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?
My brother and I have decided that after idiotic statements like this that the McCourts need to sell. Check any blog (dodgerblues, etc) and you will see the hate for these two is quite strong. As for my personal approach, I just recently received an invoice for my season tickets--if I don't see Manny or a CC type player signed I am not going to renew. If I want to go to a game, I can just troll craigslist the day of the game and get tickets for half price.
Posted by: JMK | November 28, 2008 at 02:26 PM
It´s seems there´s gonna be a warm winter in SoCal. Sorry to say this but it´s how all the ticketholders feels, as i am: totally fleeced
Posted by: Tio | November 28, 2008 at 02:34 PM
the fan's response should be to boycott opening day. i know it will never happen, but if the dodgers decide to give us angel berroa instead of furcal, raul ibanez instead of manny and andy pettite instead of CC, thereby saving $50million dollars (sure, they can spend $5million on a few fields and keep the remaining $45million), then the only response is to ensure their revenue goes down by $50million by not going to games, not buying merchandise, and for those that hold the purse strings on ad money, stop paying for those eye-sore ads that now litter what was once the most beautiful stadium in all of baseball (but which has now just become a neon-lighted billboard). Boycott Opening Day. That will send a huge message.
Posted by: HI Dodger Fan | November 28, 2008 at 02:50 PM
I need way too much space to express my anger.
But in short this leaves no doubt in my mind that we will not get Manny, CC, or even any 2nd tier guys. This tells me to expect Angel Berroa at shortstop, McDonald as our # 3 starter, God knows who at 3rd, and an outfield of Ethier, Kemp and Jones/Pierre.
I get it McCourt. You got burned by giving loads of cash to Pierre and Jones.
IT IS COMPLETELY UNNACCEPTABLE TO EVEN BEGIN TO COMPARE THEM TO MANNY OR CC. AND TO CLAIM THAT NOT SPENDING IS DOING FANS A SERVICE?!!! WATCHING A BALLGAME IS THE ONLY ESCAPE FOR ALOT OF FANS TO GET AWAY FROM THE UNCERTAIN TIMES AND CHEER FOR SOMETHING WE'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT.
Trust me, we will get over the fact that you pay Manny $25mil while our 401k's are in the crapper if the team is actually relevant.
Posted by: Mike G | November 28, 2008 at 03:38 PM
Totally agree - I will be answering Jamie's pity party with my wallet. I got the call last week from Dodger stadium about my mini plan, and I didn't renew - I told them until I see what kind of team we have, there's no way I am going to lay out money for mediocrity - especially not when the prices keep going up while the money becomes more precious. They can't possibly equate a significant tax write-off (the 50 fields) with the outlay required to keep our team competitive. The initial offer to Manny was offensive, and though I don't think Raffy is good for four years, I still think there needed to be more effort made to keep him here. Until I see a real effort to keep our team competitive, I will settle for TV - that is, if I can even stomach watching them lose at all.
Posted by: Jen | November 28, 2008 at 06:04 PM
Now is the time for one good commissioner to come to the aid of Dodger fans. Unfortunatly the one we got is just a piece of crap. He wanted this three division baseball so the owners could fleece the fans and make it look like your always in contention. If he wasn`t such a piece of crap He would have stepped in and asked Frank and {Kathy-Lee) Jamie to sell. Second largest tv market and over twenty years since they have won or appeared in a world series. These two bums who own this team have got to go. As a lifelong Dodger fan, I`m 71, I am thoroughly fed up, what we have got to do is hit the assholes where it hurts, in the wallet. Just let them start drawing less than two million fans a year, and we will get rid of them. It is now more than apparent that all they think about is money. I think the expression goes If you can`t or won`t run with the big dogs stay in the parking lot. Lets just go to where the owner appreciates the fans lets root and go to see Arte Moreno`s Angels.
