PDA

View Full Version : New WSI Interview


Lip Man 1
03-30-2008, 07:59 PM
Folks:

I've been contacted by George and he says my latest interview is going up this evening on the site.

The interview was conducted in February with the highest ranking member of the White Sox front office to ever agree to do one for White Sox Interactive.

I hope you'll enjoy it and feel free to post comments.

The interview takes you behind the scenes in a number of areas that are vitally important to the success of the franchise.

It also goes into areas that fans have had questions about for the past few seasons, clears up some misconceptions and poses some other things to think about.

Look for it a little later Sunday night.

I hope you'll enjoy it.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=11&id=3534

Lip

MarySwiss
03-30-2008, 08:03 PM
Well, Lip; it's not there yet. But I am intrigued and looking forward to reading it.

My guess is Kenny.

The Wimperoo
03-30-2008, 08:26 PM
My guess is Brooks.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 08:26 PM
I'll go Hahn.

spawn
03-30-2008, 08:39 PM
My guess is Brooks.
It's up...and we have a winner!

michned
03-30-2008, 11:37 PM
(Authorís Note: It was at this point that I tried to sell Brooks on the idea of the red pinstriped era, aka Dick Allen and how special that was to my generation!)

So Mark, did he buy into the idea?

Lip Man 1
03-30-2008, 11:40 PM
I think he'll consider it...but no promises.

Lip

HomeFish
03-31-2008, 12:17 AM
Most underrated Brooks Boyer accomplishment: winning two consecutive MLB 30th man elections.

doublem23
03-31-2008, 12:29 AM
I think he'll consider it...but no promises.

Lip

I hope so. I would love to see the Sox embrace our colorful (pun intended) history of uniforms.

FedEx227
03-31-2008, 12:35 AM
Most underrated Brooks Boyer accomplishment: winning two consecutive MLB 30th man elections.

I agree. Sox fans helped Scott Podsednik defeat Derek Jeter, that's amazing.

JGarlandrules20
03-31-2008, 12:42 AM
I agree. Sox fans helped Scott Podsednik defeat Derek Jeter, that's amazing.

Totally. I hate how everyone was saying it was because Jeter/Matsui split the vote. No. Sox army overcame it all. I, myself, stayed up until 4 AM voting. So worth it!

JGarlandrules20
03-31-2008, 01:01 AM
And that was a nice interview, you asked some really good questions. Brooks becoming the VP of marketing was a huge step forward for this team. :smile:

Frater Perdurabo
03-31-2008, 06:14 AM
Great interview! Great interviewee! Great interviewer! Thanks Lip!

RedHeadPaleHoser
03-31-2008, 08:37 AM
Lip:

Class and professionalism as always. Well done.

Brooks - my first Sox game was a red home pinstripe game. Give Lip his props and represent. :D:

skottyj242
03-31-2008, 09:09 AM
Great job Lip.

PopsBrechtel
03-31-2008, 10:19 AM
Thanks Lip for the inside scoop. I enjoyed it.

Pops

jabrch
03-31-2008, 10:27 AM
Excellent Job Lip. Thanks

Rocky Soprano
03-31-2008, 10:30 AM
As always Lip, great work.
And kudos to the Sox organization, especially Brooks, for being so approachable.

I remember running into him at a Sox-Cubs game at Wrigley and he spent a few minutes chatting with me about the game, the Sox won, and how Sox park was so much better. :D:

Lip Man 1
03-31-2008, 10:35 AM
Folks:

Thanks for the kind words. I really enjoyed speaking with Brooks...class guy all the way!

I do wonder what's going to happen though if Mike (The Doofus) North ever finds out about the comment involving him and him ever doing Sox games! LOL

Lip

Fenway
03-31-2008, 11:07 AM
Folks:

Thanks for the kind words. I really enjoyed speaking with Brooks...class guy all the way!

I do wonder what's going to happen though if Mike (The Doofus) North ever finds out about the comment involving him and him ever doing Sox games! LOL

Lip

If I read that right WSCR makes the choice ( and pays the announcers ) but the White Sox have a veto. I am guessing they really pushed to get Singleton out and stone in.

kaufsox
03-31-2008, 11:22 AM
great interview Lip. BB seems like a really good guy and has a good handle on Sox fans. I'm glad he reads our e-mails, etc. It makes me feel like I'm not wasting my time and energy.

Lip Man 1
03-31-2008, 11:54 AM
Fenway:

Not quite true. BOTH have veto power (as I understood things from the conversation.)

If either party feels strongly about an individual and they don't think they are a good fit, they can say 'no' and that's the end of the candidacy for that individual. (i.e. Brooks using Mike North as an example...)

It's a collective decision. Brooks also said the Sox came up with a list and WSCR came up with one. The Sox apparently interviewed candidates, WSCR interviewed candidates and then the two selected the most desirable candidates and interviewed them together.

