PDA

View Full Version : Flanagan: Glass talks about Royals, stadium project


tk13
02-02-2005, 02:41 AM
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascitystar/sports/10790933.htm

State of the game concerns owner more than stadiums

By JEFFREY FLANAGAN The Kansas City Star


As the 15-member task force composed of city and county officials discusses whether the community should build a downtown ballpark, we talked by phone Tuesday with the man who will be affected most by the task force's decision, which is due May 1 Royals owner David Glass.

You may be surprised to learn that Glass isn't exactly begging for a new ballpark, nor does he consider a new park the solution to all of the Royals' problems.

If a stadium is what the community wants, so be it, Glass said. But his top priority is fixing baseball, which has been his focus as a Royals executive for the last 10 years.

And as for any rumors that Glass might just take the Royals and run if a new stadium doesn't happen, ignore them. Glass said that he fully intends to honor the lease at Kauffman Stadium through 2014 and, if necessary, beyond.

Q: Some owners in baseball basically have demanded new ballparks and got them. How strongly do you want a new downtown ballpark?

Glass: We're certainly not issuing any demands to the city or holding anyone hostage. This notion of a downtown stadium started after the voters voted down bistate. We had been working toward a plan to renovate Kauffman Stadium, but that didn't happen. So now everyone is looking for other solutions and other options.

Q: Is a downtown stadium absolutely necessary to rescue the Royals?

Glass: No, not at all. What is needed to rescue the Royals is further advancement toward parity in baseball. We made many strides with the last collective-bargaining agreement, and hopefully, we can make more strides with the next collective-bargaining agreement in 2007. The single most important thing for the Royals is for the game to fix itself and get more parity. When we can achieve that, and payrolls are closer together, we will be in good shape.

We don't need a huge payroll to be competitive. That much has been proven by other teams. But there still is a gap that exists that needs to be addressed to help all small markets and create more parity.

Q: Is there hope that we're inching closer toward more parity?

Glass: I truly believe that. We're going in that direction.

Q: Back to the stadium. We're guessing that if someone simply financed and built you a beautiful new stadium, you couldn't exactly say no.

Glass: I don't know. It depends on whether everyone is on board with it. You need 100 percent support, I believe, from the city, the county, the fans, everyone involved. If it's kind of a half-and-half thing, then I'm not sure it would work.

Q: OK, so what if there were 100 percent support?

Glass: If that was the case, I'd gladly lead the charge.

Q: Would you be willing to put in your own money for a new stadium, and how much would that be?

Glass: That's a tough question because it comes down to where you believe it is best to invest the money in the team or in the stadium. What you have right now is a situation where you're subsidizing a team, and you have to ask yourself if it's better to do that or to subsidize the stadium. What is best for the Kansas City Royals? Those are all things we're discussing.

Q: Kauffman Stadium is still considered by outsiders as one of the jewels, at least in terms of appearance, of major-league baseball. Is that how you feel?

Glass: It needs a lot of help. It needs fixing in a lot of areas, from the plumbing to the bathrooms to a lot of other areas. It's really showing its age (It opened in 1973) in many places, which is only natural.

Q: What if the proposal for a downtown ballpark isn't feasible? What happens next?

Glass: We have a lease at Kauffman Stadium, and we fully intend to honor that. We have said that all along. If a downtown stadium doesn't happen, we will be playing baseball at Kauffman Stadium. Our lease runs through 2014, and right now we intend to play baseball there.

Q: And after 2014?

Glass: We are committed to Kansas City. We would have no problems with playing at Kauffman Stadium through 2014 and beyond that. The Royals aren't going anywhere.

Q: Have you had discussions with Lamar Hunt about these stadium issues?

Glass: Yes, I've talked to Lamar off and on about it. I don't want to speak for him, but I'm guessing he's having similar thoughts and discussions. It's hard to know what to do when you're in a market this size. We're all looking for what the best answer is.

Q: The Royals have had a pretty quiet offseason. Now that spring training is around the corner, are there any surprises waiting for Royals fans?

Glass: It's still possible that we could add a free agent. We haven't ruled that out. I can't wait to get down to Surprise (Ariz., for spring training) and get started. We might surprise some people this year.

Ari Chi3fs
02-02-2005, 03:40 AM
you would think that CEO of Wal-Mart would have more cash to throw around... always looking for bargain basement prices and not wanting to actually give this team the influx of cash that it needs to contend...

Damn, I miss "ROYALS" baseball. those were the days.

DenverChief
02-02-2005, 03:44 AM
Damn, I miss "ROYALS" baseball. those were the days.
I miss baseball.....all we see now are Yankeeball, Giantball, Bravesball and Redsoxball

OldTownChief
02-02-2005, 03:52 AM
We're commin up on a new season and..........I got nothin.

Ari Chi3fs
02-02-2005, 03:56 AM
something we will never see again.

http://ebusiness.tc.msu.edu/~nelso145/World%20Series%20Trophy.jpg

OldTownChief
02-02-2005, 04:00 AM
something we will never see again.

http://ebusiness.tc.msu.edu/~nelso145/World%20Series%20Trophy.jpg


Never say never, but unless some things change in MLB you're probably right.

mikey23545
02-02-2005, 04:19 AM
you would think that CEO of Wal-Mart would have more cash to throw around... always looking for bargain basement prices and not wanting to actually give this team the influx of cash that it needs to contend...

Damn, I miss "ROYALS" baseball. those were the days.