Posted by: Jim McVeigh | November 28, 2008 at 07:25 PM
The Dodgers ownership act like they play in Kansas City, Tampa Bay, or Montreal. This is a big market team, and big market teams spend big cash for free agents. Specially when they raised ticket/parking every season and you average over 3+ million fans. I would much rather see the McCourts come out and say, that they can't afford a big market player instead of feeding me this bulls**t explanation.
I also received a call and received an e-mail from Dodgers to buy tickets for next season. Are they crazy? It's time for the McCourts to spend money on top free agents and act like a big market team, otherwise do all us fans a favorite and sell the team to someone that actually can. I hate the McCourts so much.
Posted by: dcerros | November 28, 2008 at 07:54 PM
right on bk..and right on plascke( though i totally disagree with him on manny)..baseball is even a more needed outlet in severe economic times than ever...it is where you go to escape wether in person at a game or listening to vin call a game...it is precisely in these tough economic times, with los angeles as one of the ground zeros of the subprime meltdown that we need to field a team that will win the whole f-----g thing..and i would even go an extra step and tell you that with dodgers as world champs, and yes they can do it with manny and c.c., the mood of angelenos will greatly improve and it may, just may, be the impetus to turn our local economy around by instilling hope. afterall baseball is the game of life and if fans see the underdog dodgers do it, then why not them ?
Posted by: cramsib | November 28, 2008 at 09:51 PM
the chemistry that existed with the dodgers in september and october was something that you can't put a number on. it was priceless..considering that the dodgers netted at least $10 million on Manny whom they got for free, and considering the accomplishments of the team as a group, ownership should do what it takes to retain Manny and acquire c.c...it is precisely because of the bad economy that they should get in front of this thing and get the deal done..the goodwill they will garner will buy them them a lot with the fans. i know it would with me. and if they don't, i have one thing to say to the mccourts...go to hell!
Posted by: cramsib | November 28, 2008 at 10:09 PM
So glad to see everyone is upset about this as I have been. I've always given the McCourts the benefit of doubt but this really set me off. Spend your own millions on charity McCourts & spend the dodgers $ on the dodgers. I don't "feel weird" about giving Manny or CC millions of dollars because THATS WHAT A-LIST PROFESSIONAL BALL PLAYERS MAKE!!! If you are uncomfortable with that then get out of the business. I've been conned into paying extra for tix, parking etc because of those salaries. I want good ballplayers. I used to make it 20 or so games a year. Over the last couple seasons that's proved difficult with the ever rising prices. But going to the stadium is always my escape. If they want me to pay the prices that they ask for tickets, parking, food, beer, and merch then it better be a fricking competative & entertaining team out there on the field. The end of this season was so much fun and even though the Phillies came in and crushed us I had a lot hope for next year. Ever since then it feels like Ned & the McCourts are sucking it out of me by the hour. It's increasingly obvious that we won't have the same team coming back, forget about a better team! If we can't chase some A-list talent what happens? Visquel at short, Andruw Jones in the lineup everyday, randy wolf back in the rotation? Whats next Steve Lyons doing all the broadcasts because Vin costs too much?
Jamie if you are really concerned about giving to charity, how about you reward fans who contribute their time/& or money with your seats beside the dugout? Or if I help fix up a youth ball field I get to take batting practice with Matt Kemp? Because I'd love to have that experience but that $500 needs to go to my rent.
Posted by: Jukuren | November 29, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Didn't I read recently somewhere that 250 fans showed up to pay $500 each to take batting practice at Dodger Stadium with Ethier and others? 250 times $500 equals $125,000, which pays for one of those fields. So much for McCourt charity. (Or did he us that money to pay a significant part of those young, underpaid, talented players that carried this team, unlike Jones, Schmidt,and Co.) And speaking of charity, why not ask Jones and Schmidt, who have been the two biggest charities in Dodger history, each to pony up $2.5 mil to pay for these fields as a payback to the fans for their pathetic contributions to LA the past two years. After all, they both made over $5 mil per home run/win last season! And I'm sure they could write it off on their taxes. And finally, when are we going to see Jones on the TV program "The Biggest Loser"? Just look what those ordinary people go thru for $100,000, which is a hell of a lot less that $18 mil!
