PDA

View Full Version : Reinsdorf calls out WMVP, Moronotti


Unregistered
02-13-2004, 12:01 AM
Well, naturally JR didn't say it himself. According to the Trib, JR is furious that WMVP didn't ask him before hiring Moronotti. MVP replies that they're not scared by JR cause basically his 2 teams under MVP contract aren't exactly setting the world on fire, ratings-wise... Can't blame him.

Reinsdorf declined to address the issue personally, opting to express his views through White Sox public relations director Scott Reifert.

"The thing we question is that they have invested millions of dollars in promoting these teams," Reifert said. "Now they are bringing in somebody who has made it his business to devalue those investments. It doesn't make sense from a business perspective."

Reifert acknowledges the nature of sports talk radio and says the teams don't have a problem accepting criticism from on-air personalities. But Mariotti, he contends, has demonstrated an agenda that precludes him from giving "a balanced and fair representation."

I love this quote from Station GM Bob Snyder:
"We each have to do what's best for our business," Snyder said. "The last I checked, we had little say over whether the Sox kept Bartolo Colon."


Radio Static for Reinsy (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-040212espn,1,2560795.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines)

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 12:10 AM
I agree they can do anything they want, but Mariotti is being a child about some of these issues. This feud between him and Hawk is ridiculous, and he is using his air time to make sure his one sided views are heard by all on a repetitive basis. That's certainly his right, but in my view it's annoying, and it puts Hawk in a bad situation where he can't even argue or defend his position. What sucks for me is that even if I decide to switch from 1000AM to 670AM, I hear the same thing. Lose-Lose I guess lol.

santo=dorf
02-13-2004, 12:25 AM
I can't get a reception down here. How is the Moronotti show? What has he said about Hawk?

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 12:38 AM
Originally posted by santo=dorf
I can't get a reception down here. How is the Moronotti show? What has he said about Hawk? Nonstop saying Hawk blames everything on him for any Sox problems. Hawk originally said that Mariotti uses his column to set a negative tone to Sox fans, and refuses to include any positive information, which is pretty much true. Mariotti expands on that daily saying Hawk blames the media for anything and everything, and distorts what was actually said in order to make his point more attractive.

RichFitztightly
02-13-2004, 12:52 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Nonstop saying Hawk blames everything on him for any Sox problems. Hawk originally said that Mariotti uses his column to set a negative tone to Sox fans, and refuses to include any positive information, which is pretty much true. Mariotti expands on that daily saying Hawk blames the media for anything and everything, and distorts what was actually said in order to make his point more attractive.

Moronotti distorting reality!? NO WAY!!! I should have your head for that blasphemy.

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 01:25 AM
I FRIGGIN' LOVE IT!

Good for Snyder and ESPN Radio 1000!

From Ed Sherman's story in the Tribune: "Reinsdorf declined to address the issue personally, (naturally the friggin' coward!) opting to express his views through White Sox public relations director Scott Reifert.

"The thing we question is that they have invested millions of dollars in promoting these teams," Reifert said. "Now they are bringing in somebody who has made it his business to devalue those investments. (Ummmm no, Scott. Uncle Jerry devalued those franchises himself.) It doesn't make sense from a business perspective."

Reifert acknowledges the nature of sports talk radio and says the teams don't have a problem accepting criticism from on-air personalities. But Mariotti, he contends, has demonstrated an agenda that precludes him from giving "a balanced and fair representation."

Snyder disputed that assessment.

"I don't think the average Chicago sports fan sees the kind of criticism Jay provides as devaluing the franchise," Snyder said. "I believe they are the thoughts shared by some of the most ardent fans in town. " (Obviously Mr. Snyder visits WSI!!!)

It turns out Snyder is one of those fans. The station says it has suffered significant financial losses stemming from the downfall of the Bulls after Michael Jordan and the failure of the Sox to win consistently.

"Unfortunately, the impact these two teams have had on this station, both on the field and in our books, has been detrimental to our business," Snyder said. "While we enjoy our relationship, as partners they haven't provided us with a lot of help." Snyder concedes that the situation might be different if the Sox and Bulls were winning and making money for the station. WMVP might have acquiesced to Reinsdorf's wishes.

Because he says the opposite is occurring, Snyder decided to go ahead and hire Mariotti despite Reinsdorf's objections.

"We each have to do what's best for our business," Snyder said. "The last I checked, we had little say over whether the Sox kept Bartolo Colon ."

LOL, Take that Uncle Jerry.

Lip

TommyJohn
02-13-2004, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
I FRIGGIN' LOVE IT!

Good for Snyder and ESPN Radio 1000!

From Ed Sherman's story in the Tribune: "Reinsdorf declined to address the issue personally, (naturally the friggin' coward!) opting to express his views through White Sox public relations director Scott Reifert.

"The thing we question is that they have invested millions of dollars in promoting these teams," Reifert said. "Now they are bringing in somebody who has made it his business to devalue those investments. (Ummmm no, Scott. Uncle Jerry devalued those franchises himself.) It doesn't make sense from a business perspective."

Reifert acknowledges the nature of sports talk radio and says the teams don't have a problem accepting criticism from on-air personalities. But Mariotti, he contends, has demonstrated an agenda that precludes him from giving "a balanced and fair representation."

Snyder disputed that assessment.

"I don't think the average Chicago sports fan sees the kind of criticism Jay provides as devaluing the franchise," Snyder said. "I believe they are the thoughts shared by some of the most ardent fans in town. " (Obviously Mr. Snyder visits WSI!!!)

It turns out Snyder is one of those fans. The station says it has suffered significant financial losses stemming from the downfall of the Bulls after Michael Jordan and the failure of the Sox to win consistently.

"Unfortunately, the impact these two teams have had on this station, both on the field and in our books, has been detrimental to our business," Snyder said. "While we enjoy our relationship, as partners they haven't provided us with a lot of help." Snyder concedes that the situation might be different if the Sox and Bulls were winning and making money for the station. WMVP might have acquiesced to Reinsdorf's wishes.

Because he says the opposite is occurring, Snyder decided to go ahead and hire Mariotti despite Reinsdorf's objections.

"We each have to do what's best for our business," Snyder said. "The last I checked, we had little say over whether the Sox kept Bartolo Colon ."

LOL, Take that Uncle Jerry.

Lip

YEAH!!! And move the team while you're at it!!

I'm in complete agreement with Reifert. Mariotti does have an
agenda.

And it sounds like Mariotti has declared war on his new sworn
blood-oath archenemy, Hawk. That'll teach him to mess with
one of the great men of our times.

doublem23
02-13-2004, 02:59 AM
Moronotti is a dick, I've already emailed ESPN-1000 telling them I'll not listen to their station and have started emailing Mariotti's sponsors, telling them I'll not buy their products as long as he's on air.

Damn, that used to be the only halfway decent sports station in town. Sigh, Chicago...

Chisox_cali
02-13-2004, 04:30 AM
Hypothetical question Lip

Would you rather have Reinsdorf not sell?

or

Have Reinsdorf sell and the new owner moves the team out of Chicago?

And don't say death.

Just curious....

hose
02-13-2004, 07:32 AM
I think Mariotti does have an agenda against Reinsdorf, the Sox, and Sox fans. What he is doing on WMVP is a bit of a reach, of course I'll have to read about Jay at WSI because I don't listen to him.

Sports radio with the likes of Burnstein and Boers are more on par with the Jerry Springer show .....complete and total trash.

With other sports radio guys like Rod Goldman getting popped I can see the same happening to a guy like Boers in the future.

Boers is flat out creepy, what he is doing on a sports related show is a bit odd. Is he still talking about ball players and their private parts that he has met in the locker room.? The pitcher and the hot dog bun to be specific.

OneDog
02-13-2004, 07:37 AM
I feel bad for Scott Reifert. Reinsy just does not have the stones to speak for himself, so he sends one of his lietenants to fall on his sword. I don't think that any intelligent person actually believes Reinsy's message, including Reifert. But, he has to go make a fool out of himself for Reinsdorf because that's his job.

MarqSox
02-13-2004, 08:15 AM
I miss The Huge Show. :whiner:

voodoochile
02-13-2004, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by TommyJohn
YEAH!!! And move the team while you're at it!!

I'm in complete agreement with Reifert. Mariotti does have an
agenda.

And it sounds like Mariotti has declared war on his new sworn
blood-oath archenemy, Hawk. That'll teach him to mess with
one of the great men of our times.

I don't think Moronotti had an agenda to ruin the Sox in Chicago - before Hawk made it a personal issue that is. I think KB writes what will sell the most newspapers - controversy and massive hyperbole. He loves to exagerate and use sarcasm, but that is the nature of a columnist.

Then Hawk spoke up and started ripping on him personally. It isn't like he is the only reporter who has pointed out JR's folly/cheapness this off season and in years past. I don't care for the Moron and half the time I cannot even finish the links provided on this website, but he didn't make it personal, the Sox did. Then he used his bully pulpit to fire back. The Sox made a mess and JR is trying to clean it up by whining to the owner of the station that is paying him lots and lots of money for the right to lose money broadcasting Sox and Bulls games.

Typical Sox. Blame everyone but themselves. Sox ratings are dropping? Shocking...

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I don't think Moronotti had an agenda to ruin the Sox in Chicago - before Hawk made it a personal issue that is. I think KB writes what will sell the most newspapers - controversy and massive hyperbole. He loves to exagerate and use sarcasm, but that is the nature of a columnist.

Then Hawk spoke up and started ripping on him personally. It isn't like he is the only reporter who has pointed out JR's folly/cheapness this off season and in years past. I don't care for the Moron and half the time I cannot even finish the links provided on this website, but he didn't make it personal, the Sox did. Then he used his bully pulpit to fire back. The Sox made a mess and JR is trying to clean it up by whining to the owner of the station that is paying him lots and lots of money for the right to lose money broadcasting Sox and Bulls games.

Typical Sox. Blame everyone but themselves. Sox ratings are dropping? Shocking... They're losing money? Mariotti is constantly commenting that the Sox have one of the highest broadcasting revenues around. I believe he said it was the top six. How can they be losing money?

sas1974
02-13-2004, 09:30 AM
Like most here, I am also not a huge fan of Moronotti.

That being said, I find it amazing that a team that has sat on it's hand all winter has the gall to suggest that some newspaper columnist has devalued them, as Lip had previously mentioned.

Maximo
02-13-2004, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by TommyJohn
YEAH!!! And move the team while you're at it!!

I'm in complete agreement with Reifert. Mariotti does have an
agenda.

And it sounds like Mariotti has declared war on his new sworn
blood-oath archenemy, Hawk. That'll teach him to mess with
one of the great men of our times.

I've got news for Reinsdorf.......if and when you ever move the team, there are 'Mariotti-like' creatures working for newspapers everywhere.

Should you run this organization there, like you've run it here......you'll hear from another Mariotti clone.

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by Maximo
I've got news for Reinsdorf.......if and when you ever move the team, there are 'Mariotti-like' creatures working for newspapers everywhere.

Should you run this organization there, like you've run it here......you'll hear from another Mariotti clone. I don't think JR is prepared to be move the team because of Mariotti.

poorme
02-13-2004, 09:40 AM
This team isn't going anywhere in the near future.

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 09:51 AM
Originally posted by poorme
This team isn't going anywhere in the near future. I honestly think we'll see the team sold before they would allow a contraction or move. It doesn't make sense.

Fungo
02-13-2004, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by poorme
This team isn't going anywhere in the near future.
You can say that again.

Maximo
02-13-2004, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I don't think JR is prepared to be move the team because of Mariotti.

I don't either.

My point is Reinsdorf has this habit of wanting to assign blame elsewhere whenever this organization gets criticized be it from sportswriters, broadcasters, fans, whomever.

Look in the mirror, Jerry. As the owner, you are responsible for the news generated by the White Sox. Both good and bad.

If you're gonna help facilitate a strike when you have the first opportunity in years to bring a championship to the southside.....

If you're gonna okay a 'white flag' trade in the middle of the season when your team is only a handful of games out of first place......

If your gonna ignore 'impact free agents' year after year because they cost too much.....

If your gonna sit on your butt and do nothing during an off-season, while your biggest business competitor 8 miles away seems to be garnering only good news....


Then deal with it !!! You made this bed !!!

Besides, too many people think Mariotti is a 'moron', anyway. Why give him any credence?

34 Inch Stick
02-13-2004, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by MarqSox
I miss The Huge Show. :whiner:

You are kidding, I hope. When retreads like Tom Shaer can find work in this city it is preety damning that neither of those two are on the air in a sports related show anywhere in the city.

Kanellis is best suited playing second banana to Janet Davies on a fluff show. I don't even know what the other guy is doing. That was bad radio.

Procol Harum
02-13-2004, 10:05 AM
The Moron and the Paranoiac aside, the article did bring up one hopeful ray of sunshine for Sox fans and Bulls fans--that maybe the controversy would tilt Reinsdorf towards his only other viable radio alternative in this market, i.e. inking his next contract with the Score. At least then maybe those of us who live more than 10 miles due West of the Loop might actually be able to pick up an interference-free broadcast at night.

mandmandm
02-13-2004, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by MarqSox
I miss The Huge Show. :whiner:

UGH!

Here you go. You can spend your hard earned money on this loser.

http://209.172.2.67/olink.php?url=http://www.hugearmy.com

CLR01
02-13-2004, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
You are kidding, I hope. When retreads like Tom Shaer can find work in this city it is preety damning that neither of those two are on the air in a sports related show anywhere in the city.

Kanellis is best suited playing second banana to Janet Davies on a fluff show. I don't even know what the other guy is doing. That was bad radio.



Bill Simonson is now in Grand Rapids.

CLR01
02-13-2004, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by Chisox_cali
Hypothetical question Lip

Would you rather have Reinsdorf not sell?

or

Have Reinsdorf sell and the new owner moves the team out of Chicago?

And don't say death.

Just curious....



Its Lip do you even have to ask?

ewokpelts
02-13-2004, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by Procol Harum
The Moron and the Paranoiac aside, the article did bring up one hopeful ray of sunshine for Sox fans and Bulls fans--that maybe the controversy would tilt Reinsdorf towards his only other viable radio alternative in this market, i.e. inking his next contract with the Score. At least then maybe those of us who live more than 10 miles due West of the Loop might actually be able to pick up an interference-free broadcast at night.

The Score's worse than am1000. If you wanna get sox broadcasts, but mlb radio.
Gene

poorme
02-13-2004, 10:25 AM
we're talking about reception here. I live probably 90 miles from downtown Chicago. I can't pick up MVP AT ALL at night. The SCORE comes in loud and clear, much to my wife's dismay.

