it incompetently. When Hendry stated last offseason that Burnitz had the 6th highest slugging percentage of any player with 120 or more strikeouts it seemed plain to me that some number-crunching staffer came up with that pearl of statisical wisdom. That's my point. They moved Chuck Wasserstrom from some PR or media relations type of job into some sort of Baseball Information analyst. At the time it was obvious the organization wanted to make it look like they were paying attention to the new wave of thinking sweeping across the league, but they didn't hire anybody who could be expected to a do a great job at it. From all accounts all the guy does is click the sortables on ESPN.com and come up with interesting, but completely worthless, trends.

No way. If Hendry is allowed to either extend Baker or sign a new manager, and the team still sucks, that will have been his last chance.

There is no justification for that last statement. Disney won a world series. Why can't the Trib? They've provided more than enough resources for management to get the job done. The Trib could easily clean house after this season and bring in the right people to get the job done by 2008. They haven't been great owners, but they've hardly been terrible.

Couple problems: Lou is not the answer. And why should Andy have been fired years ago? I could see making the claim that he should be fired now, but years ago? What did he do years ago to deserve a firing? It took a while to take hold, but his insistence on rebuilding the farm system was the right decision and it start to pay off in the late 90's. As of early this decade the Cubs were in fantastic position to get to the next level. There was nothing wrong with hiring Hendry at the time. The one thing I blame him for in the past would be never insisting on bringing in some new school ways of thinking into the baseball hierarchy (that means more than hiring a PR guy to crunch numbers). And now that it's become painfully obvious that Hendry wasn't getting the job done, Andy should have looked outside the organization before granting an extension. But that is recent stuff. Andy didn't deserve to be fired years ago. And you can't completely ignore his ability to draw more revenues out of the baseball operations. That's an important part of a club president's role.

That was Andy. Andy runs the baseball operations. That's on him, and it was a terrible decision. Why not wait until mid-season if you wanted to extend him during the season? The Trib has allowed the baseball people to make the baseball decisions, and that is a good thing. The problem is they've made a lot of wrong decisions.

My thoughts exactly...how do either the pitching coach or the hitting coach have jobs? Everyone bashes dusty, I don't see them doing their jobs either! My big problem is with Rothschild, what has he doen with the talent he's been given? It's pretty clear they should all go. Any Baker bashing implicitly includes his coaches. Just like Neifi bashing extends to the men who signed and now play him.