Lip

Fenway
03-31-2008, 11:56 AM
Fenway:

Not quite true. BOTH have veto power (as I understood things from the conversation.)

If either party feels strongly about an individual and they don't think they are a good fit, they can say 'no' and that's the end of the candidacy for that individual. (i.e. Brooks using Mike North as an example...)

Lip

Did you get the impression WSCR asked for North?

RoobarbPie
03-31-2008, 11:57 AM
Great interview, he's seems like such a regular dude.

Brooks is awesome - a couple of years ago my wife's school was doing a math project involving scorekeeping. She emailed Brooks to see if their school could get some unused scorecards to help with the exercise and about a week later boxes of scorecards showed up at the school. They'll never forget that.

chisox77
03-31-2008, 11:58 AM
Great job, Lip. Read it this morning and enjoyed it!


:cool:

Lip Man 1
03-31-2008, 11:58 AM
No, I never got that. Brooks was very clear that he was using North's name simply as an example of how the Sox have veto power. I think he used that name because there were some rumors that it could be a possibility, it generated ink in the papers and of course on North's own show.

I think it was simply coincidence.

Lip

Paulwny
03-31-2008, 01:10 PM
Another excellent article Lip.

manders_01
03-31-2008, 08:58 PM
Got to read this gem over my lunch hour and I have just one word - fantastic. Thanks for the article Lip - the insight is great.

asg2003ws2005
03-31-2008, 09:32 PM
cream puff interview.

total company line by brooks. he's worked for jerry long enough to know what to say, and how to say it.

Lip Man 1
03-31-2008, 10:22 PM
ASG:

Sorry you didn't enjoy it, as for the "cream puff" nature of it, feel free to suggest questions for the next one and I'll consider them.

I thought I went into a lot of issues that fans here at WSI had been asking about or discussing for a long time. From who hires and pays the announcers to the Nancy Faust situation to how ad campaigns are formed.

I don't have a problem with you not liking it but I did a damn good job framing the issues. I'm not Jay Mariotti, I'm not going to rip into a member of the Sox front office for no good reason in the middle of an interview and expect any co-operation in the future.

Again though, next time, feel free to suggest things or don't waste your time reading them in the future (or you could always try your hand yourself at these, I'd be happy to pass along some contact information...do you want a former player? member of the front office? former broadcaster? or a member of the Chicago media?...here's my e-mail address: mliptak1@msn.com. Let me know. And this is a serious offer, if you can do better I'm happy to give you a chance at it. It would make the site better)

Lip

voodoochile
03-31-2008, 10:26 PM
ASG:

Sorry you didn't enjoy it, as for the "cream puff" nature of it, feel free to suggest questions for the next one and I'll consider them.

I thought I went into a lot of issues that fans here at WSI had been asking about or discussing for a long time. From who hires and pays the announcers to the Nancy Faust situation to how ad campaigns are formed.

I don't have a problem with you not liking it but I did a damn good job framing the issues. I'm not Jay Mariotti, I'm not going to rip into a member of the Sox front office for no good reason in the middle of an interview and expect any co-operation in the future.

If after thirty years in the business that's not good enough then I don't know what to say. I've been doing it this way my adult life.

Again though, next time, feel free to suggest things or don't waste your time reading them in the future (or you could always try your hand yourself at these, I'd be happy to pass along some contact information...do you want a former player? member of the front office? former broadcaster? or a member of the Chicago media?...here's my e-mail address: mliptak1@msn.com. Let me know. And this is a serious offer, if you can do better I'm happy to give you a chance at it. It would make the site better)

Lip

Just ignore the trolls, Lip. It's all the rage to slam things just to look cool. This guy probably still read the Windsock every day and laps it all up...

voodoochile
03-31-2008, 10:28 PM
Oh and I liked the interview a lot, Lip. Another great job. Kudos for getting so many big names to sit down and talk to you. One more reason WSI rocks!

Lip Man 1
03-31-2008, 10:36 PM
Voodoo:

I appreciate your courtesy. I do what I do and think I'm pretty good at it. I know I can't please everyone and that's to be expected but I just didn't get the "cream puff" comment. I don't know what else I could have asked about a serious issue that Brooks had decision making ability on. Maybe I missed something obvious though and if so if ASG will let me know I'd honestly appreciate it, it's something I can learn from.

And that's a serious offer to ASG, if he wants to take a whack at one of these I'll help get him started by giving him contact information.

Lip

Noneck
03-31-2008, 10:43 PM
1st I'd like to say I enjoyed the interview very much. I just wish you could have pressed him more about why he thinks the 77 team is not relevant to fans. Do you think it was because it was also the height of popularity for Harry, Jimmy, and Veeck?

Keep up the good work.