Hangar18
02-13-2004, 11:34 AM
Jay Mariotti DOES NOT HAVE IT IN FOR THE SOX. He is just Telling it like it is. YES, the guy is a Poor Writer and doesnt come up with the most Timely or Original Articles (CubFluff, rah-rah articles).
HOWEVER, Some of the BEST and most TIMELY articles Ive ever read, are some of his regarding the MLB Labor Issues, and Ripping on the SOX. His Articles Calling out Reinsdorf and the Shoddy Mgmt practices/gaffes on the South Side are nothing but the Truth and I often shake my head thinking this guy CAN write something Good when he feels like it. As ive Said many many many times before, Mariotti could make a CAREER of Good Honest Hard Hitting journalism if he opened his eyes more, and saw the nonsense going on over at 35th & Shields

Maximo
02-13-2004, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Jay Mariotti DOES NOT HAVE IT IN FOR THE SOX. He is just Telling it like it is. YES, the guy is a Poor Writer and doesnt come up with the most Timely or Original Articles (CubFluff, rah-rah articles).
HOWEVER, Some of the BEST and most TIMELY articles Ive ever read, are some of his regarding the MLB Labor Issues, and Ripping on the SOX. His Articles Calling out Reinsdorf and the Shoddy Mgmt practices/gaffes on the South Side are nothing but the Truth and I often shake my head thinking this guy CAN write something Good when he feels like it. As ive Said many many many times before, Mariotti could make a CAREER of Good Honest Hard Hitting journalism if he opened his eyes more, and saw the nonsense going on over at 35th & Shields

Read his column in today's Sun Times regarding steroids in professional sports. It's hard to disagree with him.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Jay Mariotti DOES NOT HAVE IT IN FOR THE SOX. He is just Telling it like it is. YES, the guy is a Poor Writer and doesnt come up with the most Timely or Original Articles (CubFluff, rah-rah articles).
HOWEVER, Some of the BEST and most TIMELY articles Ive ever read, are some of his regarding the MLB Labor Issues, and Ripping on the SOX. His Articles Calling out Reinsdorf and the Shoddy Mgmt practices/gaffes on the South Side are nothing but the Truth and I often shake my head thinking this guy CAN write something Good when he feels like it. As ive Said many many many times before, Mariotti could make a CAREER of Good Honest Hard Hitting journalism if he opened his eyes more, and saw the nonsense going on over at 35th & Shields

I have a hard time understanding how anyone who's read Marriotti over the past few years can come to any conclusion except that he's biased against anything related with Reinsdorf to the point of irrationality.

He's made personal attacks on everyone associated with the Sox & Bulls, taken fabricated and unproven points and turned them into "facts" in his world, and then used them to beat up the team. He's slammed them for not acting on his recommendations, and then conveniently forgotten when the moves they have made have worked out.

It's a big misleading for MVP to say listeners share Jay's views. Some do, but as a "journalist", he has a responsibility to leverage facts, not innuendo and suspicion. All that does is feed the frenzy of fans that worry about their team and create more of a negative image than would be warranted. That's fine if you're a fan on a barstool, but as a member of the media, you have a greater responsibility.

Case in point: His column on Maggs. He takes Maggs quote that he wants to stay in Chicago, and writes a column on how easy it would be to resign him if the Sox weren't so cheap. Never mind that Maggs has also said he wants to test free agency, and that he wants $15m/yr - which most agree he's not worth. None of that matters since it can't be used to slam Reinsdorf. The Hawk feud is something similar - Jay's slammed him for years, Hawk fires back once (and not blaming him for all the team's troubles, just for using his position to further an anti-Sox agenda). So now all you'll hear on the radio is how Hawk & the Sox blame the media for all of their problems.

joecrede
02-13-2004, 12:04 PM
Just a comment on Mariotti's show. It's really bad. For someone who revels in being the tough guy in the Chicago sports media (the only one who tells it like it is), it's amazing how thin-skinned he is.

Randar68
02-13-2004, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
"I don't think the average Chicago sports fan sees the kind of criticism Jay provides as devaluing the franchise," Snyder said. "I believe they are the thoughts shared by some of the most ardent fans in town. " (Obviously Mr. Snyder visits WSI!!!)


You mean, he must visit WSI and think your posts are indicative of Sox fans? Sorry, Lip, but:

1) You're not unbiased in this
2) Marriotti is a petty person who does not give fair or unbiased reporting
3) Replacing Kornheiser, someone who has the respect of his peers, is fair and balanced, with Marriotti is a terrible move

4) I absolutely refuse to listen to WMVP other than actual sports broadcasts.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Just a comment on Mariotti's show. It's really bad. For someone who revels in being the tough guy in the Chicago sports media (the only one who tells it like it is), it's amazing how thin-skinned he is.

All big talk when he's got his buddies (or from the safe haven of a column with no response). But when confronted with his own hypocrisy, he backs down or gets all shrilly and defensive.

Randar68
02-13-2004, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Just a comment on Mariotti's show. It's really bad. For someone who revels in being the tough guy in the Chicago sports media (the only one who tells it like it is), it's amazing how thin-skinned he is.

First day of his show, he comes on and says:

"And people think I don't know this town. Let me tell you people something, I've been here 12 years (or whatever it was), and I KNOW this town."

All he does for 2 hours is talk about himself.

Yeah, that's what I want to hear... UGH!

But hey, Lip's thrilled with it defacing the team he supposedly roots for, so I guess it's a good thing...




BLAH!

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
I have a hard time understanding how anyone who's read Marriotti over the past few years can come to any conclusion except that he's biased against anything related with Reinsdorf to the point of irrationality.

He's made personal attacks on everyone associated with the Sox & Bulls, taken fabricated and unproven points and turned them into "facts" in his world, and then used them to beat up the team. He's slammed them for not acting on his recommendations, and then conveniently forgotten when the moves they have made have worked out.

It's a big misleading for MVP to say listeners share Jay's views. Some do, but as a "journalist", he has a responsibility to leverage facts, not innuendo and suspicion. All that does is feed the frenzy of fans that worry about their team and create more of a negative image than would be warranted. That's fine if you're a fan on a barstool, but as a member of the media, you have a greater responsibility.

Case in point: His column on Maggs. He takes Maggs quote that he wants to stay in Chicago, and writes a column on how easy it would be to resign him if the Sox weren't so cheap. Never mind that Maggs has also said he wants to test free agency, and that he wants $15m/yr - which most agree he's not worth. None of that matters since it can't be used to slam Reinsdorf. The Hawk feud is something similar - Jay's slammed him for years, Hawk fires back once (and not blaming him for all the team's troubles, just for using his position to further an anti-Sox agenda). So now all you'll hear on the radio is how Hawk & the Sox blame the media for all of their problems. This is exactly right, he doesn't take into consideration of all the facts. The Maggs situation is a prime example. He also says that the Sox were cheap with Graff, which wasn't the case at all. Graff walked because he thought maybe he could become a starter somewhere else. KW wanted him back, but Graff felt he had to try to do this, which KW respected. You'll never hear that from Mariotti, mostly because he wouldn't take the time to find out information like that. If you are going to be critical, that's fine, but you had better present all the facts, not just things that help your argument, especially since a lot of it is untrue or completely distorted.

Dan H
02-13-2004, 12:25 PM
The Sox try to blame Mariotti for everything. He has his good and bad moments, but he is no way responsible for the all problems the team is having. Using him as a scapegoat solves nothing. Besides at least half of Chicago hates his guts.

The White Sox think they can control the media. No one can. It is a necessary evil, and one has to accept that. Of course, the Sox would have a better public image without strikes, white flag trades and under-achieving ball clubs.

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
First day of his show, he comes on and says:

"And people think I don't know this town. Let me tell you people something, I've been here 12 years (or whatever it was), and I KNOW this town."

All he does for 2 hours is talk about himself.

Yeah, that's what I want to hear... UGH!

But hey, Lip's thrilled with it defacing the team he supposedly roots for, so I guess it's a good thing...




BLAH! Lol, that's exactly how the show goes. It's so annoying, but I'm sad to say that I've been listening to it, probably because I enjoy getting myself upset. Sick, huh? I am sick of Mariotti's defacing though, he can sugar coat it, and hide behind some of the aspects he comments on being right, despite being generally wrong. But he takes it a step beyond when he distorts and doesn't include certain facts in order to make his point.

Maximo
02-13-2004, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
This is exactly right, he doesn't take into consideration of all the facts. The Maggs situation is a prime example. He also says that the Sox were cheap with Graff, which wasn't the case at all. Graff walked because he thought maybe he could become a starter somewhere else. KW wanted him back, but Graff felt he had to try to do this, which KW respected. You'll never hear that from Mariotti, mostly because he wouldn't take the time to find out information like that. If you are going to be critical, that's fine, but you had better present all the facts, not just things that help your argument, especially since a lot of it is untrue or completely distorted.


Like Hawk implying at SoxFest that Fisk was agreeable to moving to leftfield.

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by Dan H
The Sox try to blame Mariotti for everything. He has his good and bad moments, but he is no way responsible for the all problems the team is having. Using him as a scapegoat solves nothing. Besides at least half of Chicago hates his guts.

The White Sox think they can control the media. No one can. It is a necessary evil, and one has to accept that. Of course, the Sox would have a better public image without strikes, white flag trades and under-achieving ball clubs. Who told you the Sox blame everything on Mariotti though, Mariotti that's who. The Sox only complained that Mariotti distorts and paints a false picture of the Sox, which he does, and they commented on what he solely is responsible for. The Sox do have their problems, but when you have to lie and distort in order to get a following, it gets to be too much. Hawk has said one thing, after years of being bashed unneccesarily by Mariotti, and all of a sudden Hawk's the bad guy. Hawk's blaming everything on Mariotti. It's crap is what it is. If you listened to this guy on a daily basis, you would see it.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by Dan H
The Sox try to blame Mariotti for everything. He has his good and bad moments, but he is no way responsible for the all problems the team is having. Using him as a scapegoat solves nothing. Besides at least half of Chicago hates his guts.

The White Sox think they can control the media. No one can. It is a necessary evil, and one has to accept that. Of course, the Sox would have a better public image without strikes, white flag trades and under-achieving ball clubs.

Please show me where the Sox have EVER said Mariotti's the cause of the team's problems. What they said is that he operates with a definite bias and does whatever he can to create the most negative impression of the team that he can. That's a far cry form blaming him for all of their ills.

And by the way - if you don't think having that kind of slanted, shoddy journalism as a major show in a major market doesn't make a significant difference to the general impression of the team, I think you're kidding yourself. It's not the whole story, but it is a major part of it.

KingXerxes
02-13-2004, 12:37 PM
There can be no doubt that Marriotti is a major tool - no doubt whatsoever. But there can also be no arguing that a lot of his points are valid - just not delivered in a manner that most White Sox fans can tolerate.

Harrelson signed his own warrant when he "called out" Marriotti and other members of the media.. He's now playing on their home field, and will only be finished playing when the media - not Harrelson - calls an end to it. It was a ridiculously stupid thing to do, and now he's reaping some of the "dividends".

KingXerxes
02-13-2004, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by Maximo
Like Hawk implying at SoxFest that Fisk was agreeable to moving to leftfield.

Funny.

Palehose13
02-13-2004, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Dan H
The Sox try to blame Mariotti for everything. He has his good and bad moments, but he is no way responsible for the all problems the team is having. Using him as a scapegoat solves nothing. Besides at least half of Chicago hates his guts.

The White Sox think they can control the media. No one can. It is a necessary evil, and one has to accept that. Of course, the Sox would have a better public image without strikes, white flag trades and under-achieving ball clubs.
I don't think that the Sox blame EVERYTHING on the media, and I don't think they get a fair shake. Like most organizations, they do have blemishes on their image. However, how do the cubs continue to get positive press when a) they haven't had back-to-back winning seasons in decades. b) the ticket scam c) poor relations with "rooftop owners". d) their STAR player caught with a corked bat during a game. e) ridiculous comments by their manager relating to skin color. f) a fan throwing a cell phone at a player. g) fans stealing a hat and then fighting with opposite team members h) threatening Steve Bartman to where he needs police protection at home j) vandalism by fans during the playoffs last year k) a pitcher making derrogatory comments about SF fnas regarding their sexuality l) and so on...

All this on the other side of town and the Sox are the ones that get the brunt of the negative press. No...the media isn't biased. I just don't understand it or how anyone could think the the Sox and their fans are getting what they deserve from the press.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
There can be no doubt that Marriotti is a major tool - no doubt whatsoever. But there can also be no arguing that a lot of his points are valid - just not delivered in a manner that most White Sox fans can tolerate.

Harrelson signed his own warrant when he "called out" Marriotti and other members of the media.. He's now playing on their home field, and will only be finished playing when the media - not Harrelson - calls an end to it. It was a ridiculously stupid thing to do, and now he's reaping some of the "dividends".

Having some shreds of truth in a sea of innuendo does NOT make one a credible journalist and unbiased opinion.

Is it valid to say "the Sox are cheap" - sure. Is it then valid to say "the Sox could easily sign Maggs at a reasonable contract right now, so despite his wanting to stay at a reasonable price, they won't resign him" - no, especially given the wealth of evidence that refutes his point. That's his style - to take something with some validity, and blow up the negative side with falsehood and creative facts.

The Graffanino case is the perfect example. TonyG left not ove rthe money, but because he wanted to start. But you'll never hear that from Jay - it's all about how he left and only ot a couple of mil. Now instead of having fans saying "Man - I wish we could come to some agreement with Tony, but I can see why the Sox couldn't promise him a starting job", you have "Man those Sox are so cheap that they wouldnt spend a couple of mil".

That's an example of bias, not journalism.

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 01:03 PM
Folks:

To those of you who were commenting on how they think the Sox don't blame things on the media, I offer the following:

"We've got to battle some of the outside forces that apparently surround the club with, quite honestly, much of the negativity that comes from the media, or the perception [of negativity]. For whatever the reason, it's out there ."—G.M. Kenny Williams. February 22, 2002 Chicago Tribune.

also as far back as October 1983 Eddie Einhorn was ripping the media. (See Bob Logan's book---Miracle on 35th Street)

Williams’ and the organization, obviously thinks that the many questions and problems surrounding this charter member of the American League aren’t his fault, nor the fault of Marketing Director Rob Gallas, or Director Of Park Operations David Schaffer or Owner Jerry Reinsdorf or everyone in between.

It’s the media’s fault... or the fans fault, or the player agents fault, or (write in your favorite scapegoats) fault.

When you lay it out in black and white, you can see how stupid the argument is and how insane the Sox are for trying their best to make the situation worse!

The Chicago media isn’t anti Sox, on the contrary, they want the Sox to win. They all know that a winning (not whining) Sox team is good for their medium.

