The morning after ... I'm still annoyed
I was on a plane to St. Louis to spend Thanksgiving with my family when I read Dylan Hernandez's report in the LAT that has caused so much controversy, in which Dodgers President Jamie McCourt implied that, especially in tough times, fans might have to choose between a competitive team and the good that the community service arms of the Dodgers perform around Southern California. In the world of sports, where things are often wrongly framed in life-or-death terms, it takes a fair amount to get my Righteous Indignation Meter to redline. But Jamie McCourt's comments managed to do it:
"If you bring somebody in to play and pay them, pick a number, $30 million, does that seem a little weird to you?" Jamie McCourt asked in an interview at the Evergreen Recreation Center in East Los Angeles. "That's what we're trying to figure out. We're really trying to see it through the eyes of our fans. We're really trying to understand, would they rather have the 50 fields?"
That's the decision L.A.'s long-suffering baseball fans are facing? The same group of people that have filled Chavez Ravine to the gills year in and year out, whether the team deserved it or not? Sure, we can get you a competitive team, but children might suffer as a result?
She continued:
"I think, oddly enough, maybe if things weren't guaranteed, then we could pay for it," she said. "If people can't play anymore, it's like, 'Oh well, see ya.' Different story. Whatever money they are guaranteed could be money that we could otherwise have given to community."
At this point, I was pretty fired up. I've written in the past about how I feel the McCourts and the Dodgers consistently do a terrible job of framing issues for the community, whether it's regarding Manny in the wake of the Game 5 loss in the NLCS, or in feeding the media storyline that "the kids" have to shape up or perhaps be shipped out ... all while the youth supports the performances of many disappointing veteran players. But the newest batch of comments seemed like Team McCourt's worst violation in a while.
I sat down to write, ripping into the McCourts for taking difficult economic times and turning them into great moral question for Dodgers fans and a cynical cover to avoid going deeper into the FA derby, whether for Manny, CC Sabathia, or anyone else with a serious price tag.
But about halfway through, I stopped. Surely there must be something more to this? Not that I'm questioning the accuracy of Hernandez's reporting, but was there a larger context that he was unable to fit in his allotted inches? Frankly, that sort of verbal misstep was much more the domain of Frank than Jamie. She's usually better than that. If there was a clarification out there, I'd like to know about it before I'm done preachin' from my soap box.
At that point, I dropped a note to the Dodgers and asked. No, the quotes were absolutely accurate but part of a larger philosophical debate about priorities in tough economic times, the entirety of which couldn't make the story. In an attempt to clarify, Jamie McCourt would be on 710 ESPN with John Ireland, and also was speaking to the LAT's Bill Plaschke. I decided to wait until I saw/heard both before writing.
Well, I have, and I'm still not impressed.
"It was half the conversation," she said to Ireland. "You know how it is in the paper. It was half the conversation. I think what's interesting is that we're in these weird times. There's a lot of talk everywhere about what's at stake, what's everyone doing going forward, and I think what's important is to have the conversation about what's important."
Fair enough. Have a conversation. She continues:
"I think it's important to ask the question, "How much is OK in times like this? It makes you feel a little uncomfortable to watch all these different places losing money and people losing their jobs," and then to shell out huge sums of money on baseball players. Is that insulting to fans? There's an insensitivity, she told Plaschke, to putting huge money out for players when contrasted with the building of youth baseball fields. True, in absolute terms. But it's always been true. We all know baseball players make money out of whack to their relative value to society. That's not the point, because it's a false choice.
Money used for the many unquestionable goods from the charitable arms of the organization have no relationship to money spent on the field, a point Jamie McCourt emphasized with Ireland. To her credit, she made clear that it's not, in fact, a choice between Manny and the children of Southern California.
I think the conversation about sports and the economy is pretty fascinating. It's already easy to see the impact on sponsorship-driven sports like golf and NASCAR. Like any business owners, the McCourts have an obligation to focus on priorities and make sure dollars are being spent wisely, as Frank McCourt said they'd do other day. The problem here is that the Dodgers seem to be focusing only on one half of the equation -- how much they have to spend on the product and the amount that's appropriate in lean times. Meanwhile, little consideration is given to the other half -- how much fans must shell out to watch it.
