Lip Man 1

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 29, 2015 -> 06:48 PM) I actually laughed out loud at that statement. I am not quite sure what an economist would do with financial statements, but it would be entertaining to watch. Also the idea of demanding that a sports franchise should have to be subject to an audit just for the sake of the fans is laugh out loud funny. I won't even get into the false dichotomy of being worth a lot of money meaning that you automatically have the ability to spend it on something else. My point is there is plenty of evidence showing the Sox could actually spend a lot more money if they wanted to both at the major league level and the minor league system. I've heard from two individuals over the years with connections to the Sox Board of Directors. They have told me on separate occasions the Sox haven't lost money in years. But feel free to keep blaming the fans who pays the freight instead of the millionairs with all the financial advantages. That's your choice and I laugh out loud at anyone who takes that approach. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 29, 2015 -> 01:07 PM) Again, take Edwin Jackson from the Cubs. They make a mistake, no big deal, they just go out and sign Jon Lester instead. For us, John Danks arm falls off and we hope he can rebuild his value enough to be able to deal him without losing too much more money. For the White Sox historically it has been EITHER fund the farm system OR add players to the major league team. For the Sox to fund the minors at that sort of level, it requires less money spent at the major league level. Teams with higher resources do both. And who is to say what those resource limits are? Until an independent economist gets to take a look at Sox finances we'll never know what they could or could not do. Circumstantial evidence over a number of years (to go along with the revenue being generated by MLB) points to the possibility of the Sox being able to spend more and do both if they chose to. It was like when Veeck owned the team the second time, conventional thinking was he had no money. That was far from the truth, you look at the names on the Sox Board of Directors under Veeck and you found some of the richest people in America like the guy who owned Pizer Chemicals. It was a matter if pride with Veeck that he refused to go back and ask them for more money and promised them a profit every season. The reality was the Sox could have spent like the Yankees if they wanted to...they chose not to do so. I get the sense that at times that same philosophy was in place with the Sox and may still be. Just don't know for sure. But I go back to my original point. Given the tax payer funded stadium, given the lease advantages from the state, given the improvements made to the ballpark (and not by JR's money) the White Sox have the first, second, third obligation to field a good competitive club on a consistent basis BEFORE having the right (or the gall) to call out their fan base in any way shape or form. And that goes for their supporters wherever they may be. The ownership group has done some very good things...they've also done some really stupid things which have put them in the position they are in. The fans didn't sign Adam LaRoche, the fans didn't trade for Nick Swisher, the fans didn't sign Adam Dunn just to name a few examples or give a big contract to a stiff like Jeff Keppinger. That was ownership / front office. Period. Just my opinion. Mark

LDF: The fact that the Sox basically were not able to be seen by Chicagoans when they first moved to WFLD (because of the technical issues as well as older TV sets not getting the channel without a converter box) and then SportsVision for the 80's meant generations of kids grew up as Cub fans because that's basically all they could get. It was a major decision that badly impacted the franchise in my opinion. Mark

QUOTE (flavum @ Sep 29, 2015 -> 10:19 AM) I'm going to guess if you're on this site regularly, it means you're a huge White Sox fan, and you just want them to make better decisions that will lead them to more wins and sustained success. The frustration of White Sox fans is completely warranted and valid. If anyone here doesn't have something critical of the White Sox organization, then you're fooling yourself. Until they make some more organizational moves, they're not going to win and they'll get exactly what they deserve at the box office and lower tv/radio ratings. It's all on the organization, not the consumers. EXACTLY!!!!!!!!! You go to a bad restaurant you are under no obligation to return if the meal stinks. The White Sox are a business yes, but not like the corner hardware store or the local grocery. They are also a public trust and Eddie Einhorn was quoted directly as using that phrase in the forward to Rich Lindberg's White Sox encyclopedia. That means those owners also have an obligation, it's not all on the fan base. That's a ludicrous idea. The White Sox franchise historically has been the victim of some things that have been outside of their control (the perception of the neighborhood, the Tribune Company buying the Cubs with the built in media ties in place) but they have also been responsible for shooting themselves in the foot on many occasions. (leaving WGN in 1967, SportsVision, threatening to move and basically extorting a new stadium on the taxpayer's dime, the "White Flag Trade" to name a few.) For such smart businessmen who put themselves into position to own a pro sports franchise, they have made some incredibly short signed decisions over the decades. And that goes back to Charles Comiskey. Sorry, I get really pissed off when anyone places the blame completely on the fan base. I remember the passage from the book Lords of the Realm by John Helyar where it was asked how the Dodgers could draw so many people year after year. The answer from the Dodgers person he spoke with was, "because we kiss the fans asses..." If blame is going to be placed for the Sox situation, yes the fans could do more but the major obligation by FAR lies with ownership to give them a reason to come out (and having remarks made at least four times just this year by Cooper and Williams insulting said fan base comes straight out of "stupid business tactics 101). Mark