Posted by: Cordova Blue | November 29, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Why can't this article be in my print edition of the paper?
Why is the print edition of the sports section filled with dreck and this excellent article buried?
Posted by: pthomas745 | November 29, 2008 at 02:59 PM
I am in the minority on this one, but I applaud Jamie for coming out against the ridiculous contracts given to MLB players in this day and age. I would love nothing more than to see more teams follow suit and perhaps put a stop to the out of control spending on players salaries. I realize this is a pipe dream because of concerns about collusion, etc., but it would be great to see teams do this and who better to take the lead than my beloved Dodgers.
There are other ways to put together winning, exciting ballclubs than by spending ridiculous sums on over-the-hill, overpaid ballplayers (Manny). I would fully support the team if they came out and said henceforth they will not offer ANY player more than $X million per season and they stuck to it.
This would be acceptable to me, but only if the McCourts said furthermore they will drop prices 50% across the board on tickets, parking, food, beverages, etc. This is a plan I would support, if you are not going to spend money on free agents, then you better allow the fans to attend the games at a reasonable price.
I hate the current system of paying high prices to watch a baseball game so the team can lavish huge sums on the players. This is why even though I can afford it, I refuse to attend more than 1 baseball game at Dodger Stadium a year (usually because I get free tickets). This is my own personal protest against the current system. As much as I love the Dodgers, I will just watch them at home.
Posted by: HardHittin25 | November 29, 2008 at 06:36 PM
Brian -- in fact, Jamie specifically said it takes three to tango: Boras, the Dodgers, and Manny. The McCourts are just a continual, slow-motion pratfall.
Posted by: Rob McMillin | November 29, 2008 at 10:39 PM
The bottom line is that the Dodgers need to field a very competitive team and raise their level of play to the best teams in MLB. The mentality of winning the West under the theory that once they win the West or the wildcard then "anyone" can win, is a low goal for this organization to set and has resulted in a horrible 20-year track record.
I do not care how much they spend or how little. Just win! Get the right players from the farm system, free-agency, trades , overseas, or the 41 plus 9 new and existing so-called "dreamfields." Make it happen or bring in new management and/or owners.
Posted by: Joe the Plumber | November 30, 2008 at 06:22 AM
This is from a piece by Peter Gammons on ESPN.com:
"Many had thought the Dodgers would be into Sabathia big-time, but as several baseball people have pointed out, their statements on Manny Ramirez indicate that the McCourts still are trying to bring the Dodgers' revenue streams into the 21st century. And with holes to fill at second, short, third, the starting rotation and in the bullpen, there are a lot of concerns to address."
I absolutely agree that Jamie McCourt's comments were completely off base, and I certainly don't buy the "economy" excuse. But Gammons' comments about "bringing the Dodgers' revenue streams into the 21st century" is probably at the root of the problem. Large market team that they are, the Dodgers still lack the major revenue source that teams in Boston and New York have, namely a regional network. I know some of you are probably tired of hearing me mention this, but, in fact, it is the difference maker in those cities. Add to that the new ballbarks about to open for the Yankees and Mets, and you can rest assured that the Dodgers revenue stream comes nowhere close to that of these teams. In fact, both the Yankees and Mets both also well exceeded 4,000,000 in attendance in 2008 (and the Yankees have done it several times before).
Maybe the McCourts will surprise us all and sign a top free agent or two; but don't hold your breath waiting. Perhaps with the revenues derived from the new spring training complex there will be more money available in the next year. And maybe by the time 2012 rolls around, the Dodgers will be out from under the contractual obligations that tie them to FOX, and they will then be able to establish their own regional network. The completion of the Dodger Stadium renovation project should also result in a major source of revenue.
Whatever the case, until all the pieces are in place, we are not likely to see the Dodgers spending lavishly. However, as they get closer to building strong revenue streams, we are likely to see increased spending on players. Also, removing AJ and Schmidt from the payroll after this year, can't hurt (although, our currently cheap younger players, won't be so cheap in the years ahead).