They're hoping not to offend the sensibilities of some fans by not laying out grotesque amounts of money for Sabathia or Manny ... but still charging these sorts of prices for spring training games? Do parking and beer costs for fans come down during tough economic times? Do ticket costs come down? Likely not. Nor will they ask about the morality of fans, in tough economic times, using whatever free cash they have to spend a couple hundred bucks to take the family to a game. In bad times, shouldn't they put it in a savings account? Or give it to charity? Where are the priorities?
Jamie McCourt tried to emphasize to Ireland that the priority is winning, saying that they'd do whatever it takes to make it happen, and I'll defend their record of spending on the roster to try to make it happen. Spending wisely? Not really, but wisely isn't their department, just outlay.
If the changing economy means the McCourts can't afford Ramirez, fine. Say so. But again, it seems like the McCourts are going out of their way to prepare L.A. for the team to "lose" in the big FA races ... and not get blamed for it. After Game 5, they made clear "it takes two to tango." They reiterated it this week. Now it's the economy. Fans aren't stupid. They'll be able to make the distinction between a deal the Dodgers should have matched for Manny and one they shouldn't. They'll know what's too much for Sabathia. They'll know if the team made a legitimate offer that wasn't accepted.
The Dodgers still might re-sign Manny; they still might land CC. They have a lot of work to do in order to field a top-flight team next season, and no question the economy matters. But I can do without the shallow, self-interested explanations on the appropriateness of spending free-agent dollars while companies go under.
Put the best product on the field you can afford, period.
BK
Subscribe to this Blog | What is RSS?
Happy Thanksgiving All
Posted by: K T | November 27, 2008 at 09:42 AM
BK, I totally agree with your post. Jamie McCourt's comments are insulting to me as a fan. The job of responsible and competent ownership is to put a quality product on the field that has a chance to win a championship every year. This requires paying top dollar to keep the best players, while also building a team from within. If the Dodgers win regulary, the McCourts will make money- which is really all they care about. Giving back to the community is something all responsible businesses should do, and something the Dodgers did long before the McCourts came to town. To frame things as mutually exclusive- 1) the Dodgers can try to win, or 2) they can give back to the community, shows me that the McCourts are unworthy of owning a professional sports franchise. I can't imagine Jerry Buss saying anything so stupid. The McCourt's should sell the Dodgers immediately and go back to owning parking lots. You can bet that the McCourts will hold prices up or raise them moving forward. To do that while cutting payroll and blaming the economy assumes that fans are stupid. I think the McCourts feel that they can hire some hot shot communications person to spin their message, and explain away any dumb statement or decision.
Its unfortunate that fans can't fire incompetent ownership.
Posted by: Santa Rosa Dodger | November 27, 2008 at 09:53 AM
As a season ticket holder in the Dugout Club, I am so offended by her comments I am shaking my head in disbelief.
What little respect I had for the McCourts is now gone. It must be tough knowing the people of Southern California have very little or no respect for you.
Posted by: Eric | November 27, 2008 at 09:53 AM
i think you're being a little too heated on this BK. if you're one of the many unfortunate who have lost there jobs recently i think you would understand. you're a sports writer and we are sports fans so sometimes we get caught up in our own little world. for me reading jaime's comments were first a little shocking but hey there is more to life than sports and i respect that.
concerning the issue of wether the mccourts would open up there wallets ... i've always been annoyed by people complaining about that because history has shown they are willing to pay. the criticism is more on colletti and his wasteful spending. but in fareness it's their company to run and they have to take into account their financial outlook in the troubling years to come. if this was 2004 i would find the mccourt's comments troubling. but not now. and i know all about the long suffering fan cuz i happen to be one. but i tell you, my mind these days are far removed from sports.
last but not least, the spring training tickets vary in prices so there are affordable seats for sure. you have your choice of paying less and hanging out with the gangbangers or pay a little bit more and sit next to the kambrothers.
Posted by: 88 | November 27, 2008 at 10:08 AM
Awful comments from Jamie, I agree. It's like she's using the economic crisis as an excuse and it seems quite offensive and condescending and even exploitive.