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Sep 29, 2015 -> 10:01 AM) The team has won 90 games only 6 times in the 35 years JR's been in charge. In those years it takes everybody by surprise and its all over before they realize what happened. Then its back to mediocrity. Historically that's a pretty accurate description. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 29, 2015 -> 08:17 AM) But I thought winning was all that mattered? In my opinion its certainly the most important aspect especially with the Sox...but to claim that it's "all" (as in 100%) that matters in the overall health of a franchise is being myopic. Mark

From Tuesday's Sun-Times: http://chicago.suntimes.com/baseball/7/71/...-sox-nowhere-go Mark

QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Sep 28, 2015 -> 03:45 PM) the sox had two of their best attended years ever when the Dan Ryan was completely shut down. And 2007 they lost 90 games! The red line project had little impact in 2013 as the green line station served all riders from the red line. And the sox reduced parking fees as a buffer. Your argument is invalid. Possibly. All I know is what I read on various sites and the expressways situation and the el stops are brought up on a regular basis. Take it for what it's worth. And that doesn't invalidate the second part of the comment, making the playoffs more often than once every seven seasons. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 28, 2015 -> 11:59 AM) Why is that a detriment to the Sox, but not the Cubs? Have never been to Wrigley Field (literally) so I don't know what the neighborhood is like. Have heard it's more young, upscale, yuppie-like. I do know that historically the Sox have been fighting perceptions about the area since the social unrest of the 1960's. That's unfair to be sure but perception becomes reality in the mind of the public over time and that's something of a reality for the Sox. I personally know of many Sox fans who are older who simply refuse to go into the area around U.S. Cellular Field. Mark

QUOTE (Jake @ Sep 28, 2015 -> 11:39 AM) I think one of the biggest big picture limitations the Sox have is the location of their ballpark. It doesn't make success impossible by any stretch, but I think it is a big part of the reason that the baseline for attendance is so low. The location does have something of an impact to be sure. The expressways seem to constantly have repairs being done to them. Can't remember much of a time period when every thing was always open for traveling on. It does force fans to make a choice at times. Then you had the closings of some el-stops and construction on them too. However there's nothing that can be done about moving the stadium not at this point anyway. Which means the other option to draw fans is to consistently win. That doesn't mean making the playoffs every single season (as some have alluded to) but you certainly have to make it more often than once every seven years (which is the 'success' rate for this ownership group, five times in almost 35 years) Mark

QUOTE (captain54 @ Sep 28, 2015 -> 09:04 AM) I think bottom line, what is keeping the fans away and what will continue to keep the fans away is the staid, unmoving, inability to change the approach and higher level personnel year after year, despite the same crappy results.. The Sox are 67 games and counting under .500 since late 2012, a one game improvement so far from 2014, and yet.. chance are high that the same bunch of mopes in the front office, Cooper, Ventura, etc. will all be back.. it just shows a lack of progressive thinking and stubbornness to stick to an approach that isn't working… and they wonder why people don't show up Well said. The Sox simply refuse to accept change as a needed part of any organization. I'm not advocating change for changes sake or constant change (which leads to constant chaos) but you have to be willing to admit when things aren't working, when a philosophy (of rebuilding while contending) simply doesn't achieve what you want and move on. That and the fact that to me there is a group mindset on looking at the problems in the same vein, which complicates things. (Not blaming those folks, that's human nature when the same people have been together for so long.) Mark

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Sep 27, 2015 -> 08:58 AM) You can't change the philosophy of the White Sox without changing ownership... I don't care who you bring in to run the team. Agree completely. Mark

24th time the Sox held an opponent to three runs or less...and lost. We suck, period. Oh welcome to another losing season. Ain't life grand! LOL. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2015 -> 11:37 AM) Kane and Toews are not a small part of the picture. They are the freaking franchise. They certainly are a large part but two guys alone can't win championships either regardless of how great they are. Even MJ and Scottie needed some help. Mark

My house is fine as well as my family. Thanks for your concern, always appreciated. Mark

QUOTE (Mike F. @ Sep 25, 2015 -> 09:30 AM) Imagine how bad the attendance would be if they did blow everything up? It's not good now (15,000 or so a game I think), and that's with stars like Sale, Abreu, etc still on the team. If those guys left, I wouldn't be surprised if the attendance went under 10,000 a game. They'd have to give away tickets most likely. With all the discounts and special codes aren't they basically doing that now? Let's put this this way (and I'm not necessarily advocating a complete tear down) how have the last nine years of "rebuilding while contending" worked? Mark

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 24, 2015 -> 05:23 PM) ok, no offense, but i needed to get into this discussion. ref to the sox, while it is true in the sox getting Jose. but the sox still has a team that is riddle in holes and no help coming ..... second, other teams has a good, knowledgeable management from the team managers all the way up to the upper FO. LDF: EXACTLY but some folks continue to be so obtuse as to not understand it for their own reasons apparently. Yet again my point wasn't just Kris Bryant exactly...only him, it was any of a bunch of good young players they have up and down that organization. And for that matter other organizations like the Cardinals, Pirates, Astros et al. Why is that so hard to understand? Mark