Lip Man 1
03-31-2008, 10:52 PM
Noneck:

Good question. My sense from the conversation was that the comment was along the lines of the fact that 1977 was thirty years ago.

My sense (and again this is me) is that the Sox are trying to focus on a "younger" audience. I base that on Brooks comment (and I'm paraphrasing here) that the 1977 team isn't "relevant" to a part of the fan base probably because they were to young or weren't even born yet.

At least that's the only thing I can think of. I honestly don't think any animosity towards Harry or Jimmy or Bill is a factor. (and if there is any said animosity towards them I can't imagine it would come from Brooks who seemed to me to be about as friendly a person as you'd want to talk to.)

Lip

Noneck
03-31-2008, 11:03 PM
1977 was not that long ago (at least to me) and coincidentally also the year Elvis died who the Sox commemorate yearly. And regarding ignoring the Harry, Jimmy, Veeck era, I would think that comes from the very top not from Brooks. Thanks again, looking forward to your next interview.

asg2003ws2005
04-01-2008, 11:41 AM
Lip,

Maybe we're seeing things different.

From My POV, you're not going to go for the jugular since you do have the ear of a top sox executive. And Brooks knows that he has a captive audience so he dosent have to worry about flaimg arrows slinged at him.

As a customer of the Sox, chiefly being a season ticket holder, i have different concerns and questions. And I may not be satisfied with Brooks' answers.


One thing I would have hammered him about is the 2008 campaign. Yeah, "Back to the Grind" backfired, but 2x4 did make the SouthSide Tourism bits. Why did the team feel thier efforts were lacking(when it was really the team's performance that made slogan suffer), and then approve the moronic" Share the Passion, Show the Swagger" slogan? One which gets plenty of chortles from Cub fans as well as the media.

Lip Man 1
04-01-2008, 11:57 AM
ASG:

So if I understand you correctly your "issue" with the interview revolved around the fact that the Sox changed advertising agencies?

I'm curious...do you have some connection with 2x4? Is there a business relationship or is he a family member?

I'm not going to say you're wrong in your "concern." But keep in mind when I did this interview those new ads were barely released and the new advertising agency was on the job for just a few months.

They may turn out to do a better job then 2x4's group....we just don't know yet.

I can see asking the question about changing agencies but I was more concerned with the general mentality behind ad campaigns rather then getting into specifics of "why" the change.

If you want me to, I can give you Brooks contact information and you can get in touch with him on this point.

Thanks for at least explaining yourself a little more on this.

As far as "going for the jugular", you need some issues that are worthy of having that take place, especially when we don't normally get access to top Sox front office types...so they better be damn good ones. In my opinion taking on Brooks over some of the issues involving the Sox (and I can think of some including going after the Cubs which we got into a little bit) wasn't worth it because Brooks doesn't have that kind of authority. That goes higher up on the chart.

Now if this interview with Brooks could eventually put me in a position to speak with Kenny or JR then rest assured that I will ask about some issues that I think are "tough" and "controversial." But you do it in a proper, professional way...not Mariotti-like. If you take the later approach, especially say in Brooks' interview, I guarantee you never get the chance to talk to Kenny or Eddie or JR.

Lip

asg2003ws2005
04-01-2008, 12:34 PM
Lip,
I just said that was ONE thing I would mention. I have other concerns, some that he may have very little control over(like ticketing decisions), but who has the advertising contract is most certainly something he has a a voice, if not total control over.

And NO, I have NO affiliation with 2x4. I just find it funny that the Sox blame the ad agency when the team cant win games.

Oh, and I agree. You CANT interrogate the first Sox exec you get with hardline questioning, even if it were issues he has influence over. You want to be cordial to the organization.

Oldfellah
04-01-2008, 12:48 PM
Usually one to skim the surface of those interviews, but it was well done!! Nice job Lip!!:bandance:

Iwritecode
04-01-2008, 01:54 PM
1977 was not that long ago (at least to me) and coincidentally also the year Elvis died who the Sox commemorate yearly. And regarding ignoring the Harry, Jimmy, Veeck era, I would think that comes from the very top not from Brooks. Thanks again, looking forward to your next interview.

I was born in 77 so obviously I don't remember the team at all. I only know about them from what I've read.

It seems to me that some fans remember that team in a similar way fans my age remember the 2000 team. They were fun to watch, won a lot of games, scored a lot of runs but ultimately in the end, really didn't *do* anything.

At least the 2000 team won the division...

asg2003ws2005
04-01-2008, 02:44 PM
As for the retro uniforms, the Sox SHOULD try and revisit popular years.
And it's not liek they wont make any money off retro jersey sales. OR fail to secure a sponsor for free hats or tshirts.

It's Dankerific
04-01-2008, 02:55 PM
Lip:

Really enjoyed the interview. I don't know why anyone would complain, there was some good information there.