Hope we can feel free to disagree with her without resorting to any crude remarks about her personally and/or gender trashing.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Posted by: Kevin McBride | November 27, 2008 at 10:16 AM
exactly right bk.
Posted by: Joeshmo | November 27, 2008 at 10:26 AM
What's there to complain about? The Dodgers just signed Luis Maza to a minor league deal.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | November 27, 2008 at 10:48 AM
What's there to complain about? The Dodgers just signed Luis Maza to a minor league deal.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | November 27, 2008 at 10:48 AM
i am appalled and disgusted by jamie mccourt. i am thankful for the outcry and contempt towards the dodgers owners. we deserve better than this. i never could trust a bostonian and now know i never will. thank you for this post
Posted by: thisisfogey | November 27, 2008 at 10:52 AM
mcCourts ought to convert dodger stadium into low-income housing project, much like former ebbets field?
Posted by: PrimceOrPauper | November 27, 2008 at 11:18 AM
In the ESPN interview, Jamie says "...I have no sense, I really don't..."
These are, in all fairness, comments stripped of context, but at this point I think they do fit in the context of the greater dialogue. What is this question she's raised of "weird" amounts of money to pay players, or the bizarre hypothetical choices implicitly being presented to fans as excuses for a low budget team.
Big league sports are a fantasy, and the sooner she steps away from the poorly executed exercise of trying to invest fans in the pains of wading through every business decision, the more likely the decisions are to be simply accepted as the necessities of business.
But it's too late for that now, since her comments have invited a hostile scrutiny & judgment of their budgetary choices.
One hopes she comes to her senses and realizes just how "weird" the internal budget truly seems, while there still is a fan base--same steep prices for tickets, concession, parking, and a mere $500 for one of those afternoons on the field with Martin/Ethier or Kemp, not to mention the new Spring Training maybe money-maker, & still the management produces no marquis players?? No sense in this.
Nor is there any sense in the un-named, but apparently huge outlays of cash for the charitable organizations, which are great opportunities for more McCourt pictures, reflected glory that feeds an apparently insatiable narcissism. To hook fans into that part of the organization is just twisted logic, at best, delusion at worst, or a combination of the two.
How the charity fund remains bottomless, and the operating budget has to be scrutinized for weird numbers (which are simply the cost of doing business)--this was an unwise road to go down... There was no sense inviting this hostile dialogue.
Package stole my line: the McCourts really need to sell the Dodgers.
Posted by: lizzieinsb | November 27, 2008 at 12:28 PM
In the owners eyes, guaranteed contracts are the problem. However, I look at it like this; the owners were ripping off the players for upwards of 100 yrs. (pre-free agency) and for the last 30 or so the players have been getting back at them.
Posted by: A Scanner Darkly | November 27, 2008 at 01:33 PM
BK
That may be the best thread I've ever seen you write. Good Job.
Package
Posted by: Package | November 27, 2008 at 01:38 PM
K Bros, is there any way that a 3rd choice could be added to the Poll Question concerning Jaime McCourts question? How about adding a "New Owners" choice for fans to choose? I wonder how many people would choose that. I know I would.
Posted by: Adrian | November 27, 2008 at 01:49 PM
I think the most insulting part about this turn of events is that the McCourt's keep raising prices for everything in Dodger Stadium. Since they've become owners ticket prices are up almost 50 percent. They have the gall the ask fans to invest more money to go watch the team next year but turn around and site the poor economy as a reason to not invest their money into the Dodgers.
These comments have pretty much confirmed my fears. I didn't think we'd sign Manny or CC. We're going to end up with Randy Johnson, Rich Aurilia and Omar Vizquel next year.
Posted by: Adrian | November 27, 2008 at 02:12 PM
Charitable giving and community involvement are clearly NOT exclusive to the Dodgers.
Go to their website,
http://losangeles.dodgers.mlb.com/index.jsp?c_id=la
and click on "MLB Sites" in the upper right corner. Pick any team, and you will find that today's theme at every site is "Baseball's Giving Spirit". Charitable giving and community activism is common to EVERY MLB team, and has absolutely nothing to do with the business of acquiring players and putting the best possible product on the field.