A winning Sox team sells newspapers, a winning Sox team means more viewers on WGN and Fox Sports Chicago, which means those stations can sell advertising at a higher rate, a winning Sox team means more money for ESPN RADIO 1000. A winning Sox team means more readers on White Sox Interactive. And of course if the Sox were to be in a pennant race, like last year, or go to the postseason, you have all the "specials." Remember the weekly Push For The Pennant, on WGN-TV and Fox Sports Chicago? Oh yea, MORE chances to sell advertising, ditto for the 'souvenir sections' of the newspapers.

Biased against the Sox? The media can’t wait for a Sox team to actually do something in the post season besides lose at home .

Uncle Jerry, Kenny Williams and the entire Sox organization refuse to acknowledge a simple truth.

If you want better publicity, (or more attendance, or more advertising revenue or more corporate sponsorships etc...) THEN WIN MORE GAMES! and like it or not, start kissing the media's rear end like every other team in the majors do.

Here's a quote that will blow some of you away..."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? When baseball teams get that for free, it makes sense to cooperate. " That wasn't said by the Tribune Company, or by Bill Veeck. It was said by JERRY REINSDORF! (From the book Miracle On 35th Street Pg. 154)

and don't worry folks, with that new 30 year lease the White Sox aren't going anywhere! (and personally if getting rid of this goofball organization meant losing the Sox for a few years before getting an expansion team with good ownership to replace them, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Long term it would be better for Chicago's South Side fans since these doofuses aren't going to win a damn thing anyway.

Lip

Palehose13
02-13-2004, 01:08 PM
"We've got to battle some of the outside forces that apparently surround the club with, quite honestly, much of the negativity that comes from the media, or the perception [of negativity]. For whatever the reason, it's out there ."—G.M. Kenny Williams. February 22, 2002 Chicago Tribune.

I don't see how this shows that the Sox blame the media for everything. Frankly, I agree with KW's quote.

joecrede
02-13-2004, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
First day of his show, he comes on and says:

"And people think I don't know this town. Let me tell you people something, I've been here 12 years (or whatever it was), and I KNOW this town."

All he does for 2 hours is talk about himself.

Yep, 2 hours of him attempting to tell his audience how his Chicago sports acumen is credible. Jay, give me an opinion, I'll decide your credibillity. He is so obviously conscious of his many critics over the years that his show is nothing more than a train wreck.

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 01:23 PM
Palehose:

If your position is that the Sox don't blame the media for (literally) everything , then I agree with you.

But it's clear that the organization has had a history of blaming troubles and situations that it has created on others.

I don't know how many more quotes you want me to produce to show you this but I can easily accomodate you. It's long and unglorious.

By the way, a little aside on the Williams quote. It was done the first day of his first spring training when he was addressing the team and the media overheard him. Not the smartest way for someone to start their first 'official' day on the job is it? You'd expect better from a Stanford graduate don't you think?

With respect you might want to take off the blinders a little bit. Just look at Williams' recent comment linking fan attendence with the Sox ability to acquire players in the stretch run. With a hostile fan base that wasn't the smartest position to take. He should have just shut his mouth and kept quiet instead of causing another controversy.

You don't threaten your fan base if you want to attract them into the gates. You complete the process like every other team in baseball...you put a good product on the field first, then ask your fans to support you. But of course this organization has a history of doing things bass ackwards.

Lip

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Folks:

To those of you who were commenting on how they think the Sox don't blame things on the media, I offer the following:

"We've got to battle some of the outside forces that apparently surround the club with, quite honestly, much of the negativity that comes from the media, or the perception [of negativity]. For whatever the reason, it's out there ."—G.M. Kenny Williams. February 22, 2002 Chicago Tribune.

What he says is exactly right - they do have to battle some media who are responsible for much of the negativity in the media. I.e. not all media are creating this - there's a couple of guys doing most of it. Nowhere does he say this is even reducing attendance, and there's not even an implication that this impacts the club on the field.



When you lay it out in black and white, you can see how stupid the argument is and how insane the Sox are for trying their best to make the situation worse!

The Chicago media isn’t anti Sox, on the contrary, they want the Sox to win. They all know that a winning (not whining) Sox team is good for their medium.

A winning Sox team sells newspapers, a winning Sox team means more viewers on WGN and Fox Sports Chicago, which means those stations can sell advertising at a higher rate, a winning Sox team means more money for ESPN RADIO 1000. A winning Sox team means more readers on White Sox Interactive. And of course if the Sox were to be in a pennant race, like last year, or go to the postseason, you have all the "specials." Remember the weekly Push For The Pennant, on WGN-TV and Fox Sports Chicago? Oh yea, MORE chances to sell advertising, ditto for the 'souvenir sections' of the newspapers.

Biased against the Sox? The media can’t wait for a Sox team to actually do something in the post season besides lose at home .

That's quite simply - wrong. Guys like Marriotti write what they write to generate controversy and sell papers. That's why even when the bulls were winning - was he writing about how they won 6 titles? No - he was writing about how they were screwing something up - whether it was the Kukoc situation, the Jackson situation, a lack of signing bench guys, any little thing. But never any kudos to anyone but PJ & MJ on having accomplished something pretty amazing.

Will a lot more papers get sold if the Sox win - possibly, but that doens't matter to Marriotti. What matters to him is his own readership - i.e. what can he say to get readers. That's why he says things that are often ludicrous - to stir things up. And then if'when he gets called on it, he can't handle the criticism.


If you want better publicity, (or more attendance, or more advertising revenue or more corporate sponsorships etc...) THEN WIN MORE GAMES! and like it or not, start kissing the media's rear end like every other team in the majors do.

Here's a quote that will blow some of you away..."[B]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? When baseball teams get that for free, it makes sense to cooperate. " That wasn't said by the Tribune Company, or by Bill Veeck. It was said by JERRY REINSDORF! (From the book Miracle On 35th Street Pg. 154)

Again - nowhere do the Sox blame ALL the media, just those who operate in a biased mode against the Sox. Re-read Kenny's quote again - that's what he says. And that's basically what Hawk said - he'd start calling out those few writers who do that.

There are plenty of fair writers in this town (and they write negative things too - but it's based in fact and tries to take an objective view of the situation). But there are some who are not and Marriotti's made it obvious over the years that his prime goal is to knock anything related to JR, not informing the public.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 01:28 PM
You don't threaten your fan base if you want to attract them into the gates. You complete the process like every other team in baseball...you put a good product on the field first, then ask your fans to support you. But of course this organization has a history of doing things bass ackwards.

Lip

I'd agree with you, except that I've seen Kenny make what looked like pretty strong moves (Wells, Colon) - only to see attendance not come through. For Pete's sake, the Sox were in a playoff hunt and not selling out in August this past summer. And that's after getting Colon and the Everett/Alomar deal - and being in first!

Is it smart to say - no. But it's not like Sox fans have proven that if you make good moves and the team does well they'll come out. not since 1994 - it seems to be more of a "well, they made good moves, but they won't make any more" or "well, they might win the division - but they won't be able to compete with the Yanks".

IMO Kenny's guilty of being honest with the fans about how he feels. That might not be the best tactic, but it's not like he's saying they're the cause of the team's problems.

joecrede
02-13-2004, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Harrelson signed his own warrant when he "called out" Marriotti and other members of the media.. He's now playing on their home field, and will only be finished playing when the media - not Harrelson - calls an end to it. It was a ridiculously stupid thing to do, and now he's reaping some of the "dividends".

Mariotti is the one though that has come out sounding bad in all of this. He's showing he cannot handle criticism. Being as defensive as he's been makes me thing there's truth to what the White Sox organization says.

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 01:32 PM
Folks:

We need to make the ground rules clear in this discussion.

Some of you are referring specifically to Jay Mariotti. I'm talking about this organization's confrontational relationship with their fans, player agents, the media.

Mariotti is not the only one they have gone after over the past two decades.

If you want to argue tit for tat about Jay go ahead...my point and contention is that the problem the Sox have is bigger then Jay.

Please start seeing the big picture and stop narrowing the discussion down to Jay. It's not jay...it's a lot more then him.

Lip

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 01:36 PM
Look at the number of sell outs in the second half of 2003. Look at the number of 30,000+ games in the second half of 2003.

Considering the team was garbage for the first 2 1/2 months of 2003, the Sox should get on their hands and knees thanking the almost two million fans who came out.

That's an unbelieveable attendence figure given the circumstances.

And with respect, the fact is that the Sox will never draw to their full potential as long as Jerry Reinsdorf owns this club. The resentment, the hated is so deep many fans will stay home and watch the club rather then go out and give money to him.

That's reality (unfortunately) but they brought it down upon themselves from as far back as the "first class organization,' comment and SportsVision.

Lip

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Folks:

We need to make the ground rules clear in this discussion.

Some of you are referring specifically to Jay Mariotti. I'm talking about this organization's confrontational relationship with their fans, player agents, the media.

Mariotti is not the only one they have gone after over the past two decades.

If you want to argue tit for tat about Jay go ahead...my point and contention is that the problem the Sox have is bigger then Jay.

Please start seeing the big picture and stop narrowing the discussion down to Jay. It's not jay...it's a lot more then him.

Lip Did you happen to see the thread title?

joecrede
02-13-2004, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Folks:

We need to make the ground rules clear in this discussion.

Some of you are referring specifically to Jay Mariotti. I'm talking about this organization's confrontational relationship with their fans, player agents, the media.

Lip, the White Sox are one of the best organizations in baseball when it comes to treating their fans right. Agents hold them in high regard for their above board dealings as well.

hold2dibber
02-13-2004, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
They're losing money? Mariotti is constantly commenting that the Sox have one of the highest broadcasting revenues around. I believe he said it was the top six. How can they be losing money?

The point was that WMVP is losing money, not the Sox (i.e., WMVP pays the Sox lots of $ but the advertising revenue they make from Sox broadcasts doesn't cover the cost).

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Folks:

We need to make the ground rules clear in this discussion.

Some of you are referring specifically to Jay Mariotti. I'm talking about this organization's confrontational relationship with their fans, player agents, the media.

Mariotti is not the only one they have gone after over the past two decades.

If you want to argue tit for tat about Jay go ahead...my point and contention is that the problem the Sox have is bigger then Jay.

Please start seeing the big picture and stop narrowing the discussion down to Jay. It's not jay...it's a lot more then him.

Lip

I guess I see it diferently - I think it's exactly what Kenny said - there's a few guys throwing up most of the crap and it is a significant factor in the negative impression the Sox have in this town.

Have they been successful - no. They haven't accomplished their goals of a WS, so no. But over the past 5-10 years, they have generally made moves that were attempts to get this team to where it needs to be - everything from Albert Belle to David Wells to Colon. This offseason it didn't happen (although the offseason isn't over) so they get slammed. But overall, they tend to make a legitimate effort as a mid-market team to make the playoffs. Meanwhile, the Cubs generally don't, but skate on through with almost all positive press and none of the guys specifically targeting them like the Sox have.

Hey - the Sox have problems, but I think it's wishful thinking to say that the media treats them the same as the cross-town rivals in terms of getting favorable press.

Again - it may not be smart to say, but that's all kenny's saying - not that they're the reason why the team hasn't won.

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Lip, the White Sox are one of the best organizations in baseball when it comes to treating their fans right. Agents hold them in high regard for their above board dealings as well. Even the Score, who usually doesn't give the Sox credit on anything, mentioned that the Sox deserve a lot of credit to listening to fans. When everyone complained about the stadium upper deck, they decided to do something about. Maybe everyone won't like it, but they're trying. Geez even Mariotti gave them credit for that. They listen to the fans, but they can't just whetever they want.

joecrede
02-13-2004, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Look at the number of sell outs in the second half of 2003. Look at the number of 30,000+ games in the second half of 2003.

Considering the team was garbage for the first 2 1/2 months of 2003, the Sox should get on their hands and knees thanking the almost two million fans who came out.

That's an unbelieveable attendence figure given the circumstances.

An unbelievable attendance figure that was surpassed by 8(?) teams ...

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 01:49 PM
Joe:

With respect, sorry, I don't buy that bill of goods.

Ask the agents for Horace Grant, Roberto Alomar and Alex Rodriguez.

There's an old saying...once is a fluke, twice a coincidence, three times is a trend.

and Seal, don't forget about the comments from ESPN Radio's 1000, general manager. That's being lost in this. His actions say he supports Mariotti, what he's saying and and what he is doing and his point about the station perhaps losing money on the Sox / Bulls comes (I'm assuming) from the point I brought up that a garbage team meams you can't sell advertising at the highest rate. Why can't they do this? Because the Sox and Bulls have been bad to mediocre the past six years and apparently ESPN Radio 1000 is tired of it. That comment about the Sox not consulting them with Colon is priceless.

Lip

joecrede
02-13-2004, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Joe:

With respect, sorry, I don't buy that bill of goods.

Ask the agents for Horace Grant, Roberto Alomar and Alex Rodriguez.

Lip, trust me ... the Sox are above board. Koch, Konerko, Lee's agents had no problems.

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Joe:

With respect, sorry, I don't buy that bill of goods.

Ask the agents for Horace Grant, Roberto Alomar and Alex Rodriguez.

There's an old saying...once is a fluke, twice a coincidence, three times is a trend.

and Seal, don't forget about the comments from ESPN Radio's 1000, general manager. That's being lost in this. His actions say he supports Mariotti, what he's saying and and what he is doing and his point about the station perhaps losing money on the Sox / Bulls comes (I'm assuming) from the point I brought up that a garbage team meams you can't sell advertising at the highest rate. Why can't they do this? Because the Sox and Bulls have been bad to mediocre the past six years and apparently ESPN Radio 1000 is tired of it. That comment about the Sox not consulting them with Colon is priceless.

Lip So essentially you're saying the ESPN general manager is tired of the Sox and Bulls losing so he's trying to stick it to them by hiring Mariotti. That's pretty childish, but he is able to do whatever he wants, no one is disputing that. If they don't care for the Sox and Bulls then the contract will simply not be renewed in a couple years.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1

And with respect, the fact is that the Sox will never draw to their full potential as long as Jerry Reinsdorf owns this club. The resentment, the hated is so deep many fans will stay home and watch the club rather then go out and give money to him.

That's reality (unfortunately) but they brought it down upon themselves from as far back as the "first class organization,' comment and SportsVision.

Lip

I agree with that, but based on that - it's not unreasonable for Kenny to feel like no matter what he does to try and improve this team, it doesn't matter in terms of attendance unless they get to a WS. IMO - that's at the heart of what he said.

And for what it's worth, while they were horrible to start the season, there wasn't much of a boost from the Colon deal early on, was there? So he went out and made the big move - and got no reaction. So he says that to the fans - again, not the best PR, but not blaming them for the team's woes.

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Joe:

With respect, sorry, I don't buy that bill of goods.

Ask the agents for Horace Grant, Roberto Alomar and Alex Rodriguez.

