SoxNet: The Legacy of Jerry Reinsdorf

[Quin]

Dan Helpingstine is back with a column look at the legacy of White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf.

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/soxnet/2015/08/t...erry-reinsdorf/

[Lip Man 1]

It would take a book to really delve into his background and legacy. A very complex individual to be sure. I thought these quotes from my White Sox library would be of some interest:

 

“Eddie and I never discussed how to talk to reporters. We’ve just been ourselves. I always though Jack Kennedy was the kind of person I looked up to in that regard. He always gave the media a fair shake and understood you guys have a job to do. Without responsible people willing to divulge some accurate information, it’s hard to do it right. It was a much better approach then Nixon, who figured the media was his enemy. Doing it Kennedy’s way just makes a lot more sense to me. After all, nobody can buy the kind of advertising Chicago teams get. What other line of work finds newspapers assigning people to follow you around and write about how the business is doing every day? At Balcor, we have to hire a public relations firm to get our names in the paper. When baseball teams get that for free, it makes sense to cooperate.” – Jerry Reinsdorf to Bob Logan. From the book ‘Miracle On 35th Street.’ Pg. 154. Published 1983.

 

“The idea that I must talk to the media in order to know what is going on with our fans or the public is ludicrous. I communicate with fans on an almost daily basis and often hear comments from people on the street and in the ballpark. We have committed a lot of resources to market research each year, whether it is telephone or internet polling, mall intercepts, focus groups or in-park surveys. We believe these surveys are the most impartial way to hear from our fans. I don't think a media interview gives me the same type of insight into what our fans think and feel. Believe me, our fans tell us. They care and they are passionate. I like that about sports. The fact is that I do speak publicly when there is an issue of importance to our fans and to the franchises. I owe that to our fans. But again, I don't really think people want to hear from me or go to the game to see me. I hope not.” – Jerry Reinsdorf quoted on the “official” White Sox web site, www.whitesox.com, August 16, 2004.

 

As with any other individual he's done some remarkable things, some things that make you scratch your head and I'm sure he's done some things he wishes he could do over. (aka as he's publicly admitted regarding the firing of Tony LaRussa and the hiring of Hawk Harrelson as G.M.

 

Mark

Edited August 24, 2015 by Lip Man 1

[LDF]

this was a great article and i kinda got to give you credit for being understanding and tolerant. i would have imagine you probable could have given a lot example of , what i would consider his legacy. total and complete miscalculation on almost all of the ventures or opportunity to build on. mismanagement and mishandling of golden opportunities presented.

 

and esp in the last 15 yrs total inept running of the org, except for 1 yr.

[Saufley]

this was a great article and i kinda got to give you credit for being understanding and tolerant. i would have imagine you probable could have given a lot example of , what i would consider his legacy. total and complete miscalculation on almost all of the ventures or opportunity to build on. mismanagement and mishandling of golden opportunities presented.

 

and esp in the last 15 yrs total inept running of the org, except for 1 yr.

 

That is why a pro like a John McDonough is needed to NOW to run this organization!! But, we all know that will never happen.

[Lip Man 1]

That is why a pro like a John McDonough is needed to NOW to run this organization!! But, we all know that will never happen.

 

And McDonough folks grew up a Sox fan in case you don't know.

 

Mark

[Thad Bosley]

If facts have anything to do with the determination, his legacy as owner of the White Sox will be a very poor one, even with the accomplishment of 2005.

[LDF]

If facts have anything to do with the determination, his legacy as owner of the White Sox will be a very poor one, even with the accomplishment of 2005.

 

i am going to play devil's advocate.

 

shouldn't the world series give the owners a free ride???

 

considering how many yrs it was since the other world series win.

[nickofypres]

If facts have anything to do with the determination, his legacy as owner of the White Sox will be a very poor one, even with the accomplishment of 2005.

 

Agreed.

[LDF]

i will say this again, many yrs of wasted talent b/c of the owners never finishing off what was started.

 

the most of the 90's.

[Lip Man 1]

i am going to play devil's advocate.