I imagine that the McCourt's are also banking on the Dodgers remaining competitive in the relatively weak NL West, thereby keeping their attendance at least at current levels, with the possibility of additional revenues being derived from playoff appearances.
As I noted above, despite everything I've said, perhaps the McCourt's will give us a surprise signing or two. At the very least they need to shore up the infield. More would be nice.
Because it's being buried here at the bottom of a very long post, I will probably repeat this when the next thread is posted. I just received the latest issue of Baseball America, which features the top 10 prospects of all the American League Central teams (the National League West will follow in a later issue). It seems that the #1 prospect in the Cleveland Indians system is none other than Carlos Santana, the same Carlos Santana that the Dodgers gave away to get Casey Blake. What's even more disturbing is the reason he was included in the deal. Apparently, he (along with Jon Meloan) were included when Cleveland agreed to pick up the remaining $2 million on Blake's contract. Bonuses greater than $2 million are regularly given to top amateur prospects. Considering that Santana was already an accomplished young professional prospect at a demanding position (catcher), you would think that $2 million would not have been enough to get the deal done. Again, this is a further indication that the McCourt's are simply not willing to spend, at least at this time.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | November 30, 2008 at 06:39 AM
Brooklyn Dodger--another excellent, fact-laden summary of the situation. I would like to see you apply your skills to the facebook page.
Dudes,
Anybody remember that financial commercial that was on about a year ago, where the guy is going about his upper-middle class life, enjoying all sorts of luxuries like a new car, a swimming pool, and a fancy BBQ, and all the while he's talking about how much he owes for everything he's using? How he overextended all his credit? How his finances are in ruin? And he ends with that weird, exasperated smile while riding a lawnmover, saying "I'm in debt up to my eyeballs... somebody please help me!" Anybody remember that commercial?
That's the McCourts.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | November 30, 2008 at 11:43 AM
Having been able to think about this situation for a while I have come to the conclusion that this is the beginning of the end for the McCourts. If McCourt thinks the economy is bad now just wait until next offseason. We all know McCourt had money issues before he "bought" the team. He actually had to borrow 145 million dollars from Fox to "buy" the team.
Next year will be even worse for the McCourt and Frank knows that. With the new administrations Tax increases to the rich, the continuing devaluation of the dollar and the runaway inflation in this country now McCourt won't stand a chance next season or the season after that. All teams will be struggling actually,
McCourt won't be the owner much longer. He can't afford it. He couldn't even afford when our fake economy wasn't in complete collapse so you can only imagine how things are for him now. I can see his point about the economy and its a very very valid one but him and Jaime completely screwed up trying to explain their situation to people and it as pretty much set off the chain of events that I think will eventually lead to new owners.
Posted by: Adrian | November 30, 2008 at 12:31 PM
Adrian,
If memory serves me correct, I believe that McCourt paid off his entire debt to FOX (probably News Corp.) a while back after selling all of his Boston real estate holdings when the real estate market was at its height.
I know that Dodger Stadium was refinanced for 25 years at favorable rates, and I'm sure that the Dodger Stadium renovation project, which will reportedly cost upwards of a half billion dollars will also be financed over a long period with favorable terms. But those are investments backed by a tangible asset, and with an expected revenue return.
My best guess is that McCourt is a savvy businessman, and that he has a long term plan to bring the Dodgers' revenue streams into the 21st century. That plan has probably not yet reached the stage at which the Dodgers are ready to throw big dollars around. Suffice to say, this is all guesswork on my part, since like everyone else on this blog, I'm not privy to inside Dodger financial information. Whatever the case, McCourt has his timetable and we have ours, and ne're the twain shall meet.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | November 30, 2008 at 02:38 PM
I've pretty much have branded the Blue as being a sub-par team for the next couple of season, I wouldn't be surprise if it takes another 20 years to get back to the NLCS! I'm not going to waste anymore of my time on this Jamie McCourt rant about would you want youth baseball fields or quality talent ultimatum! After looking around some of the sports websites I ran into this blog by Peter Gammons. I really don't blame Manny for not coming back because he probably knows that this team is going to be awful a couple of seasons, I think this really goes with Raffy as well.