There's an old saying...once is a fluke, twice a coincidence, three times is a trend.



Lip You can say whatever you want about Alomar, but he made his own bed. The Sox offered him the best deal out of any club and he refused to take it because he was "insulted" by it. He was forced to take a lot less money and instead of looking like an idiot, he tried to pin in on the Sox.

joecrede
02-13-2004, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Joe:

With respect, sorry, I don't buy that bill of goods.

Ask the agents for Horace Grant, Roberto Alomar and Alex Rodriguez.

There's an old saying...once is a fluke, twice a coincidence, three times is a trend.

and Seal, don't forget about the comments from ESPN Radio's 1000, general manager. That's being lost in this. His actions say he supports Mariotti, what he's saying and and what he is doing and his point about the station perhaps losing money on the Sox / Bulls comes (I'm assuming) from the point I brought up that a garbage team meams you can't sell advertising at the highest rate. Why can't they do this? Because the Sox and Bulls have been bad to mediocre the past six years and apparently ESPN Radio 1000 is tired of it. That comment about the Sox not consulting them with Colon is priceless.

Lip

Interesting that the Chairman's soon-to-be business partner, Comcast, might be the new owner of ESPN Radio.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Joe:

With respect, sorry, I don't buy that bill of goods.

Ask the agents for Horace Grant, Roberto Alomar and Alex Rodriguez.

There's an old saying...once is a fluke, twice a coincidence, three times is a trend.



Counter that with the numerous agents that have no problem with them. And the times he's done things like the Jay Williams buyout - or recommending to Scottie that he not sign the deal he did. Gee- any coincidence that Horace has had problems in other places? Or that Scott Boras has been accused of not telling his clients about ALL offers in front of them - just the biggest ones?

To have 3 instances in 20-odd years and 2 teams does not seem like a trend to me. Especially not when you're buying a version of the truth from someone with their own axe to grind (similar to the whole Antonio Davis saga with the Bulls where it came out that he was never promised more money and reneged on by the Bulls - he was just pissed because they wouldn't match Toronto's $$$).

Palehose13
02-13-2004, 02:07 PM
If your position is that the Sox don't blame the media for (literally) everything , then I agree with you.
That is my position. IIRC, some posters in this thread and the media (mariotti, Bernstein) have said that the Sox DO blame the media for everything.

By the way, a little aside on the Williams quote. It was done the first day of his first spring training when he was addressing the team and the media overheard him. Not the smartest way for someone to start their first 'official' day on the job is it? You'd expect better from a Stanford graduate don't you think?
I think it was a great way to start. I am tired of reading and hearing the Sox bashing from the Chicago media, and then hear/read all the cubbie love. It makes me sick. IIRC, complaints about New Comiskey didn't run rampant until a few years after it opened and Moron started his "BallMall" columns.

With respect you might want to take off the blinders a little bit.
With respect, not until you let a little Sox sunshine into your life.

Just look at Williams' recent comment linking fan attendence with the Sox ability to acquire players in the stretch run. With a hostile fan base that wasn't the smartest position to take. He should have just shut his mouth and kept quiet instead of causing another controversy.
He addressed that comment in the Friday night seminar at SoxFest. Funny how that didn't get into the papers.

Please start seeing the big picture and stop narrowing the discussion down to Jay. It's not jay...it's a lot more then him.
Isn't this thread about JR and Jay?

Lip:
I am sorry that I am not enlightened as you are and if you are bothered by my blinders. However, this is a baseball team whose purpose is to bring me pleasure and entertainment. I decided long ago that if I spend the a good portion of my time on this team complaining, then this team isn't worth my time because it is not giving me the pleasure and entertainment that I desire from baseball. If that time ever comes, I would truly reconsider my fandom.

MarqSox
02-13-2004, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by 34 Inch Stick
You are kidding, I hope. When retreads like Tom Shaer can find work in this city it is preety damning that neither of those two are on the air in a sports related show anywhere in the city.

Kanellis is best suited playing second banana to Janet Davies on a fluff show. I don't even know what the other guy is doing. That was bad radio.
Not kidding at all ... that was my favorite radio show ever, with the possible exception of NPR's "All Things Considered."

I'll be the first to admit that Huge and Lou were far from being sports geniuses, but they never really pretended like they were ... they were just entertaining. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

Viva Magglio
02-13-2004, 02:19 PM
I certainly believe Jay Mariotti has an anti-White Sox agenda. In reality, it's more of an anti-Jerry Reinsdorf agenda. I don't defend what JR does, but that does not mean Mariotti's rants against him and the Sox are gospel. The reason Mariotti hates Reinsdorf so much is because of M. Jeff. As the head of the Jordan Arse Licking Society Chicago bureau, Mariotti sided with Michael Jordan in the Michael/Phil/Scottie vs. the Jerrys war.

Of course, we all know Mariotti is almost as much a partisan Sammy Sosa arse licker. This alone, coupled with the (what Viagra provides) Mariotti has for Cubbiedum, gives him an ax to grind with the Sox.

As for the relationship with WMVP, I believe there are two more seasons (2004 and 2005) left on the contract. If Reinsdorf leaves ESPN Radio 1000, the only viable option would be WSCR (nee WMAQ) because of its 50,000-watt clear channel blowtorch. WBBM also has that kind of blowtorch as do WGN and WLS. We all know WGN would not air Sox games for reasons that need not be explained. WLS is not interested in sports and is a sister-station of WMVP. That leaves WSCR and WBBM. I don't see WBBM wanting to air 162 games over its news programming. They air Bears games, of course, but that is a cash cow for them and its 10 airings don't interfere with its regular programming like 162 airings would.

This leaves the Score. Now its hosts. Harsh criticism has come from Score hosts, but it rarely is directed at Reinsdorf himself. Usually, Kenny Williams or Rob Gallas are the usual targets of Score hosts' criticism. How would Reinsdorf reconcile this with wanting to air games on that station?

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 02:23 PM
.

This leaves the Score. Now its hosts. Harsh criticism has come from Score hosts, but it rarely is directed at Reinsdorf himself. Usually, Kenny Williams or Rob Gallas are the usual targets of Score hosts' criticism. How would Reinsdorf reconcile this with wanting to air games on that station? [/B]

I bet he won't care. Obviously, he'd prefer his team not getting slammed in the media, but as long as it's somewhat objective and fair, I would guess he'll have no prpoblem with it - as many have said, it goes with the territory. Marriotti's a horse('s ass) of a different colour, as you note quite well.

poorme
02-13-2004, 02:28 PM
I wonder if the SCORE would even want the sox. (unless JR paid them to broadcast the sox, a la the Blackhawks).

ewokpelts
02-13-2004, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by poorme
I wonder if the SCORE would even want the sox. (unless JR paid them to broadcast the sox, a la the Blackhawks).

i think sox/bulls are worth more than the hawks
gene

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 02:49 PM
In their battle with MVP, anything they can do to make themselves the preferred destination for Chicago sports.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if the Bulls start to pick up. If they have a strong 2d half - it would be meaningless in terms of making the playoffs, but I wonder how excited MVP management will be to have had them when they were terrible, then piss off the owner as they're about to improve. WSCR would love that.

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 03:01 PM
Folks:

I have just received some information from a reliable source with knowledge of the Sox / Bulls, ESPN Radio 1000 deals.

It may shed some light on what has been taking place and why.

I have started a new thread entitled, "WMVP Contracts with Sox / Bulls" if you care to read the information.

Lip

inta
02-13-2004, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
They're losing money? Mariotti is constantly commenting that the Sox have one of the highest broadcasting revenues around. I believe he said it was the top six. How can they be losing money?

the SOX are making money off the broadcasts on WMVP. the article is about how WMVP is losing money because they signed a long contract with much better bulls and sox teams in 1996, teams that have done near nothing since.


this is getting silly, i dont know how much more crap i can take from this sox organization. just spend some money and win, that's all anyone from fans to journalists want to see. why's that hard to see?

no wonder most of my southside bred fam could care less about the sox anymore... they've been complaining about reiney since the 80's.

i bet when the sox contract on wmvp is up reiney will move them to XM radio.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 03:10 PM
Taking on David Wells contract?

Trading for Colon, Everett, Alomar?

Giving pretty good extensions to young players like Maggs, Buehrle, Konerko, CLee?

Sure - the Sox haven't spent money this year, but they have certainly made moves with an eye towards putting the best product on the field (short of having a huge payroll).

IMO this is the first year in a few that we can claim they haven't made moves to make them at least co-favorites for the division. So complain that they haven't spent money this year, but they made pretty strong attempts the past few, although it didn't work out.

inta
02-13-2004, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Taking on David Wells contract?

Trading for Colon, Everett, Alomar?

Giving pretty good extensions to young players like Maggs, Buehrle, Konerko, CLee?

Sure - the Sox haven't spent money this year, but they have certainly made moves with an eye towards putting the best product on the field (short of having a huge payroll).

IMO this is the first year in a few that we can claim they haven't made moves to make them at least co-favorites for the division. So complain that they haven't spent money this year, but they made pretty strong attempts the past few, although it didn't work out.

who's complaining about past years?
signing wells, colon, even koch were all applauded by fans and media when they happened.

but the sox have done nothing this off season but lose players, some of them ridiculously ... (graff?)

the fact is tho that the sox have lost money for WMVP, who i doubt anticipated the white flag, kids can play and utter dismantling of the bulls when they threw money at Reiney in 96.
WMVP has every right to hire whoever they want.

kittle42
02-13-2004, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
I have a hard time understanding how anyone who's read Marriotti over the past few years can come to any conclusion except that he's biased against anything related with Reinsdorf to the point of irrationality.

So what? Reinsdorf sucks.

voodoochile
02-13-2004, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Lip, trust me ... the Sox are above board. Koch, Konerko, Lee's agents had no problems.

Yes, and coincidently(?) they were all restricted FA's (read Sox property, period) when they signed their contracts.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 03:38 PM
Originally posted by inta
who's complaining about past years?
signing wells, colon, even koch were all applauded by fans and media when they happened.

but the sox have done nothing this off season but lose players, some of them ridiculously ... (graff?)

All I'm saying is that this is the first offseason in a few years that there hasn't been a good faith effort to put together a division winning team. To me that indicats that they are doing what they can. And IMO the FAs they lost weren't all their fault this offseason.
*Alomar ended up getting less than they offered.
*Graffanino (despite what you'd hear from Moronotti)- did NOT leave over $$$ - he left because the Royals promised him more PT (so not a cheapness issue there)
*Colon got a substantially higher offer and took it. Interestingly, there have been a number of reports of other teams and media questioning the wisdom in that contract - so is that cheapness? Or someone else overpaying?



the fact is tho that the sox have lost money for WMVP, who i doubt anticipated the white flag, kids can play and utter dismantling of the bulls when they threw money at Reiney in 96.
WMVP has every right to hire whoever they want.

The certainly can do that, I think the discussion here was more along the lines of whether or not Mariotti is overtly biased against the Sox (really - against JR). I 100% believe that he is after reading him for a few years(online to minimize ST revenues). MVP can do what they like, and they have every right to piss off a major source of programming. But it's not necessarily a smart business decision. It will come back to bite them if/when the teams are doing better (primarily the Bulls). It's not like they're doing this over a top name host, they're pissing off the Bulls & Sox over a never-was.

guillen4life13
02-13-2004, 03:44 PM
Since I'm still a relatively new Sox fan, I don't have as much knowledge as many of you, but I was an avid Bulls fan through the dynasty. In regards to handling the Bulls, he was very good to his players and fans (until the very end, when controversy surrounded Jackson/Jordan/Pippen and their dislike for Krause). Some personnel decisions made by the Bulls were pretty stupid (ones that could have potentially lengthened the dynasty). The Bulls had the opportunity to draft Karl Malone, and the opportunity to draft Shawn Kemp (who, if you remember, was pretty damn good back in the day). Who did they get instead? Guys like Stacey King and Keith Lee (who I've never even heard of)--bench role players who really didn't contribute much.

The Sox: There have been significant moves made to better the product on the field, but there could have been more/better moves. I have to say that KW, despite the Kip-Fogg/Ritchie trade, has done the best job he could given his situations. The Wells-Siro move looked really good at the time, and the Jays never even saw Siro pitch for them, so who's to say we lost out on that deal, and Toronto won. The Colon trade was a stroke of genius, as were the Everett and Alomar trades. Marte was a great pickup, though he could have done it without losing Guerrier (there were reports that Pittsburg planned to release him anyways--the Sox could have picked him up without trading anyone).

So, I've established my support for KW, and my dislike for Jerry Krause. Here's the beef with Reinsdorf. The constant blame put on fans for not "showing up" is ludicrous. He's shown me that he isn't dedicated to winning. He'll only make deals if he knows (not thinks--knows) that he isn't going to lose money on them. Increased ticket prices add to the contention that his heart is in his wallet, not winning. Here are some things he's done that I find despicable:

1. The way he's handled Hurt over the past few years.
2. The Strike
3. The White Flag trade, which only yielded one huge contributor--Foulke. Howry was good in 2000, but not after.
4. Again--ticket prices.
5. His unwillingness to put forth the money needed in this day and age to produce a champion.
6. Refusing to take blame for anything said on this list.
7. Constantly blaming the fans for the Sox' problems.
8. Not seriously negotiating with Bartolo Colon (the deferred money, etc.)
9. The treatment of BlackJack that led to his departure.
10. The treatment of Robin Ventura (also linked to the White Flag trade).
11. The treatment of Carlton Fisk (he wasn't allowed into the clubhouse in '93 during the playoffs? What?)


The list could go on. I hope I've made my point.

Marriotti can write about this type of stuff as much as he wants. I encourage it. I want Reinsdorf and the current ownership of this team to feel the heat. I want them run out of town.

But, there are many times when Jay is not so fair, and I find his Cub/Sosa ass-licking addiction really annoying and angering.

I would be happier with the Sox moving, and a new expansion team under different, good ownership moving into the Cell than I would with the Sox staying, under Reinsdorf, with the same type of BS going on. I would root for that expansion team and support it in any way possible. I know it won't happen though.

voodoochile
02-13-2004, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Counter that with the numerous agents that have no problem with them. And the times he's done things like the Jay Williams buyout - or recommending to Scottie that he not sign the deal he did. Gee- any coincidence that Horace has had problems in other places? Or that Scott Boras has been accused of not telling his clients about ALL offers in front of them - just the biggest ones?

To have 3 instances in 20-odd years and 2 teams does not seem like a trend to me. Especially not when you're buying a version of the truth from someone with their own axe to grind (similar to the whole Antonio Davis saga with the Bulls where it came out that he was never promised more money and reneged on by the Bulls - he was just pissed because they wouldn't match Toronto's $$$).