 

shouldn't the world series give the owners a free ride???

 

considering how many yrs it was since the other world series win.

 

In my opinion no. It's not a lifetime pass.

 

They should be doing much better. Cleveland, Minnesota, Detroit all took turns dominating the division. Kansas City appears to be doing so now.

 

None of those cities has the advantages the Sox do in population, radio / TV deals, advertising and sponsorship possibilities.

 

Yet the Sox can't even figure out how to make the playoffs in consecutive seasons.

 

Let's put it this way, JR and EE have owned a major market team for 35 seasons. They've made the postseason five times and the overall post season record is 15-16, with 11 of those wins coming in 2005.

 

That's simply not acceptable to me.

 

Mark

 

[Quin]

In my opinion no. It's not a lifetime pass.

 

They should be doing much better. Cleveland, Minnesota, Detroit all took turns dominating the division. Kansas City appears to be doing so now.

 

None of those cities has the advantages the Sox do in population, radio / TV deals, advertising and sponsorship possibilities.

 

Yet the Sox can't even figure out how to make the playoffs in consecutive seasons.

 

Let's put it this way, JR and EE have owned a major market team for 35 seasons. They've made the postseason five times and the overall post season record is 15-16, with 11 of those wins coming in 2005.

 

That's simply not acceptable to me.

 

Mark

 

Granted, they've shared that market with a media juggernaut, in no small part due to Sports Vision. Kansas City needs more than one division title to dominate. The rest don't have championships to show for the domination.

[LDF]

In my opinion no. It's not a lifetime pass.

 

They should be doing much better. Cleveland, Minnesota, Detroit all took turns dominating the division. Kansas City appears to be doing so now.

 

None of those cities has the advantages the Sox do in population, radio / TV deals, advertising and sponsorship possibilities.

 

Yet the Sox can't even figure out how to make the playoffs in consecutive seasons.

 

Let's put it this way, JR and EE have owned a major market team for 35 seasons. They've made the postseason five times and the overall post season record is 15-16, with 11 of those wins coming in 2005.

 

That's simply not acceptable to me.

 

Mark

 

ref the bold...... that is what i was looking for.

 

but i would add 1 important word. Mismanagement

 

[Hatchetman]

That's a pretty good column. Accurate. JR misplayed his hand over and over again....

[Lip Man 1]

Granted, they've shared that market with a media juggernaut, in no small part due to Sports Vision. Kansas City needs more than one division title to dominate. The rest don't have championships to show for the domination.

 

Daniel:

 

That brings up the age old argument which I don't have an answer for.

 

Would you rather win one title or have the chance to win one (no guarantees) by consistently making the playoffs, like say the Twins in the 00's?

 

Guess it depends on your point of view.

 

Mark

 

[LittleHurt05]

Daniel:

 

That brings up the age old argument which I don't have an answer for.

 

Would you rather win one title or have the chance to win one (no guarantees) by consistently making the playoffs, like say the Twins in the 00's?

 

Guess it depends on your point of view.

 

Mark

 

I would rather win one title, but I would say that the guy who consistently made the playoffs was better at his job.

[Quin]

Daniel:

 

That brings up the age old argument which I don't have an answer for.

 

Would you rather win one title or have the chance to win one (no guarantees) by consistently making the playoffs, like say the Twins in the 00's?

 

Guess it depends on your point of view.

 

Mark

 

Win one.

[Lip Man 1]

Daniel:

 

I can certainly see both sides especially from an economic / business / attendance stand point.

 

Think the Sox would be having the issues they are having in attendance and media coverage if they made the playoffs in say 2000, 2003 (which they blew), 2005, 2006 (which they blew), 2008, 2010 (which they blew) and 2012 (which they blew) even if they didn't win the title in 2005?

 

It's a very complicated question depending on your perspective I guess.

 

Mark

[Dick Allen]

Daniel:

 

I can certainly see both sides especially from an economic / business / attendance stand point.