QUOTE (Saufley @ Sep 24, 2015 -> 04:55 PM) I, for one, appreciate your showing the most negative approach because I believe that is how most Sox fans feel!! Yours and Captains posts are right on!! Saufley: I wish I didn't have to. I'd rather not but "it's time" (sorry LOL) that people need to be hit in the head with a 2 X 4 to get them to wake up. And I hope the Sox take the same attitude, everything isn't close to smelling like roses. Maybe if they take that approach they'll do some things differently and if some things go their way next year they can be ahead of the curve in certain aspects. Mark

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 24, 2015 -> 03:19 PM) Maybe if Black Jack would have showed up in the playoffs things would have been different. It is funny how you rip loyalty but are loyal to any White Sox employee who speaks to you, and you totally disregard their failures. 1993 playoffs 0-2 10.00 ERA. Yeah Jack not your fault. Also when the Cubs made it to 2 in a row earlier this decade, the White Soc actually won more playoff games these years. Dick: And it's a fact McDowell and Fernandez were tipping their pitches according to Cito Gaston. They lost all four games in 93. Those guys were to good for that to happen without some help. And the Sox brain trust apparently never picked up on it. And also just to clue you in, Jack was just as hard on himself for his failures as he was to blame others. And to be clear one final time Dick, I rip loyalty when it impacts and interferes with the ultimate goal...winning baseball games, winning championships. A blind man can see that loyalty is so highly regarding by this organization that it's handicapping the franchise badly. Why do you think Ventura's returning? Because he's a great manager? LOL. But feel free to think otherwise, in five years time the Sox will be selling 'hope' to the masses because that's the only excuse they'll have left. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 24, 2015 -> 03:16 PM) The Marlins also have had 8 people manage their team since 2010 and 0 playoff appearances to show for it. They are about the polar opposite of the "loyalty" meme. Southside: Personally I'd rather be disloyal and win myself but that's just me. Loyalty is a wonderful thing especially in today's day and age but when loyalty stops accountability then you have just as big of an issue as having a revolving door no? Mark

And with that lack of offense yet again the Sox have guaranteed themselves another non-winning season. Best they could do would be to go 81-81 if they won out. And..that..isn't..happening. THAT'S THE 23RD TIME THE SOX HAVE ALLOWED AN OPPONENT THREE RUNS OR LESS...AND LOST! Wow! Bottom five guys in the lineup all hitting .250 or less. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 24, 2015 -> 02:57 PM) They had one step into the starting rotation, his name was Carlos Rodon. True, Rodon will be an outstanding pitcher. One who can make an impact every five days. My original statement stands, where is the Sox Kris Bryant an everyday player with that kind of impact ready to come up from the minor leagues? Mark

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Sep 24, 2015 -> 01:13 PM) Why do 2005 and 2008 have to be outliers? They still won 90 games in 2006, and that was with every starting pitcher performing significantly worse than the year before. Hell if Buehrle just has his usual season we would have made the playoffs that year. 2003 and 2004 they weren't too far off either (83 wins with your two best hitters out the whole year isn't too shabby, who knows what would have happened if Frank and Maggs were healthy). We were also a couple small things going our way from making the playoffs in 2010 and 2012. It's not like we're the Marlins who lose 90+ games every season except for the two completely random seasons when everything came together. The last few seasons have been rough but from 2000-2012 the White Sox were usually in playoff contention. Things certainly haven't been great, but it hasn't been quite as bad as you're making it seem. Omar: I agree with you... the problem is going back to the 50's the Sox are always "close" but never get it done. Something always jumps up and bites them in the ass. Again I can only restate history, they are the only one of the original 16 pre expansion franchises to have never made the playoffs in consecutive seasons. We're talking 115 years. Even the clownish Cubs have been able to pull that one off. What does that say about the Sox? Or do you (not necessarily you personally) start believing in "curses..." LOL. Like Jack McDowell told me once the Sox haven't won more often because they've had "bad players, bad managers and bad general managers." Hard to argue with his remarks. And it also says something when the brain-dead Marlins have won more World Series in their history than the Sox got to the World Series between 1919 and 2005. Mark

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 24, 2015 -> 12:13 PM) If Jeff Samardzija was Jake Arreitta, and Jake Areitta, Jeff Samardzija, Theo, who offered Shark $85 million, wouldn't be a genius, and Rick Hahn would be a boy wonder, and KW would have had nothing to do with the treade. But in typical White Sox fashion it didn't turn out for the Sox benefit did it? And there as Shakespeare once wrote "lies the rub..." LOL. Mark

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 24, 2015 -> 02:18 PM) Exactly. People are so focused on LaRoche vs. LHP, they completely ignore how horrible Abreu was vs. LHP. LaRoche is supposed to be bad, Abreu not. The team was just horrible at the start and it snowballed. Any time it seemed they might turn the corner, another clunker. It was a bad year. The Sox talent level isn't as bad as it is made out to be. Every team has holes. Mike Olt was the Cubs starting 3B on Opening Day. Not relevant because everyone knew Bryant would be up in 20 days and Olt was simply a temporary fill in. Last I looked the Sox don't have a Kris Bryant ready to step in someplace. Mark