Okay, you have evidence that Boras doesn't present other offers? Sounds like a violation of his responsibilities to me. Do you know for a fact he never talked to ARod (for example) and said, "I am going to get you the most money that I can, period. Do you have anything else that I should be listening for?" It could well lead to legal problems if he allowed his client to sign for less than maximum dollars. It might open him up to lawsuits down the road ("He never told me about the Texas offer when I signed with the Sox.") So, it isn't quite as simple as you make it out to be.

You say that 3 times in 20 years isn't a trend. Okay, for comparison sake, how many times have any of the other owners in Chicago been accused of doing the same thing? Other owners in other cities? It seems to follow JR around like the scent of dog crap follows a fly. If JR wan't to correct this "misperception" then he should stop letting it happen, period.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 03:55 PM
Wirtz doesn't sign FAs & football has a completely different system in place along with revenue sharing (not to mention the Bears don't sign a lot of FAs either).

All I'm saying is that complaints from guys who obviously have axes to grind aren't necessarily to be taken as fact. It could just as easily be informal discussions and then the agent coming in and trying to squeeze the owner for more $$$. That's their right, but it doesn't exactly equate to trying to get the agent out of the picture.

Take Horace - it's perfectly reasonable for me to believe that JR might meet with Horace to talk about how he's valued and how he sees his future with the team(and it's his decision to do that - if Horace had wanted to call his agent in, he could certainly have done that). If in that discussion Horace says he wants to stay at a reasonable salary, then his agent convinces him he can get more, that's not any impropriety on JR's part IMO.

Same for Alomar. All of this smacks more of players taking advantage of an inherent bias by the fans towards them to take the biggest $$$ and make it seem like someone else's fault.

And as for A-Rod, Jr wanted to meet with him 1-on-1. If I was going to pay someone about $20m/yr and build a franchise around them, I might want to do that too. Tom Hicks did that (and no one complained about it, not even Boras). Why is JR at fault for wanting to do the same? Heck - even the BoSox owner met alone with Alex before the attempted trade! Is he now an ass as well?

beckett21
02-13-2004, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
The certainly can do that, I think the discussion here was more along the lines of whether or not Mariotti is overtly biased against the Sox (really - against JR). I 100% believe that he is after reading him for a few years(online to minimize ST revenues). MVP can do what they like, and they have every right to piss off a major source of programming. But it's not necessarily a smart business decision. It will come back to bite them if/when the teams are doing better (primarily the Bulls). It's not like they're doing this over a top name host, they're pissing off the Bulls & Sox over a never-was. [/B]

Given all the discussion over kotex boy, obviously WMVP is getting a lot of bang for their buck. No such thing as bad press. Mariotti is a polarizing figure, and many people will tune in just to be able to cuss him out. Plus, they will draw Cub fans in who will listen either to hear him drool over the Flubbies or rip the Sox. And I'm sure he comes relatively cheap. What they did was a smart business decision. They are expanding their listener base. Sure, they are losing the hardcore Sox fans, but for now if you want to get the game on the radio you have no choice. As things look now, by June very few people may be listening to Sox baseball anyway, and the Bulls are on the cusp of another "rebuilding" project which may not reap any rewards for another 5 years.

Reinsdorf gets what he deserves. That is not in any way shape or form an endorsement of Moronotti; but there is no way in hell I will ever feel any sympathy for chairman. WMVP is tired of bleeding cash; who can blame them?

With all the money saved on Colon, we could have signed someone of more impact than Cliff Politte, Marvin Bernard, Robert Person, or Mr. Zero. Reinsdorf has opened himself up to criticism, and unfortunately this will give shammy-lover more fuel for the fire. Let JR go pout to someone who cares, because I don't. :whiner:

voodoochile
02-13-2004, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Wirtz doesn't sign FAs & football has a completely different system in place along with revenue sharing (not to mention the Bears don't sign a lot of FAs either).

All I'm saying is that complaints from guys who obviously have axes to grind aren't necessarily to be taken as fact. It could just as easily be informal discussions and then the agent coming in and trying to squeeze the owner for more $$$. That's their right, but it doesn't exactly equate to trying to get the agent out of the picture.

Take Horace - it's perfectly reasonable for me to believe that JR might meet with Horace to talk about how he's valued and how he sees his future with the team(and it's his decision to do that - if Horace had wanted to call his agent in, he could certainly have done that). If in that discussion Horace says he wants to stay at a reasonable salary, then his agent convinces him he can get more, that's not any impropriety on JR's part IMO.

Same for Alomar. All of this smacks more of players taking advantage of an inherent bias by the fans towards them to take the biggest $$$ and make it seem like someone else's fault.

And as for A-Rod, Jr wanted to meet with him 1-on-1. If I was going to pay someone about $20m/yr and build a franchise around them, I might want to do that too. Tom Hicks did that (and no one complained about it, not even Boras). Why is JR at fault for wanting to do the same? Heck - even the BoSox owner met alone with Alex before the attempted trade! Is he now an ass as well?

You are spinning that Horace situation. I remember it well because it was widely reported. Horace was very clear about how it happened. JR called him into his office and they chatted briefly and JR offered him $5M/year Horace immediately started to leave the office because he didn't WANT to negotiate with JR without his agent. He ended up signing for $8M/year with the Magic.

beckett21
02-13-2004, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
[B]All I'm saying is that this is the first offseason in a few years that there hasn't been a good faith effort to put together a division winning team. To me that indicats that they are doing what they can. And IMO the FAs they lost weren't all their fault this offseason.
*Alomar ended up getting less than they offered.
*Graffanino (despite what you'd hear from Moronotti)- did NOT leave over $$$ - he left because the Royals promised him more PT (so not a cheapness issue there)
*Colon got a substantially higher offer and took it. Interestingly, there have been a number of reports of other teams and media questioning the wisdom in that contract - so is that cheapness? Or someone else overpaying?

Well, since I don't see any WS flags flying over the Cell, and since this division is so "winnable," shouldn't they be making MORE of an effort this season? Or are they just white-flagging it already?

Why did Alomar take less money elsewhere?

Graffanino--I thought he was one of JR's pets?

Colon? Maybe the Angels overpaid him, but we replaced him with... :?:

It is easy to lay blame on others...but this has become like a broken record. If we had a title or two to point to, this would be much easier to swallow. But since we have won NOTHING, obviously JR is just playing out the string until the next CBA in 2006...He wouldn't want to have to pull the plug on ANOTHER World Series caliber team!

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
You are spinning that Horace situation. I remember it well because it was widely reported. Horace was very clear about how it happened. JR called him into his office and they chatted briefly and JR offered him $5M/year Horace immediately started to leave the office because he didn't WANT to negotiate with JR without his agent. He ended up signing for $8M/year with the Magic.

I think Horace was doing his own spin. The other reports (and not just from the Bulls) were that Horace agreed to that deal, then his agent found out and he reneged (to the extent that you can on a deal you haven't signed). Remember, this was at the same time that he was complaining about his shots & playing with MJ, wanted to get more attention, etc. It wasn't like JR pissed him off so he left - he wanted and got a lot more money and went somewhere where he could take on a larger role.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
Well, since I don't see any WS flags flying over the Cell, and since this division is so "winnable," shouldn't they be making MORE of an effort this season? Or are they just white-flagging it already?

Why did Alomar take less money elsewhere?

Because he thought he'd get more, and then by the time he realized he couldn't, it was too late - he couldn't resign.


Graffanino--I thought he was one of JR's pets? ]
Which has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that he wanted more PT and the Sox didn't see him as an everyday player. Again - this wasn't about money.


Colon? Maybe the Angels overpaid him, but we replaced him with... :?:
Agree with this one - although I'm not convinced there's not another deal on the horizon.

It is easy to lay blame on others...but this has become like a broken record. If we had a title or two to point to, this would be much easier to swallow. But since we have won NOTHING, obviously JR is just playing out the string until the next CBA in 2006...He wouldn't want to have to pull the plug on ANOTHER World Series caliber team!


And interestingly enough - the current situation in baseball is exactly what JR said was going to happen back in '94. A clear division of teams with many that have little to no hope and few that are considered contenders. Everyone blames him for a strike that was an attempt to avert the current scenario, which most (outside of NY & Boston) hate. JR & the owners failed then, so they get blamed for the strike AND for the current state of affairs? (Although that's a topic for another thread.)

inta
02-13-2004, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar



And interestingly enough - the current situation in baseball is exactly what JR said was going to happen back in '94. A clear division of teams with many that have little to no hope and few that are considered contenders. Everyone blames him for a strike that was an attempt to avert the current scenario, which most (outside of NY & Boston) hate. JR & the owners failed then, so they get blamed for the strike AND for the current state of affairs? (Although that's a topic for another thread.)

y'know i was starting to think you were a member of the sox' organization with your blind defense of every move they make, but this just seals it.
c'mon, you can tell us! reveal your identity rahulsekhar!

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 04:46 PM
Hey - I've said I'm not happy with the lack of moves this offseason, I'm just not as rampantly anti-JR as most.

That said, and at the risk of a change in topic, the fact is that JR was quoted in '93-94 as saying that without a change in the economic system - you'd have a tiering of teams. That's what's happened. You can argue about who's fault it is, but not the base facts.

joecrede
02-13-2004, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
Reinsdorf gets what he deserves. That is not in any way shape or form an endorsement of Moronotti; but there is no way in hell I will ever feel any sympathy for chairman. WMVP is tired of bleeding cash; who can blame them?

The current owners bought the station knowing the terms of the contract. Maybe 'MVP isn't bleeding cash just like Reinsdorf is printing money.

steff
02-13-2004, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Mariotti is the one though that has come out sounding bad in all of this. He's showing he cannot handle criticism. Being as defensive as he's been makes me thing there's truth to what the White Sox organization says.


But that's been Jay's way for.. ever. His response was completly expected, IMO.

steff
02-13-2004, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You can say whatever you want about Alomar, but he made his own bed. The Sox offered him the best deal out of any club and he refused to take it because he was "insulted" by it. He was forced to take a lot less money and instead of looking like an idiot, he tried to pin in on the Sox.



You believe the Sox when they say they don't "have the money" to spend on players, don't you... ? :D:

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by steff
You believe the Sox when they say they don't "have the money" to spend on players, don't you... ? :D: What are you talking about? They offered 3 million (1 deferred) for 2 two years. He said he was insulted by the deal, and then in turn couldn't get anymore from anywhere else. So he took a 1 million dollar deal ($350,000) deferred for one year. I don't see how that translates into what you said, but it's obvious you make a special point to accuse the Sox of lying for whatever reason.

steff
02-13-2004, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
What are you talking about? They offered 3 million (1 deferred) for 2 two years. He said he was insulted by the deal, and then in turn couldn't get anymore from anywhere else. So he took a 1 million dollar deal ($350,000) deferred for one year. I don't see how that translates into what you said, but it's obvious you make a special point to accuse the Sox of lying for whatever reason.


He said that.. to who? To Kenny...? Was this before or after he was quoted HIMSELF from HIS mouth that he wanted to stay with his brother here? Was this before of after Kenny was quoted in the Trib that they had a handshake deal in September and he didn't know what happened to bust that up.

This is what I think happened...

Kenny - Robbie.. how about 3 million for 2 years?
Robbie - Sure..
Kenny - OK.. let me go ask my boss.
Jerry - No
Kenny - Whoops :o:

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by steff
He said that.. to who? To Kenny...? Was this before or after he was quoted HIMSELF from HIS mouth that he wanted to stay with his brother here? Was this before of after Kenny was quoted in the Trib that they had a handshake deal in September and he didn't know what happened to bust that up.

This is what I think happened...

Kenny - Robbie.. how about 3 million for 2 years?
Robbie - Sure..
Kenny - OK.. let me go ask my boss.
Jerry - No
Kenny - Whoops :o: Lol steff, do you have any backing to your conspiracy theory? The numbers are factual, they were offered and then turned down by him and his agent. Plain and simple.

steff
02-13-2004, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Lol steff, do you have any backing to your conspiracy theory? The numbers are factual, they were offered and then turned down by him and his agent. Plain and simple.



Did I dispute the numbers..?

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by steff
Did I dispute the numbers..? You disputed that it was an actual offer.

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 06:14 PM
Rahulsekhar:

The problem with many of the Sox moves (the overwhelming majority by the way) is that they were trades.

In a trade you have to give up something.

For an organization as thin as the Sox have been since 1994 how does creating more holes in order to try to fill the ones that you already have do anything?

Why aren't the Sox getting other teams free agents to fill holes without creating new ones?

Lip

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 06:15 PM
On ‘incidents’ with agents: “When (Horace) Grant left Reinsdorf’s office, he said he called his agent Jimmy Sexton from his car phone. Sexton described him as ‘very emotional.’ ‘Jimmy, the guy just tried to negotiate with me without getting you involved.’ Sexton had Grant fax over the piece of paper they had scribbled on, the proposed contract in Reinsdorf’s view. ‘I swear on my grandfather’s grave, I didn’t agree to anything,’ said Grant, who related that same story, off the record, to at least one reporter. ‘If I did agree, then why didn’t I just sign the paper?.’ Sexton’s biggest problem with Reinsdorf’s story is that this somehow was a ‘spur of the moment’ offer. ‘If your going to do a handshake deal with a player...I don’t think you take the time to write it on a legal pad and ask the player to sign it.’ ‘He talks about the morality of sports,’ Grant said. ‘Why would anyone want to negotiate with me without my representative there?’– Horace Grant & Jimmy Sexton to Melissa Issacson. From the book Transition Game. Pgs. 77- 79.

"There was plenty of time to work it out if [the Sox] had serious interest," Jose Torres the agent for Roberto Alomar said."They wanted to sign him to a deal without my involvement.” – from a story in the Chicago Tribune January 8, 2004.

More to come in the future.

Lip

steff
02-13-2004, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You disputed that it was an actual offer.



Where did I do that...?

Here's the proof, by the way.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/index.html?ts=1076714441

"The Sox have a different perspective, contending [Ken Williams] and [Roberto Alomar] verbally agreed to a one-year deal worth $3 million during a one-on-one discussion in August. When Williams called [Jaime Torres] to hammer out the agreement, Sox officials say the agent sought two years."


Nothing about being insulted.. it was about wanting another year.

Geez.. heaven for bid a player WANT to stay here.. :o:

voodoochile
02-13-2004, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by steff
But that's been Jay's way for.. ever. His response was completly expected, IMO.

Not just that, but it's what he feeds off of. He is the sports columnists version of a shock jock and now he has air time. He wants this feud to continue because it increases his ratings.

Does anyone think he cares for a minute what people THINK of him? He could care less so long as the money is green and flowing. Heck, maybe it will be a good thing for the Sox. After all they aren't getting any good publicity and the ONLY bad publicity is no publicity.