Peter Gammons Blog
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3732933&name=gammons_peter.
Posted by: Matsuda | November 30, 2008 at 10:48 PM
I think Brooklyn said it best. I am sure Frank has a plan and maybe it takes a few years to get there, I believe he will make $ because he is a good businessman. However he is a BAD baseball owner. If you are in a rebuild movement and are about cutting payroll, just suck it up and admit it like SD did or some other teams. Fans understand every decade or so you need to scrap everything and start over. Cut ticket prices and get a following of developed players and not mercenaries. I don't see how Frank is uppping ticket prices and then deciding to slash payroll and star power. It is insulting to fans, and just a bad move by an owner. Yeah he got burned by lots of bad signings and might have learned a lesson, but that is no justification for fleecing the fans to pick up the bill. As a fan I want to pay to see a product to forget life and my dwindling 401K. Charity is nice and all, but to shame your fans into thinking they should put $ into charity rather than a competitive team is asinine. Their job is to win championships, not to rebuild LA. Don't get me wrong its great they want to give back to the community, and it is noble to do so. My problem is that they have a job and a responsibility as owners of the dodgers to win and bring the city glory is used to have regularly. For all we know Frank might start the public parks then close them to build condos for profit later, but that is besides the point. As a team owner you don't shame your fans into accepting a sub-par product. Its like saying going to hell is a good thing because it is always warm and you'll have a good tan. Sorry Jamie, I'm not buying it. Either buy big name talent and we will pay for it, or dump salary and build from within, but just make sure to cut prices if you do that. I like the other posters ideas of boycotting the games, but I am not going to the halos, sorry Christopher Marc, I agree with you the angels are better in every way right now, but I can never bleed red after blue.
One final thought; the big problem for this sucktitude we have to deal with is Frank for buying the dodgers under such a bad deal, but i blame FOX foremost for ruining the team. FOX screwed the pooch, running this team like a corporation and not a franchise.
Posted by: poppinfresh | December 01, 2008 at 08:06 AM
Its good to see the National Media reporting on this. Keith Law said its simply bad economics to compare $30 Million in donations to spending $30 on CC or Manny to bring in $35-40.
There is so much written here to applaud. But two deals were made last year to win it all, and instead of spend money we spent prospects. With out the WS championship the fans lost out, but McCourt also lost future CHEAP stars.
A team that is depleted so badly by the FA market this year and an owner who is afraid money, cheap playnrs ready to make the jump is what this team needs. ANd now they have even less of those.
Happy Dodger Fans are going to be hard to find.
Posted by: SteelMohawk | December 01, 2008 at 05:15 PM
maybe the mccourts should ask for a bailout. everyone else is doing it. lol.
Posted by: stephanie | December 01, 2008 at 06:10 PM
I swear my computer is possessed. I tried leaving a comment and didn't let me. Here are some points that I wanted to share after reading all of the comments......
1) I think that the McCourt's should ask for a bailout. Everyone is getting one, why can't we. (haha)
2) Boycotting is nice, but no one ever does it. Ever.
3) I hate the high priced players as well, but it will never change. Ever.
4) I will never ever switch to the Angels. I may be pissed, but I am not a traitor.
Posted by: stephanie | December 01, 2008 at 06:48 PM
The longest morning after is turning into an even longer & more public walk of shame.
The McCourts are getting a little PDA, KISS'd as it were, as they find there' with "nowhere to run, nowhere to hide" if they're making it to ESPN page 2.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2
/story?page=081202/ramirezfield&sportCat=mlb Here's another perspective on the choice between 30 mil for a player or $ for kids.
Skate park for Manny, little league fields for Schmidt... at least it's cute, if you don't find it funny.
Posted by: lizzieinsb | December 03, 2008 at 07:59 PM