 

Think the Sox would be having the issues they are having in attendance and media coverage if they made the playoffs in say 2000, 2003 (which they blew), 2005, 2006 (which they blew), 2008, 2010 (which they blew) and 2012 (which they blew) even if they didn't win the title in 2005?

 

It's a very complicated question depending on your perspective I guess.

 

Mark

I'll take the win. I am always excited when the Sox make the playoffs, and disappointed when they bow out. There is nothing like winning playoff series though, especially the big one.

[Chisoxfn]

I'll take the win. I am always excited when the Sox make the playoffs, and disappointed when they bow out. There is nothing like winning playoff series though, especially the big one.

I don't think they would. I think if you consistently contend, you will get fan support. Will they get cranky and will you see some reduction, certainly (look at the 90's Braves and how at times, after years of making the playoffs, fans got complacent wanting / needing more). That said, even those complacent years, they still drew very well.

 

Bottom line, consistent winning is the only true recipe to succeed from an attendance perspective. Sure, some times can succeed anyway, but it takes a very rare situation for a consistent winner to not draw well. And the only real exception I can think of is the Rays, which is point #1 for why they either need a new stadium and / or need to move to another market (not sure that a stadium would do any good).

 

Honestly, if I were MLB and the Sox did all of the things Mark outlined and still couldn't draw, then to be frank, a change would have to be made because that just isn't acceptable. I'll also be honest, I'd probably rather be in the playoffs 10+ times in 20 years (and not win it) then twice in 20 years, but win it once. Bottom line, those other seasons would be miserable and that one season, while amazing, wouldn't make up for the rest. Heck, just look how antsy the entire fanbase is, just 10 years removed from the series. We have been awful the past 3 years and it isn't fun.

[Dick Allen]

I don't think they would. I think if you consistently contend, you will get fan support. Will they get cranky and will you see some reduction, certainly (look at the 90's Braves and how at times, after years of making the playoffs, fans got complacent wanting / needing more). That said, even those complacent years, they still drew very well.

 

Bottom line, consistent winning is the only true recipe to succeed from an attendance perspective. Sure, some times can succeed anyway, but it takes a very rare situation for a consistent winner to not draw well. And the only real exception I can think of is the Rays, which is point #1 for why they either need a new stadium and / or need to move to another market (not sure that a stadium would do any good).

 

Honestly, if I were MLB and the Sox did all of the things Mark outlined and still couldn't draw, then to be frank, a change would have to be made because that just isn't acceptable. I'll also be honest, I'd probably rather be in the playoffs 10+ times in 20 years (and not win it) then twice in 20 years, but win it once. Bottom line, those other seasons would be miserable and that one season, while amazing, wouldn't make up for the rest. Heck, just look how antsy the entire fanbase is, just 10 years removed from the series. We have been awful the past 3 years and it isn't fun.

But at least with White Sox fans, once the Sox won, making the playoffs wasn't good enough. Now maybe it will be for a little while, but it certainly wasn't in 2008. And if you technically make the playoffs as a WC and bow out after 1 game, is that really considered satisfying?

[LDF]

Daniel:

 

That brings up the age old argument which I don't have an answer for.

 

Would you rather win one title or have the chance to win one (no guarantees) by consistently making the playoffs, like say the Twins in the 00's?

 

Guess it depends on your point of view.

 

Mark

 

Mark, you make an interesting POV / statement. while i am not as learned as you and many i this site, i have always maintained that that cliche you wrote was made to justify the outcome of the time and the events of that team.

 

having that 1 title, fans and many can look back and justify that not making the playoff was ok. b/c of that 1 title.

 

making the playoff many times as just as good as never making the playoff.

 

it is nothing but excuses to vindicate the team and the org in general.

 

my point of view is my own and i do not look into the fluff of that org spews..... so i can say, i am greedy. i want it all.

 

i want the playoff, many times with the title wins.

 

good org people who are smart and yeah, is some cases ruthless can position the team to make that run.

 

but again, this is on me and my POV.