Which is probably exactly why JR has now weighed in on the topic. If he can keep the wheels spinning on this issue, maybe more fans will start blaming the moron for the problems and start to feel sympathy for the Sox.

:gallas
"JR... I've got it. Brainstorm of brainstorms. We'll hold a wake. Have all the fans wear black and bring flowers and we'll have a big casket at centerfield with "sports journalism integrity" painted on the side and a giant mannequin of Jay inside. We can have fans throw money in giant collection buckets to help out the team in it's time of need."

:reinsy
"I like it. One question can we skip the casket and the mannequin and just put out the buckets? Paint "Help Darn Our Sox" on the side with a picture of Jay and one of those funny red circles with a slash through his face. That way it can be a year round promo."

:gallas
"Where's the promo in having fans throw money in a bucket?"

:reinsy
"I'll give you 10... no... 5%."

:gallas
"I'm beginning to understand the beauty of your simple plan. I can have the buckets by opening day."

:reinsy
"Do it sooner. There are suckers.... er... fans in Arizona who just might want to help out in March."

joecrede
02-13-2004, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
On ‘incidents’ with agents: “When (Horace) Grant left Reinsdorf’s office, he said he called his agent Jimmy Sexton from his car phone. Sexton described him as ‘very emotional.’ ‘Jimmy, the guy just tried to negotiate with me without getting you involved.’ Sexton had Grant fax over the piece of paper they had scribbled on, the proposed contract in Reinsdorf’s view. ‘I swear on my grandfather’s grave, I didn’t agree to anything,’ said Grant, who related that same story, off the record, to at least one reporter. ‘If I did agree, then why didn’t I just sign the paper?.’ Sexton’s biggest problem with Reinsdorf’s story is that this somehow was a ‘spur of the moment’ offer. ‘If your going to do a handshake deal with a player...I don’t think you take the time to write it on a legal pad and ask the player to sign it.’ ‘He talks about the morality of sports,’ Grant said. ‘Why would anyone want to negotiate with me without my representative there?’– Horace Grant & Jimmy Sexton to Melissa Issacson. From the book Transition Game. Pgs. 77- 79.

"There was plenty of time to work it out if [the Sox] had serious interest," Jose Torres the agent for Roberto Alomar said."They wanted to sign him to a deal without my involvement.” – from a story in the Chicago Tribune January 8, 2004.

More to come in the future.

Lip

Lip, what is your point?

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by steff
Where did I do that...?

Here's the proof, by the way.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/index.html?ts=1076714441

"The Sox have a different perspective, contending [Ken Williams] and [Roberto Alomar] verbally agreed to a one-year deal worth $3 million during a one-on-one discussion in August. When Williams called [Jaime Torres] to hammer out the agreement, Sox officials say the agent sought two years."


Nothing about being insulted.. it was about wanting another year.

Geez.. heaven for bid a player WANT to stay here.. :o: He originally wanted three years, we did in fact offer two years, at $3 million a year, for 2 years, with each year 1 million deferred. That was not to his liking.

joecrede
02-13-2004, 06:29 PM
Originally posted by steff
Where did I do that...?

Here's the proof, by the way.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/index.html?ts=1076714441

"The Sox have a different perspective, contending [Ken Williams] and [Roberto Alomar] verbally agreed to a one-year deal worth $3 million during a one-on-one discussion in August. When Williams called [Jaime Torres] to hammer out the agreement, Sox officials say the agent sought two years."


Nothing about being insulted.. it was about wanting another year.

Geez.. heaven for bid a player WANT to stay here.. :o:

You don't want Alomar here in '05.

Chisox_cali
02-13-2004, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1

and don't worry folks, with that new 30 year lease the White Sox aren't going anywhere! (and personally if getting rid of this goofball organization meant losing the Sox for a few years before getting an expansion team with good ownership to replace them, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Long term it would be better for Chicago's South Side fans since these doofuses aren't going to win a damn thing anyway.

Lip

So you would rather have the team move. That is some petty hatred you got going there....

PaleHoseGeorge
02-13-2004, 07:26 PM
I'm guessing this latest episode proves yet again that Hawk Harrelson is the "Oracle of Reinsdorphi." He calls out Jay Mariotti and sure enough 2 weeks later we find out Reinsdorf is making similar whines behind the scenes.

:hawk
"I tell you what, I'm calling out that Jay Mariotti..."

:reinsy
"Well said, Hawk. Sox Fans couldn't even see my lips move."

BTW, this entire pissing contest was utterly predictable the moment Hawk opened his mouth at SoxFest. You would have to be on drugs to think anything positive is going to come from this. Declaring war on the media is the last thing the Sox need now. In yet another management gaffe, Reinsdorf is only succeeding in queering his team's most important business partner this side of the IFSA. Now even the WMVP station manager is calling out Reinsdorf. I suppose JR thinks cozying up to those morons at the Score would be preferable?

:ass
"You can buy my allegiance, Jerry. Just fire DJ and make me your TV colorman!"

Stupid... how stupid this all is... completely avoidable... and 100 percent caused by Reinsdorf's bullheaded notion that he can control what *independent columnists* write about his team. What an abortion this organization has become...

Scott Reifert ought to wear a bag on his head for serving up those quotes on behalf of his master. Surely he can't be this stupid, can he?

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 08:07 PM
George:

Extremely well said.

Joe:

My point is that some fans think these 'incidents' were just pleasant little get togethers, bull sessions. The evidence seems to show otherwise (or how do you account for Uncle Jerry writing out what he offered Grant, doesn't sound like a handshake agreement does it?)

Joe I'm surprised you haven't been told this by your sources but when it comes to money Uncle Jerry leaves nothing to chance. These 'discussions' with Grant, Alomar and Rodriguez (technically not a discussion but a request to see him without Scott Boras) didn't just 'happen'. They were planned out in advance.

Like Cub Killer said elsewhere why have these things continued to happen after Grant's incident? These type things are Uncle Jerry's M.O. and the stench of it continues to follow him. (Fine choice of words by the way, Cub!)

Lip

cornball
02-13-2004, 08:15 PM
I call for a death match Jerry vs. Jay.

Finally the fans would be guarenteed a winner! :D:

joecrede
02-13-2004, 08:29 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
George:

Extremely well said.

Joe:

My point is that some fans think these 'incidents' were just pleasant little get togethers, bull sessions. The evidence seems to show otherwise (or how do you account for Uncle Jerry writing out what he offered Grant, doesn't sound like a handshake agreement does it?)

Joe I'm surprised you haven't been told this by your sources but when it comes to money Uncle Jerry leaves nothing to chance. These 'discussions' with Grant, Alomar and Rodriguez (technically not a discussion but a request to see him without Scott Boras) didn't just 'happen'. They were planned out in advance.

Like Cub Killer said elsewhere why have these things continued to happen after Grant's incident? These type things are Uncle Jerry's M.O. and the stench of it continues to follow him. (Fine choice of words by the way, Cub!)

Lip

Are you accusing Reinsdorf of being an unethical businessman? Come out and say it then.

Lip Man 1
02-13-2004, 09:33 PM
Joe:

I already have in the past when the Alomar situation came out. I said that it was an unethical practice that would get around in the small society that is MLB and eventually bite the Sox on the rear big time.

It's happened three times now, that's not coincidence.

Lip

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 09:40 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
George:

Extremely well said.

Joe:

My point is that some fans think these 'incidents' were just pleasant little get togethers, bull sessions. The evidence seems to show otherwise (or how do you account for Uncle Jerry writing out what he offered Grant, doesn't sound like a handshake agreement does it?)

Joe I'm surprised you haven't been told this by your sources but when it comes to money Uncle Jerry leaves nothing to chance. These 'discussions' with Grant, Alomar and Rodriguez (technically not a discussion but a request to see him without Scott Boras) didn't just 'happen'. They were planned out in advance.

Like Cub Killer said elsewhere why have these things continued to happen after Grant's incident? These type things are Uncle Jerry's M.O. and the stench of it continues to follow him. (Fine choice of words by the way, Cub!)

Lip

1) Jerry never had any discussions with Alomar, it was Kenny. And the result was a contract offer to the agent based on the discussion. Nothing under the table in that - a discussion on what terms the player would be willing to stay which resulted in something for the agent to review. The only thing people are going on there to call it underhanded is the agent's comment. Given how that played out and Kenny's general attitude (i.e. he's pretty honest & open even when it can hurt him), I think there's a pretty good chance that this was above board and the agent & Alomar just thought they could get more.

2) I remember other reports on the Grant situation that made it seem less like JR was being underhanded (and I know I've seen a lot of quotes from agents about how JR's been pretty forthright in dealings with them). But I can't find any refutation of the Isaacson quote. All I can say is that the only source is obviously someone with their own axe to grind there, so I'd take it with a grain of salt

3) Given the # of contracts that have been negotiated, I see (maybe) 1 incident (Grant's) - a pretty small percentage. The ARod thing was exactly what other owners did (Hicks, the BoSox) and given the contracts being tossed around, I think were totally warranted. Nothing underhanded - make a request to speak to the player, and if he's willing - great. The player has a choice.

4) On the other side of this is things like what JR did with JWill, the fact that he advised Pippen against the deal he signed, and the deals he made with MJ.

I'm sorry - I just don't see a "stench" here. Like I said - MAYBE 1 incident if you 100% believe Grant's story. I know most here are predisposed to think the worst of JR, and therefore it's easy to take Horace's side, so I doubt anyone's going to change their mind on this one.

joecrede
02-13-2004, 09:51 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Joe:

I already have in the past when the Alomar situation came out. I said that it was an unethical practice that would get around in the small society that is MLB and eventually bite the Sox on the rear big time.

It's happened three times now, that's not coincidence.

Lip

What about Reinsdorf paying Jay Williams $3M? Or picking up the option on Guillen's contract just after Guillen blew his knee out in 1992?

beckett21
02-13-2004, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
What about Reinsdorf paying Jay Williams $3M? Or picking up the option on Guillen's contract just after Guillen blew his knee out in 1992?

Consider those loss leaders (I think that is the marketing term, but I am not a business major).

Imagine the bad publicity had he given those guys NOTHING. You would never get another FA in here, and every player under the sun would have a Sox/Bulls no-trade clause in their contract (at least the smart ones would.). 3 mil is a drop in the bucket to JR...but to give a "cripple" nothing...well that would be downright evil, wouldn't it? Gotta give them something to keep from looking like the bad guy. Sorry but that doesn't overly impress me. Consider it good PR. Nice gesture, don't get me wrong. Glad to see it. But JR didn't do it solely because he's a nice guy, IMO. I am sure you will disagree with me but that's how I see it.

rahulsekhar
02-13-2004, 10:59 PM
Hey - that's fine, it's just interesting that when he does something good - no credit. But then when he supposedly does something bad, he gets all the blame. Way to be evenhanded there!

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
Consider those loss leaders (I think that is the marketing term, but I am not a business major).

Imagine the bad publicity had he given those guys NOTHING. You would never get another FA in here, and every player under the sun would have a Sox/Bulls no-trade clause in their contract (at least the smart ones would.). 3 mil is a drop in the bucket to JR...but to give a "cripple" nothing...well that would be downright evil, wouldn't it? Gotta give them something to keep from looking like the bad guy. Sorry but that doesn't overly impress me. Consider it good PR. Nice gesture, don't get me wrong. Glad to see it. But JR didn't do it solely because he's a nice guy, IMO. I am sure you will disagree with me but that's how I see it. You can't hold that against him though. When someone does something nice, you can't just question their motives. He wasn't trying to be nice when he implemented Thomas's diminished skills clause. PR or not, he did something he didn't have to. It's still keeps the Sox in good faith, whether that was the goal or not. With all the negativity surrounding JR, adn some of it may be deserved, but the guy can't do anything good without it appearing to some that he is just to hide his evil intentions. It's not fair.

beckett21
02-13-2004, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You can't hold that against him though. When someone does something nice, you can't just question their motives. He wasn't trying to be nice when he implemented Thomas's diminished skills clause. PR or not, he did something he didn't have to. It's still keeps the Sox in good faith, whether that was the goal or not. With all the negativity surrounding JR, adn some of it may be deserved, but the guy can't do anything good without it appearing to some that he is just to hide his evil intentions. It's not fair.

I never said he was hiding his evil intentions; I said he would look evil if he gave those guys nothing. Perhaps you could interpret it that way but that is not what I meant. In honesty I wouldn't blame him if he didn't give Williams a penny; what Williams did was totally irresponsible and I would have been pissed if I had to pay him $3 mil. dollars for being an idiot. Williams deserved nothing and got a generous buyout; kudos to JR there.

I grant that it is a good gesture, whatever the motive. I applaud it. But either way he had to do it from a PR standpoint with players, prospective players, and fans.

Must be tough being a multimillionaire owner of multiple sports franchises in the city of Chicago--poor guy. Why does everyone want to persecute him?

He couldn't GIVE his money away in the aftermath of Jordan...nobody wanted to play for him or Crumbs. Let's not paint the guy as a martyr. The truth may be somewhere in between, and forgive me for painting with a broad brush but you do not get as far in the world as JR has by being a nice guy. He is a businessman, plain and simple. Business is business. I respectfully disagree with you and other Reinsy apologists. Fair or unfair, he is the Chairman, he signs off on the checks, the buck stops with him. It may not be fair, I may not be right...that is just my perspective on it for whatever that's worth. You reap what you sow.

:reinsy

"Why is everybody always picking on me??"

beckett21
02-13-2004, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Hey - that's fine, it's just interesting that when he does something good - no credit. But then when he supposedly does something bad, he gets all the blame. Way to be evenhanded there!

Sorry for always looking at things with a jaundiced eye. I just fail to see a commitment to winning from this franchise. Yes, maybe we had the second or third best record in the nineties, or whatever the stats say; hard to argue against that. Point for your side.

But let's look at the team TODAY...not last year, not next year, today. Because that is the hand we have been dealt. Not what we might do, who we might trade...Speculation at this point is merely that...heresy. This team is undisputably (although I am sure someone will dispute it) worse today than it was to end last season, IMHO; and we only won 86 games last year.

And for all those victories and second place finishes...what did we actually WIN? Nobody remembers second place...nobody cares. All we remember is what could have been and how much it sucks to miss the playoffs again, or WHEE to get knocked out in the first round.

World Series? Hell I would be content to get to the ALCS ...do you know how exciting that would be? Not to mention how much freakin' money JR and the Sox would make... And that would be a step in the right direction. You have to crawl before you can walk. Not going to happen with this crew. And the sad thing is, we could be somuchcloser...