My only "wish" was that the organ music would have had its own (or followup question.) Its fine with me (and I believe the sox) if nancy wants to take it easy, work less games and even that they don't have a succession plan in place. But I would have really like a question as to why its not "piped in" or an alternate selected now for the games she doesnt work, and especially, why "hey hey goodbye" is not used anymore. I mean, the indians did it to mark yesterday!! what made it worse is knowing when we knock them around at the cell, the favor will probably not be returned.

Lip Man 1
04-01-2008, 03:33 PM
Dank:

Well Brooks did answer part of your question. He talked about some fans wanting a plan in place now for when Nancy leaves but he felt now was basically not the time for that.

Take it for what it may be worth.

Lip

It's Dankerific
04-01-2008, 03:41 PM
Dank:

Well Brooks did answer part of your question. He talked about some fans wanting a plan in place now for when Nancy leaves but he felt now was basically not the time for that.

Take it for what it may be worth.

Lip

Yeah, i thought that part of the question was on point. but, personally, id like to know why we're letting other teams take our hey hey goodbye song without a fight (or at least playing it ourselves).

Noneck
04-01-2008, 04:25 PM
I was born in 77 so obviously I don't remember the team at all. I only know about them from what I've read.

It seems to me that some fans remember that team in a similar way fans my age remember the 2000 team. They were fun to watch, won a lot of games, scored a lot of runs but ultimately in the end, really didn't *do* anything.

At least the 2000 team won the division...

Yes, you are correct but I have never seen as much excitement and enthusiasm at a ballpark like I saw that season. That includes the 2005 regular season. It was truly amazing but this is something you would have had to experience 1st hand. Many teams have special promotions for revered teams that never won anything. (eg. 69 cubs) I still think it won't be acknowledged under the current management because it would involve acknowledging Harry, Jimmy and Veeck.

Lip Man 1
04-01-2008, 05:18 PM
Dank:

Well actually that's not even the Sox song. It belongs to the writers of it when it came out in 1969. There's nothing that can be done to stop another team from using it. But your point about why the Sox have stopped playing it, considering it's long history with the franchise is a good one.

Why don't you ask Brooks via e-mail. He'll take the time to answer you.

Lip

Fenway
04-01-2008, 05:52 PM
Dank:

Well actually that's not even the Sox song. It belongs to the writers of it when it came out in 1969. There's nothing that can be done to stop another team from using it. But your point about why the Sox have stopped playing it, considering it's long history with the franchise is a good one.

Why don't you ask Brooks via e-mail. He'll take the time to answer you.

Lip

First time I ever heard the song played was at Boston Garden by the organist after the crowd started singinging it acapella at a Bruins playoff game in 1970 when they swept a series they were not supposed to do so.

The crowd had been inspired to do so by the late DJ Bud Ballou of WMEX

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bud_Ballou

AZSoxPosse
04-02-2008, 02:41 AM
Lip,
As a novice to this art form I found out firsthand just what a challenge it is to interview a personality or someone of importance within the organization and make it worthy of reading. So, all I can say is: great job.

I also like the way you handled this post.

What your effort(s) has done, especially with this interview of WS brass, is to give even more legitimacy to the website and the importance it should have to the WS organization.

Best to you and keep it up,

Pascal Marco

voodoochile
04-02-2008, 09:05 AM
Lip,
As a novice to this art form I found out firsthand just what a challenge it is to interview a personality or someone of importance within the organization and make it worthy of reading. So, all I can say is: great job.

I also like the way you handled this post.

What your effort(s) has done, especially with this interview of WS brass, is to give even more legitimacy to the website and the importance it should have to the WS organization.

Best to you and keep it up,

Pascal Marco

Exactly and by not attempting to make them "gotcha" interviews, Lip makes it more likely he will be able to interview more people. I am sure Lip gets asked for his credentials from time to time by those he seeks to interview. He can tell those people to speak to Brooks or any or the others he has interviewed for a reference.

Besides do we really need another dirt digging celebrity bashing website on the Internet?

#1swisher
04-02-2008, 11:47 AM
good interview:thumbsup:

doogiec
04-02-2008, 12:01 PM
First, great interview. I usually don't bother to post, but always enjoy these articles.

Second, I think the issue with 1977 is more related to the turnover of fans than anything else. While anyone who went to Sox games in 1977 would understand the impact of that team, I'd be shocked if even 5% of a typical USCF crowd had been part of that season, between death, relocation, refocus of marketing toward families, etc.

So you end up with 95% of the people wondering why the Sox franchise is so pathetic that it is honoring a third place team that finished a dozen games out. And let's face it, the '77 team was popular in large part because of how bad the '76 team was. If they had jumped from 86 to 90 wins, for example, no one would have noticed them.

I always laugh when I see that Ron Santo commercial (Chevy, I think) talking about what a wonderful season 1969 was for the Cubs. I think the reaction would be the same for the '77 Sox.