Finally, without realizing it at the time, I must have been absolutely giddy about the signing of Luis Maza to a minor league deal. So much so, I posted it twice (above).
If you don't see this until tomorrow, the theme will probably still be on the page, but at #2, 3, 4, or later.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | November 27, 2008 at 04:27 PM
Wow. The McCourts must think we are really, really stupid. What a couple of rich assholes.
AK/BK: this might not exactly be your bag per se, but I would like to see the LA Sports press in general hammer the MCourts with questions as to what exactly they make per year. How much did they make personally last year? How much, personally, do they expect to make this year? What percentage of their own personal income is being spent on pure charity (as in, charity that doesn't buy their investment interests "free" advertising)? How much SHOULD they be making, given the economy and what they charge for tickets, parking, etc.? If you can, guys, hammer that point home. I mean, they are only asking for it with idiotic comments like these.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | November 27, 2008 at 05:04 PM
BK- a very thoughtful post!
Remember the last era of very competitive baseball played by the Dodgers? 1977 through 1983. Jimmy Carter was President from 1977 through 1981. Remember the state of the economy? It was very bad with double digit mortgage interest rates coupled with double digit inflation rates.
I think we can be very competitive in today's economic environment too!
Posted by: Joe the Plumber | November 27, 2008 at 05:09 PM
I heard the interview with Jamie on Mason/Ireland. As far as I can remember, almost all the L.A. teams have done charity work. It shouldn't have anything to do with the Dodgers competing for the WS.
Jamie sounded really annoyed about how disappointing the FAs have shown to be. Welcome to our world! Unfortunately, the fans didn't get a vote; whereby, even though she acts as if she/Frank were taken to the cleaners, no one FORCED them to sign Schmidt, coming off the previous year when he had lost 5-10 mph on his fastball & was thought to be hurt; Jones, when he had hit .222 the previous year; or overpaying for Pierre (who, at least, delivered in the manner he always had). These were decisions the team made, so, if annoyed, be annoyed at her employee, Ned.
I would have been happy to have Dodgers Stadium stay the way it was: no luxury seats, no change of seat color; no new parking procedure (raising prices from $8 to $15); no new scoreboard; no upcoming "quad" behind the outfield fence, etc. To me, the only problems were long food lines & lack of sufficient bathrooms.
Owning a team requires sufficient talent to compete every year. Personally, I love following the young guys as they progress in the majors, but, the downside to that is, generally, lack of HR power, which needs to be addressed elsewhere. While not as enthralled as most, Manny looks to be a better FA option than almost anyone else available. However, I certainly got the impression that the McCourts aren't leaning in that direction. I think the team needs pitching--Lowe will be missed, as one of only two in the MLs to never be on the DL. Lots of holes to fill & Beroa-type players aren't the answer. I thought the team overachieved this year, &, next year, think it will be even more difficult.
Posted by: PatriciaDu | November 27, 2008 at 07:18 PM
sadly, this doesn't come as a surprise to me. nor should it to any remotely lucid observer of baseball, the mc courts and the decline and fall of the dodgers since peter o'malley bid farely well. coaches can bench players and front office execs can trade or fail to resign players, fire managers and owners can fire front office execs. unfortunately owners can't be fired. if they could, the boston parking lot attendant and his trophy wife would have been axed years ago. eli broad, philip anschutz, even a hollywood tycoon and local figure like steven spielberg or jeffrey katzenberg would be better than this boston phony. if the dodgers fail to sign manny, and i've bet alll along they would, and particularly if he goes to the giants and if they fail to sign c.c. or trade for peavy, both looking more unlikely and watch dlowe, raffy and other quality players leave town and then think and hope that fans will shell out their own good money after the mc courts miserable product, take the only action you as a fan can and boycott to the point that ticket sales, merchandise sales, parking, concession and beer sales, television and radio ratings and the right to broadcast the dodgers all fall to the point that the mc courts have a better choice than whether or not to pay for free agents or build community fields, continue to lose money or sell the dodgers and get the frank out of town. i opt for the latter and while it may be hard for true blue dodger fans to swallow, there is an alternative lead by a superior owner and front office team that is on the same page and not in disarray that doesn't make p.r. blunder after another. his name is arte moreno, he owns the angels and orange county is just as nice a place to watch a baseball game on a warm summer evening. parking's lower, beer's cheaeper, and the lines are shorter. the product on the field is better, the atmosphere is kinder and more family friendly. you won't have to worry about cholos cursing in the seat next to you and the sinking feeling that your at a raider game. i've said it before and i'll say it again, not because i'm all that bright, but because it is so obvious, the angels have become superior to the dodgers IN EVERY WAY. as long as the man who failed to become the next owner to red sux nation continues to have his sloppy seconds at all of our expense the blue slide into mediocrity and eventually obscurity (where they were for four years before two months of manny and where they will be after manny signs with the giants, or yankees, or angels should teixera decide to take steinbrenner's money). thinking red instead.