I can understand not re-signing Colon to a point, and for all we know that may have been a smart move. But we should have replaced him with a credible starter, not the 5-headed monster we are looking at in ST to fill two spots. All in the name of the almighty dollar. C-H-E-A-P. Let's call a spade a spade. We could have signed someone if we wanted to. But that would have cost MONEY, and, well, IF THE FANS WOULD SUPPORT US... THEN, MAYBE... unbelieveable; the guy gets more of a fair shake than he even deserves IMO. :(:

Lip Man 1
02-14-2004, 12:35 AM
Rahulsekhar:

Does it really matter who contacted Alomar? The point is that both are members of the same organization.

And I'm surprised that you glossed over the Rodriguez incident. That was big news when it happened. Let's put it this way, when Kenny Williams met the press the anger at being blown off was seething through his pores.

Of course it came out a few days later in the papers that Rodriguez when contacted, said that he did get a phone call from Jerry Reinsdorf expressing the Sox interest in him and requesting a meeting. Alex then said that Reinsdorf specifically wanted the meeting to take place without agent Scott Boras (whom Uncle Jerry has had a long dispute with). Rodriguez said that he couldn't do that. Then he told Boras what happened and the two blew off the meeting they had scheduled with the Sox assuming, (correctly in my opinion) that the Sox weren't really that interested. That this was going to be another 'token PR move.'

That's what the man said so either he's lying outright or he's telling the truth on what happened. Given at this time that Reinsdorf already had a 'public' disagreement with Horace, I have to give Alex the benefit of the doubt. Why should he lie? He already had plenty of interested teams.

Lip

TommyJohn
02-14-2004, 02:20 AM
Originally posted by Chisox_cali
So you would rather have the team move. That is some petty hatred you got going there....

I fear for the future of the team. I don't want to see them
moved, contracted or replaced with an expansion team.
And what makes anyone so sure that the Sox would be
replaced by one? This is such an overwhelmingly Cubs
town that the AL would see any competition as a loser
proposition. Also, the Cubs would have territorial rights all
to themselves, are a powerful, well-monied organization
and could easily block any AL expansion into Chicago.
I'm not sure what the MLB rules are on it, but I know that
the Cubs would have the upper hand. Let's also not forget
Blueblood Ueberroth's (sp?) 1988 declaration that "Chicago
has the Cubs." I have not liked that SOB from that day to
this, but it pretty much sums up baseball's attitude towards
"our" team.

You can write all you want about the olden, golden days of
1951-67. To baseball's moneymen, that may as well be 1951-
67 B.C. They'd be more interested in more recent years, when
the Cubs have outdrawn the Sox by 1 million fans. I doubt
that any expansion team would come in any time soon, even
if the Cubs would allow it, which they wouldn't.

Sure, the team has a 30 year lease. But leases can be broken.
And would Chicago put up much of a fight to keep the team?
I'm not so sure.

EDIT: I know that the NFL has a rule that any team can block
a move to within 75 miles of where it plays. There was a pipe
dream a few years ago of luring the football Cardinals back to
Chicago, but it was nothing more than talk- the Bears could
easily have vetoed such a move. I wonder if baseball has a
similar rule in effect. If they do, it would give the Cubs abso-
lute power insofar as an AL expansion team is concerned.
In my opinion, if the White Sox depart, they are gone forever,
as is Chicago American League baseball.

steff
02-14-2004, 06:10 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
He originally wanted three years, we did in fact offer two years, at $3 million a year, for 2 years, with each year 1 million deferred. That was not to his liking.



Looked all over, and I'm sorry but I can't find anything to support your comments. I'm gonna stick with what both Robbie and the Sox said on this one.

steff
02-14-2004, 06:11 AM
Originally posted by joecrede
You don't want Alomar here in '05.



I don't want Willie Harris even more!

steff
02-14-2004, 06:12 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Joe:

I already have in the past when the Alomar situation came out. I said that it was an unethical practice that would get around in the small society that is MLB and eventually bite the Sox on the rear big time.

It's happened three times now, that's not coincidence.

Lip



Amen Lip!!

gosox41
02-14-2004, 08:42 AM
Originally posted by Unregistered
Well, naturally JR didn't say it himself. According to the Trib, JR is furious that WMVP didn't ask him before hiring Moronotti. MVP replies that they're not scared by JR cause basically his 2 teams under MVP contract aren't exactly setting the world on fire, ratings-wise... Can't blame him.


I love this quote from Station GM Bob Snyder:


Radio Static for Reinsy (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-040212espn,1,2560795.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines)

There are two main problems I have with Marriotti. First, his hatred of JR is way to personal. He has not been onjective about JR in years. Just keeps ripping him every chance he gets. JR may deserve it at times, but when it happens so much over every little thing then you lose credibility.

The other problem is that Marriotti is a wimp. He shoots his mouth off in his article to start something. But the minute something is said about him he gets all defensive and starts whining. He is certainly not objective. ANyone can find the negative and Mariotti is especially good at it when he just decides to make up facts and overblow situations.

People talk of hating JR for many different reasons, and some are deserved. But Munster-boy easily falls in that category. Didn't Tony Phillips threaten him a few years ago? Don't most Sox players hate his guts? It's not because all Sox players love JR and listen to his every word. These are millionaires with big egos who dont need someone telling them how to think.

Mariotti is a bum.

Bob

TornLabrum
02-14-2004, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Rahulsekhar:

Does it really matter who contacted Alomar? The point is that both are members of the same organization.

And I'm surprised that you glossed over the Rodriguez incident. That was big news when it happened. Let's put it this way, when Kenny Williams met the press the anger at being blown off was seething through his pores.

Of course it came out a few days later in the papers that Rodriguez when contacted, said that he did get a phone call from Jerry Reinsdorf expressing the Sox interest in him and requesting a meeting. Alex then said that Reinsdorf specifically wanted the meeting to take place without agent Scott Boras (whom Uncle Jerry has had a long dispute with). Rodriguez said that he couldn't do that. Then he told Boras what happened and the two blew off the meeting they had scheduled with the Sox assuming, (correctly in my opinion) that the Sox weren't really that interested. That this was going to be another 'token PR move.'

That's what the man said so either he's lying outright or he's telling the truth on what happened. Given at this time that Reinsdorf already had a 'public' disagreement with Horace, I have to give Alex the benefit of the doubt. Why should he lie? He already had plenty of interested teams.

Lip

And let's not forget last August when Reinsdorf talked to Mark Buehrle's parents requesting that they and Mark get together without his agent to work out a deal.

joecrede
02-14-2004, 12:24 PM
USA Today 12/13/2003 (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/columnist/bodley/2003-12-11-bodley_x.htm)

"It was one day about a year ago when Henry, while visiting the Dominican Republic, received an unexpected and unsolicited call from Rodriguez. The player suggested the two might have lunch some day and discuss generic player-owner issues. It never happened.

But in November, Henry was contacted by Hicks who proposed a Rodriguez-for-Nomar Garciaparra trade. The Red Sox didn't want to deal Garciaparra but offered Ramirez instead.

At first, Hicks wasn't interested, but he later called Henry to suggest the Boston owner meet with Rodriguez and discuss restructuring the mammoth contract.

Permission was obtained from the commissioner's office. Rodriguez, his wife Cynthia, and Henry lunched at a Boca Raton, Fla., restaurant in mid-November."

Thanks for playing Lip.

Lip Man 1
02-14-2004, 01:54 PM
Sorry Joe...no sale.

I could care less what other organizations do or don't do.

THOSE organizations don't have the reputation and history of Uncle Jerry's do they?

THOSE organizations seem to be able to get players to defer money, but not the Sox.

Interesting isn't it?

I wonder why that is?

With Hal's comment about Buehrle, (which I had forgotten about) that makes four times now. And you are still claiming with a straight face that these things weren't planned?

Joe while I disagree with your view of the White Sox world in the strongest possible terms I admire that fact that in the face of overwhelming evidence both on the field, off the field, at the gate, in the media and among the fans, that this ownership and leadership, has brought the franchise to the brink of total irrelevance you can still say 'things are fine and this organization is OK.'

That really takes a special talent.

Lip

joecrede
02-14-2004, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Sorry Joe...no sale.

I could care less what other organizations do or don't do.

I don't think there is a poster to this board who cares more about what other organizations do or don't do ...

THOSE organizations seem to be able to get players to defer money, but not the Sox.

... Above is just one example.

The fact that the White Sox have not made a World Series under Reinsdorf is a legitimate enough reason to be critical of his years as owner. You don't have to make stuff up (unethical player negotiations) to further your argument against him.

With Hal's comment about Buehrle, (which I had forgotten about) that makes four times now. And you are still claiming with a straight face that these things weren't planned?.

Please clarify what you mean by "these things".

Obviously the Buehrle meeting (if it happened) was planned. He requested it.

voodoochile
02-14-2004, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
USA Today 12/13/2003 (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/columnist/bodley/2003-12-11-bodley_x.htm)

"It was one day about a year ago when Henry, while visiting the Dominican Republic, received an unexpected and unsolicited call from Rodriguez. The player suggested the two might have lunch some day and discuss generic player-owner issues. It never happened.

But in November, Henry was contacted by Hicks who proposed a Rodriguez-for-Nomar Garciaparra trade. The Red Sox didn't want to deal Garciaparra but offered Ramirez instead.

At first, Hicks wasn't interested, but he later called Henry to suggest the Boston owner meet with Rodriguez and discuss restructuring the mammoth contract.

Permission was obtained from the commissioner's office. Rodriguez, his wife Cynthia, and Henry lunched at a Boca Raton, Fla., restaurant in mid-November."

Thanks for playing Lip.

That isn't even close to the same situation. It is one thing to sit down with someone who is already signed long term and discuss what they are willing to do to make a trade possible and something else entirely to try and negotiate with unsigned players without the benefit of their legal representation.

Once a player is signed, they hold all the cards. Want money? refuse to restructure. Want to be traded? Try and work something out that the union, the player and the owner can all agree on. If nothing can be agreed on, the player still gets all of their money.

Meanwhile, JR is trying to lowball players when they don't have their legally obtained agent with them to give them advice.

How can you say these are the same thing?

Thanks for playing, joe.

joecrede
02-14-2004, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
That isn't even close to the same situation. It is one thing to sit down with someone who is already signed long term and discuss what they are willing to do to make a trade possible and something else entirely to try and negotiate with unsigned players without the benefit of their legal representation.

Once a player is signed, they hold all the cards. Want money? refuse to restructure. Want to be traded? Try and work something out that the union, the player and the owner can all agree on. If nothing can be agreed on, the player still gets all of their money.

Meanwhile, JR is trying to lowball players when they don't have their legally obtained agent with them to give them advice.

How can you say these are the same thing?

Thanks for playing, joe.

As usual, your theory could not be more wrong.

No difference in Reinsdorf lowballing a player w/o a contract and Henry lowballing a restructuring of a signed contract without their agent present.

SEALgep
02-14-2004, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
That isn't even close to the same situation. It is one thing to sit down with someone who is already signed long term and discuss what they are willing to do to make a trade possible and something else entirely to try and negotiate with unsigned players without the benefit of their legal representation.

Once a player is signed, they hold all the cards. Want money? refuse to restructure. Want to be traded? Try and work something out that the union, the player and the owner can all agree on. If nothing can be agreed on, the player still gets all of their money.

Meanwhile, JR is trying to lowball players when they don't have their legally obtained agent with them to give them advice.

How can you say these are the same thing?

Thanks for playing, joe. It doesn't mean they are necessarily trying to shove a deal down their throat. They want to meet with a player without their agent and just discuss the scenerio. When agents are present, you don't get a true feeling of how the player feels about coming to your club. I don't see a problem with it. It's at the discretion of the player, they can say no. What's the big deal. As far as lowballing, you're always trying to get the best deal for the club, and agents are always trying to get the best deal for their client. If you can cut out the middle man, you would ideally do it.

voodoochile
02-14-2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by joecrede


As usual, your theory could not be more wrong.

No difference in Reinsdorf lowballing a player w/o a contract and Henry lowballing a restructuring of a signed contract without their agent present.

Your story mentioned nothing about Henry lowballing ARod or anything remotely close. In fact, ARod went into the meetings stating publicly that any deal would have to be approved by the union - in effect keeping his representation before things ever started. And, again, the player holds all the cards in this situation. They are guaranteed the same money no matter what. When there is no contract, the player has no guarantee.

Even if this is the same principle at work it is at least slightly different because of the magnitude of the situation. ARod is protected by the very fact that he IS ARod and no matter what happens the press will report it widely. It is much harder for one of the parties to act unethically in that situation. This is the exact opposite of what happened with JR where no permissions were obtained, no press was involved and the whole thing came out AFTER it happened. You honestly don't see the difference here, or are you just playing Devil's Advocate because you get tired of people ripping on Reinsy?

The days when players and owners could do deals on a handshake without the player having representation died long ago and that is mostly the fault of the owners who completely abused their anti-trust exemption for a long long time before the players decided to form a union and sue. Since then, it has favored the players entirely. JR's weak attempts to circumvent the system are just flat dumb and the fact that these stories don't get written about other owners is just further proof of how poorly this team is run.

Got any examples of unsigned players making complaints about an owner approaching them on the side like this?

Originally posted by SEALgep
It doesn't mean they are necessarily trying to shove a deal down their throat. They want to meet with a player without their agent and just discuss the scenerio. When agents are present, you don't get a true feeling of how the player feels about coming to your club. I don't see a problem with it. It's at the discretion of the player, they can say no. What's the big deal. As far as lowballing, you're always trying to get the best deal for the club, and agents are always trying to get the best deal for their client. If you can cut out the middle man, you would ideally do it.

It is one thing to sit down with a player one on one and talk about the direction they see themselves going and talking about the future you see for the club and for them. The minute the talks turn to money, it is unethical, IMO. The sole exception to that being where everything is above board BEFORE the talks take place as in the ARod situation mentioned above.

Besides, cutting out the middle man wouldn't work in this case. The player has an agent. Any deal they sign, the agent gets a cut of regardless of whether they negotiated it personally or not. If the player were to work something out verbally and then fire their agent and then sign the contract, the agent would have a pretty tight lawsuit, IMO. No different than an agent bringing a seller and buyer together in the housing market and then the owner and seller going behind the agent's back to cut out the commission and come to terms on a lower price based on that lack of commission.

joecrede
02-14-2004, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Your story mentioned nothing about Henry lowballing ARod or anything remotely close. In fact, ARod went into the meetings stating publicly that any deal would have to be approved by the union - in effect keeping his representation before things ever started. And, again, the player holds all the cards in this situation. They are guaranteed the same money no matter what. When there is no contract, the player has no guarantee.

A player who has contract who meets with an owner for the purposes of restructuring that contract is in the exact same position as a player who doesn't have a contract talking to an owner about a contract. The player can either accept, decline, or seek counsel.