[Chisoxfn]

But at least with White Sox fans, once the Sox won, making the playoffs wasn't good enough. Now maybe it will be for a little while, but it certainly wasn't in 2008. And if you technically make the playoffs as a WC and bow out after 1 game, is that really considered satisfying?

No...I think one wc card game doesn't count. I don't even count that as making the playoffs. The playoffs start with an actual multi-game series. While I was disappointed in 2008, it was still fun. It is hard to consistently make the playoffs, let alone win the series...you really can't do the 2nd with any sort of success if you can't accomplish the first. My view is, build your teams to make the playoffs as much as possible...then see if you get hot. Play the odds in your favor. Best team doesn't always win in baseball, in fact, I'd argue of all major sports, the top team in baseball probably has the lowest correlation rate of winning a title then any other sport. I presume basketball would be the highest percentage followed by football and then hockey. Hockey is probably the closets to baseball.

 

I know one thing...sucking these past few years isn't what I want and I wouldn't want to suck for 10 years just so I have a shot to win once and then suck again. I wouldn't want to be the Marlins...two amazing seasons and a bunch of crap in between.

[LDF]

Daniel:

 

I can certainly see both sides especially from an economic / business / attendance stand point.

 

Think the Sox would be having the issues they are having in attendance and media coverage if they made the playoffs in say 2000, 2003 (which they blew), 2005, 2006 (which they blew), 2008, 2010 (which they blew) and 2012 (which they blew) even if they didn't win the title in 2005?

 

It's a very complicated question depending on your perspective I guess.

 

Mark

 

i am going to use the black hawks as this example, the hawks won 1 SC.... they did not sit on their laurels and enjoyed it, they went to work to improve the team .......

 

the hawks could have easily have reap all the benefits from winning the big one, instead they spent money to make it even better.

 

this falls on the sox ownership.

 

again basing on opinions. that is all that anyone can give.

 

 

[LDF]

I don't think they would. I think if you consistently contend, you will get fan support. Will they get cranky and will you see some reduction, certainly (look at the 90's Braves and how at times, after years of making the playoffs, fans got complacent wanting / needing more). That said, even those complacent years, they still drew very well.

 

Bottom line, consistent winning is the only true recipe to succeed from an attendance perspective. Sure, some times can succeed anyway, but it takes a very rare situation for a consistent winner to not draw well. And the only real exception I can think of is the Rays, which is point #1 for why they either need a new stadium and / or need to move to another market (not sure that a stadium would do any good).

 

Honestly, if I were MLB and the Sox did all of the things Mark outlined and still couldn't draw, then to be frank, a change would have to be made because that just isn't acceptable. I'll also be honest, I'd probably rather be in the playoffs 10+ times in 20 years (and not win it) then twice in 20 years, but win it once. Bottom line, those other seasons would be miserable and that one season, while amazing, wouldn't make up for the rest. Heck, just look how antsy the entire fanbase is, just 10 years removed from the series. We have been awful the past 3 years and it isn't fun.

 

$$ Bill Writz, said it all. appear that the FO's is doing something, make the playoff and the attendance will be near max. thus making the money that the owners want.

 

can anyone imagine what the sox fans would be doing if they made the playoff for 3 or 4 straight yrs??????

[LDF]

No...I think one wc card game doesn't count. I don't even count that as making the playoffs. The playoffs start with an actual multi-game series. While I was disappointed in 2008, it was still fun. It is hard to consistently make the playoffs, let alone win the series...you really can't do the 2nd with any sort of success if you can't accomplish the first. My view is, build your teams to make the playoffs as much as possible...then see if you get hot. Play the odds in your favor. Best team doesn't always win in baseball, in fact, I'd argue of all major sports, the top team in baseball probably has the lowest correlation rate of winning a title then any other sport. I presume basketball would be the highest percentage followed by football and then hockey. Hockey is probably the closets to baseball.

 

I know one thing...sucking these past few years isn't what I want and I wouldn't want to suck for 10 years just so I have a shot to win once and then suck again. I wouldn't want to be the Marlins...two amazing seasons and a bunch of crap in between.

nice..... really nice.