~cmh
Posted by: christopher marc | November 28, 2008 at 12:56 AM
The article estimated 50 new youth fields at around $5 mil. More than likely, the Dodgers can do BOTH at that price. Come on, you own the Dodgers and not the Inland Empire 66ers. The statement was unnecessary and obviously a twisted attempt at lowering our expectations. Note to Jamie: I no wi ar dumb enuff too came out in rekorde numbars for a 4th plase teem butte wi ar reelly not that stupeed.
Posted by: kwony | November 28, 2008 at 01:08 AM
.Well about the ball fields they can write that money to taxes, about themselves she is lawyer enough said and he is realtor enough said. Both of these professions are taking are country down, houses being pushed way over the limit and safety in products making them to expensive.
I really feel pro sports is out of touch with anything but themselves, why do ticket prices have to be so high and should some one have to make 10-20-30mil to play a game. I know its entertainment but is it that necessary in today’s world, in my opinion not.
I'm not saying players shouldn't get what’s coming to them, but they and their fat cat agents need to get a reality check. The owners and their prices are going to come down if people don't go to games and the sponsors drop off.
Seriously if you live in so. cal. look car dealers and their over stock and then go down to the port and it is full of more autos. Business is falling in the states at this point
And we are worried about pro sports, at this time I will continue to watch and support college sports.
Can't really afford time and gas to the game and then ticket price and is and hotdog & a beer really worth 10+ bucks I think not.
Posted by: pk-mesa | November 28, 2008 at 07:59 AM
wow,can't you just see the writing on the wall .why is it asking so much to sign manny AND a number 1?ned has alot of work to do
Posted by: michael | November 28, 2008 at 09:20 AM
I have been a Dodger fan going back to Drysdale/Koufax. This years pennant race was exhilarating.
There was great anticiapation going into the free agent season that the Dodgers would pony-up, and extend/keep key individuals (i.e., Ramirez, Blake) that made 2008 so exciting.
The Dodger's attendance is close to the highest in the league approaching 4 million visitors per year. Our family spends close to seventy dollars per ballpark visit to feed a family of four on hot dogs, soft drinks, and beer. Thats okay provided the team is competitive.
What makes me angry is to hear the McCourt's spout off like they owe the fans not to spend money/or to redirect to other uses (i.e., ballfields for fans), is a cop-out, and is being disingenuious.
They are more interested in not spending money than fielding a champoinship team. Enough of these people!
If they are not interested in fielding a championship team, then sell the team to someone who is going to 'maintain the stewardship' for our great city.
Get lost!
Posted by: RDL | November 28, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Hey Dodger fans:
Here's how to tell the McCourts off.
If they're going to use the economy as an excuse totake a wait-and-see attitude about top-tier free agents, then we as fans have every right to take a wait-and-see attitude about tickets.
The Dodgers called me earlier this month begging me to re-up my package. I'm not inclined to buy advance tickets for a team that features Angel Berroa and Chin-lung Hu as its starting keystone.
Fans have only one way to protest ownership: don't buy tickets. If people start staying away in droves, the McCourts will get the message quickly.
Posted by: SaMo | November 28, 2008 at 11:24 AM