Even if this is the same principle at work it is at least slightly different because of the magnitude of the situation. ARod is protected by the very fact that he IS ARod and no matter what happens the press will report it widely. It is much harder for one of the parties to act unethically in that situation. This is the exact opposite of what happened with JR where no permissions were obtained, no press was involved and the whole thing came out AFTER it happened. You honestly don't see the difference here, or are you just playing Devil's Advocate because you get tired of people ripping on Reinsy?

I didn't know Peter Gammons was at that lunch with ARod and John Henry...

Trumping up stories of possible unethical negotiations with players by Reinsdorf to further one's argument against him is unnecessary. In fact, it's weird.

voodoochile
02-14-2004, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
A player who has contract who meets with an owner for the purposes of restructuring that contract is in the exact same position as a player who doesn't have a contract talking to an owner about a contract. The player can either accept, decline, or seek counsel.



I didn't know Peter Gammons was at that lunch with ARod and John Henry...

Trumping up stories of possible unethical negotiations with players by Reinsdorf to further one's argument against him is unnecessary. In fact, it's weird.

I'm not trumping up anything. The facts are what they are. JR or someone he hired has several times approached players who work for him but are coming into a period of Free Agency to discuss contracts without their agent. In each case the meeting was initiated by the Sox management member.

Yes, as I said, that strikes me as unethical. Of course that is also just my opinion and you have done NOTHING to change it with your blind support for the current management team.

And, again, NO, the player who already has a contract who meets with an owner to discuss contract restructuring with the goal of facilitating a trade without his agent in an above board manner where the action is preapproved by everyone involved all the way up to the commissionor himself is NOT in the same position as a player who gets invited into his bosses office to talk about whatever and then has his boss try to discuss contract numbers.

If you really cannot see that, then you are too stupid or blindly loyal for me to continue this discussion with. If I'm Gammons, you must be Jr or one of his puppets.

Hawk, is that you?

joecrede
02-14-2004, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
And, again, NO, the player who already has a contract who meets with an owner to discuss contract restructuring with the goal of facilitating a trade without his agent in an above board manner where the action is preapproved by everyone involved all the way up to the commissionor himself is NOT in the same position as a player who gets invited into his bosses office to talk about whatever and then has his boss try to discuss contract numbers.

In other words, Reinsdorf lured the players into his office under false pretenses, presented them with below market offers out of the blue and coerced them into signing. John Henry on the other hand had a lovely lunch with Alex Rodriguez and his wife discussing the merits of him playing in Boston. The restructuring of A-Rod's deal never came up because Boras was not present as that would be unethical.

Oh, by the way, Selig had to approve it because Rodriguez played for another team, otherwise it would be tampering.

If you really cannot see that, then you are too stupid or blindly loyal for me to continue this discussion with. If I'm Gammons, you must be Jr or one of his puppets.

Hawk, is that you?

Let's see, the players in either situation can accept the offer, decline the offer, or seek counsel. Sorry, no difference.

(For the record, I never compared you to Gammons.)

voodoochile
02-14-2004, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
In other words, Reinsdorf lured the players into his office under false pretenses, presented them with below market offers out of the blue and coerced them into signing. John Henry on the other hand had a lovely lunch with Alex Rodriguez and his wife discussing the merits of him playing in Boston. The restructuring of A-Rod's deal never came up because Boras was not present as that would be unethical.

Oh, by the way, Selig had to approve it because Rodriguez played for another team, otherwise it would be tampering.



Let's see, the players in either situation can accept the offer, decline the offer, or seek counsel. Sorry, no difference.

(For the record, I never compared you to Gammons.)

You keep modifying the conditions of the situation so you can be right.

I never claimed that Henry didn't talk money. But, he received approval from ARod, his agent, Hicks and Selig before doing so.

JR did none of that and from all accounts surprised Grant, tried to deal with ARod without Boras present (and got told no), had KW (or allowed KW) to try something similar with Alomar and apparently tried to get Mark Buehrle's parents to help him negotiate with their son (though I admit this last one I have only heard in this thread - though I also trust the source completely).

Maybe it isn't as big an issue as it seems, but honestly, he is the only owner I have ever heard of doing this. If you have evidence (other than the ARod situation) then now would be the time to present it. We disagree about the ARod situation being the same, so it does your argument no good. Otherwise, I have nothing more to say. You and I just disagree and to continue this would be silly.

rahulsekhar
02-14-2004, 09:57 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
[B]You keep modifying the conditions of the situation so you can be right.

I never claimed that Henry didn't talk money. But, he received approval from ARod, his agent, Hicks and Selig before doing so.

JR did none of that and from all accounts surprised Grant, tried to deal with ARod without Boras present (and got told no), had KW (or allowed KW) to try something similar with Alomar and apparently tried to get Mark Buehrle's parents to help him negotiate with their son (though I admit this last one I have only heard in this thread - though I also trust the source completely).


How about he REQUESTED the meeting with ARod and was declined (gee - sounds like ARod had the control there, and not too different from what Henry did sans the Hicks/Selig - which was irrelevant in that situation)

How about with Alomar - they discussed terms, but there was not even an attempt to sign Robbie.....they then presented him and his agent with a contract offer. Is it unethical to discuss what a player wants prior to making an offer? Not to me - especially nto when the player has the right to say "talk to my agent" at any time or (more likely), can have the agent review the contract and work out any details.

All I can tell you is that I have heard many agents (including Arn Tellum) say many times that JR is a great owner for them to deal with. I have heard no agent say that they dislike dealing with him, except at the moment that they've unsuccessfully concluded some negotiations (when it's obviously to their benefit to do so and make their player look less like a moneygrubbing fool).

On top of that, I have not seen any players not want to come to the Sox because of ownership. The Bulls have, but the whole MJ/Pip poisoning the waters thing combined with their terrible record makes it very difficult to say it's due to JR (in fact I haven't seen any reports that any FA even met or thought about JR).

Hate JR for not spending more money, but this is IMO a bit ridiculous.

voodoochile
02-14-2004, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
How about he REQUESTED the meeting with ARod and was declined (gee - sounds like ARod had the control there, and not too different from what Henry did sans the Hicks/Selig - which was irrelevant in that situation)

How about with Alomar - they discussed terms, but there was not even an attempt to sign Robbie.....they then presented him and his agent with a contract offer. Is it unethical to discuss what a player wants prior to making an offer? Not to me - especially nto when the player has the right to say "talk to my agent" at any time or (more likely), can have the agent review the contract and work out any details.

All I can tell you is that I have heard many agents (including Arn Tellum) say many times that JR is a great owner for them to deal with. I have heard no agent say that they dislike dealing with him, except at the moment that they've unsuccessfully concluded some negotiations (when it's obviously to their benefit to do so and make their player look less like a moneygrubbing fool).

On top of that, I have not seen any players not want to come to the Sox because of ownership. The Bulls have, but the whole MJ/Pip poisoning the waters thing combined with their terrible record makes it very difficult to say it's due to JR (in fact I haven't seen any reports that any FA even met or thought about JR).

Hate JR for not spending more money, but this is IMO a bit ridiculous.

Okay, that's valid, and maybe I am edgy. I do tend to look for the worst from Reinsy because he has given me little reason to trust him and his motives. The Grant situation may cause me to LOOK for slights where none was intended or given.

I still don't trust him as far as I could throw Soxpark.

BTW, my understanding is that Curt Schilling is one player who has a "do not trade to the Sox" clause in his contract. Now the fact that he is a union rep who well remembers 1994 and subsequent negotiating sessions may have as much to do with that as anything. But, that is at least one player who doesn't want to play for JR. I would also be disinclined to think that just because the NBA and MLB are different leagues that they don't pay attention to what is going on across town. MLB players are fully aware of the whole "end of the dynasty" fiasco and the subsequent ill-will it generated that JR and JK allowed to happen and to say it has NO influence on their decisions regarding signing with the Sox sound false on the surface.

Of course with JR unwilling to spend ANY money this offseason on players who didn't already play for him (and even then, the odds were solid you were gone) the discussion becomes moot...

rahulsekhar
02-14-2004, 11:44 PM
[i]
BTW, my understanding is that Curt Schilling is one player who has a "do not trade to the Sox" clause in his contract. Now the fact that he is a union rep who well remembers 1994 and subsequent negotiating sessions may have as much to do with that as anything. But, that is at least one player who doesn't want to play for JR. I would also be disinclined to think that just because the NBA and MLB are different leagues that they don't pay attention to what is going on across town. MLB players are fully aware of the whole "end of the dynasty" fiasco and the subsequent ill-will it generated that JR and JK allowed to happen and to say it has NO influence on their decisions regarding signing with the Sox sound false on the surface.
[/B]

I hadn't heard that, I thought he had a standard no-trade with exclusions for teams that didn't include the Sox.

As for the end of the dynasty - don't get me started on that. "Conventional wisdom" is BS. They tried to keep Phil (even offered him a multi-year contract, which he declined). He wasn't going to stay unless he got Krause's job (and coincidentally, a couple of years after he joins LA - Jerry West leaves only to resurface shorlty afterwards). Once Phil was leaving, there was no way they were going to keep MJ.

voodoochile
02-15-2004, 12:42 AM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
I hadn't heard that, I thought he had a standard no-trade with exclusions for teams that didn't include the Sox.

As for the end of the dynasty - don't get me started on that. "Conventional wisdom" is BS. They tried to keep Phil (even offered him a multi-year contract, which he declined). He wasn't going to stay unless he got Krause's job (and coincidentally, a couple of years after he joins LA - Jerry West leaves only to resurface shorlty afterwards). Once Phil was leaving, there was no way they were going to keep MJ.

I wasn't trying to take sides in the issue, merely pointing out that there was illwill generated. We could debate this all night, but if JR had been willing to keep Phil and dump Krause, things might have been different. JR wasn't willing to part with Krause.

We can all safely assume he was wrong as Jackson has won 3 more championships and the Bulls have been in the lottery ever since. At least that is how I see it...

Lip Man 1
02-15-2004, 01:37 AM
Folks:

Two points. If some of you have heard this before I apologize.

One...Cliff Floyd, a South Side native, who grew up having Harold Baines as his hero has the Sox as part of his 'no trade' group. (From a Sports Illustrated story on Floyd in the Summer of 2002.)

Two...here is the Curt Schilling story from the Arizona Republic in July 2000. According to the story Schilling was asked about trade rumors that had him being looked at by Arizona, the White Sox and others. Schilling said that under no circumstances would he approve any deal to the White Sox and would retire first before that would happen. When asked why Schilling said that in a meeting during the labor impass Jerry Reinsdorf said something personally directed towards him. When pressed to explain Schilling said that he'd never disclose what Uncle Jerry told him but that he felt so embarassed and insulted that under no circumstances would he ever play for him.

Lip

gosox41
02-15-2004, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Folks:

Two points. If some of you have heard this before I apologize.

One...Cliff Floyd, a South Side native, who grew up having Harold Baines as his hero has the Sox as part of his 'no trade' group. (From a Sports Illustrated story on Floyd in the Summer of 2002.)

Two...here is the Curt Schilling story from the Arizona Republic in July 2000. According to the story Schilling was asked about trade rumors that had him being looked at by Arizona, the White Sox and others. Schilling said that under no circumstances would he approve any deal to the White Sox and would retire first before that would happen. When asked why Schilling said that in a meeting during the labor impass Jerry Reinsdorf said something personally directed towards him. When pressed to explain Schilling said that he'd never disclose what Uncle Jerry told him but that he felt so embarassed and insulted that under no circumstances would he ever play for him.

Lip

Didn't Cliff FLoyd not want to player here because he was divrced from Manuel's daughter? I amy be wrong but I though that was the case,

As for Schilling, he's a great pitcher but full of it. I'm not saying JR didn't say something to him, but maybe it bothered Schilling so much because it was the truth and he won't talk about it because he knows it.

I'll never forget Schilling whining about someone trying to bunt off him in the 8th inning of a game when he was pitching a perfect game. He called it a cheap play. How's it cheap? Did the player break the rules? Should a team just roll over and die because a pitcher is having a career night? It was a 2 run game. Getting a guy on base makes it a tie game with one swing of the bat by the next hitter. But to complain about a player doing this in that particular situation is ridiculous.

That night I lost all respect for Schilling as a person, but would gladly take him as a pitcher.

Bob

TornLabrum
02-15-2004, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Didn't Cliff FLoyd not want to player here because he was divrced from Manuel's daughter? I amy be wrong but I though that was the case,

That was Rondell White.

rahulsekhar
02-15-2004, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile


We can all safely assume he was wrong as Jackson has won 3 more championships and the Bulls have been in the lottery ever since. At least that is how I see it...

I'm sure going to a team that had Shaq & Kobe had nothing to do with that instead of trying to rebuild.

That in the end was the biggest thing. Phil (even if they got rid of Krause) was never going to stick it out through the eventual rebuilding. He had said that and made it clear for a while.

Kittle
02-18-2004, 09:48 AM
Man, that's a lot of reading. Guess I'll throw in my $0.02 now...

Mariotti, like his ex-counterpart Skip Bayless (I was soooo happy when he left town!), is a loudmouth, egotistical, muckraking jackass. Mariotti is more interested in promoting himself than being a respected, responsible journalist. He's not necessarily anti-Sox, but he's definitely anti-Reinsdorf and takes his act to such an extreme that he subjects Reinsdorf's employees (Williams, Gallas) to extreme and unreasonable criticism and, in some cases, gets into child-like piss fights with them (Hawk). Bill Gleason, a longtime sports columnist for the Southtown (and, IIRC, the Herald and Sun-Times as well) was also very critical of Reinsdorf. However, Gleason never went to Moronotti's childish and self-serving extremes. That's the difference between an objective sports writer and one with an agenda.

Regarding Kenny Williams, I feel that he was justified in venting. I mean, c'mon, this guy's in an almost impossible situation. His boss has pissed off the fans to such an extent that there's little to no ticket revenue for free agent acquisitions, his boss has turned the media against his organization, and he had a clueless idiot of a manager working under him through last season (who he likely couldn't fire, as JR wouldn't pay for a new manager). He tried to improve the team through bold (Wells, Colon, Everett, R. Alomar, Koch) and smart (S. Alomar) moves but. I've supported all of those roster moves, except for the Koch-for-Foulke deal. I'm not saying that Kenny's the best GM in the world, but he's been stuck between a rock and a hard place from Day 1.

As for Reinsdorf, he has nobody to blame but himself and his buddy Eddie. It's their fault that the media is against their organization. Then again, I don't blame him for ripping Moronotti, the Jerry Springer of sports journalists. It'd be best for everybody if Jerry and Eddie sold their controlling shares and left town. Their relationship with the Sox fans and the media is akin to a bad marriage and a divorce is the only way to right the situation at this point.

Lip Man 1
02-18-2004, 12:08 PM
I wonder if Williams has ever considered resigning? After all like Rich King said in his interview he knew what he was getting into when he took the job.

Lip