You're right. Sure baseball's structure is incredibly inequitable, but he should be happy to lose $50 million a year so you can watch a winning team on your tv....

Manila-Chief
02-02-2005, 05:00 AM
You're right. Sure baseball's structure is incredibly inequitable, but he should be happy to lose $50 million a year so you can watch a winning team on your tv....

You put a winning team on the field and the fans of K.C. will attend.... don't know it that will pay all the bills but I'm thinking it will????

DaWolf
02-02-2005, 07:41 AM
I don't think it's really a matter of Glass being willing to spend the money. For a market of our size I think he spends enough to put a decent team out there. The problem is that Baird and our talent evaluators have had to clean the mess up from the Herk Robinson regime and aside from the blip a year ago, really haven't been doing a good job at it. Our farm system is thin and our young pitchers keep getting arm troubles. I'm willing to give Baird just a bit more time but last year was really a major faux pas on his part. You look at a counterpart of his, Billy Beane in Oakland, and you see how he has stocked that farm system with prospect after prospect and keeps winning on a shoestring budget. Same with a team like Minnesota. The Royals just need better talent evaluators and a better farm system. If they could get that in place, they'd be fine. I don't think Glass' spending has much to do with that. but he better start demanding results or else get someone up top there to run the team right. I like Baird, I hope he can do it, but so far aside from a few bright spots, it's been spotty. If Grienke turns into a star and DeJesus blossoms and Buck and Teahen turn into players, and guys like Lubanski and Butler tear it up in the minors, then maybe we'll finally be moving towards the right direction. I would LOVE to unload that crybaby Sweeny and get some more prospects, but right now his value isn't too high on the trade market...

homey
02-02-2005, 09:32 AM
For the most part I agree with you DaWolf. Except I feel the Royals should have signed another starting pitcher. They could have afforded it.

Bowser
02-02-2005, 09:36 AM
What is it with talent evaluation and pro teams in KC? :shake:

Cochise
02-02-2005, 09:50 AM
you would think that CEO of Wal-Mart would have more cash to throw around... always looking for bargain basement prices and not wanting to actually give this team the influx of cash that it needs to contend...


The last time someone made this ridiculous argument I researched his net worth and found it somewhere around $500 million.

Why won't that jerk spend 10-25% of his net worth per year so I can watch a winning baseball team?! :cuss:

Give be a break. The reason he doesn't do this is because he didn't get rich by being stupid. If Glass just threw out the money, maybe it would work for one season or two, but then nothing would change in baseball. It's a dumb, band-aid, temporary fix.

I for one am glad that Glass sees the importance of changing the broken game of baseball than trying to temporarily outspend all the other teams. :rolleyes:

Dr. Facebook Fever
02-02-2005, 10:01 AM
you would think that CEO of Wal-Mart would have more cash to throw around... always looking for bargain basement prices and not wanting to actually give this team the influx of cash that it needs to contend...

Damn, I miss "ROYALS" baseball. those were the days.
As most businessmen do though, he doesn't use his "Wal-Mart money" on his other business ventures... and really no good business person would. They are totally unrelated and using one to help support the other wouldn't make good business since.

Now if he would just use his own checkbook to help the team that would be different....and nice.

alnorth
02-02-2005, 10:12 AM
You put a winning team on the field and the fans of K.C. will attend.... don't know it that will pay all the bills but I'm thinking it will????

Your thinking incorrectly. The Yankees and Red Sox dont get their money from tickets and concessions, it comes from television sets. There are a boatload of TV's in New England, not as many around here, so advertisers wont fork over as much for Royals TV, winning team or not, as they would for the right to advertise to the legions of mindless Yankee fans out there.

The Royals could sell out every game and it wouldnt make up the difference, it would be a black hole, and David Glass would be broke before he died with nothing to leave to his family.

The sooner KC realizes this and quits bitching at David Glass, the sooner we can unify behind his banner in our holy war against the large markets and the player's union for the 2007 collective bargaining agreement.

Have a lockout, lets have no baseball for 2007, and 2008 for all I care. If it ends in a victory and a game where we have no more excuses if we lose, then I'll come back. The whiners who cry about a lockout will return after their team wins some games as well.

crossbow
02-02-2005, 10:58 AM
I aplaud Glass for sticking to his guns. The idea of out spending other teams fuels the problem that is at the heart of baseball. Look what happened in STL. The owner bullied the city into a stadium that they didn't need so that he could make more money. The city and state (which includes us here in KC) paid for it. The baseball owners need to fix the problem and not the symptom.

BigRedChief
02-02-2005, 11:16 AM
something we will never see again.

http://ebusiness.tc.msu.edu/~nelso145/World%20Series%20Trophy.jpg

You could become a Cardinal fan. We at least have a shot at one someday.:p

Cochise
02-02-2005, 11:20 AM
The sooner KC realizes this and quits bitching at David Glass, the sooner we can unify behind his banner in our holy war against the large markets and the player's union for the 2007 collective bargaining agreement.

Have a lockout, lets have no baseball for 2007, and 2008 for all I care. If it ends in a victory and a game where we have no more excuses if we lose, then I'll come back. The whiners who cry about a lockout will return after their team wins some games as well.

Agreed, just lock them out for as long as it takes. If we actually get a salary cap then it will be worth it.

beavis
02-02-2005, 01:04 PM
you would think that CEO of Wal-Mart would have more cash to throw around... always looking for bargain basement prices and not wanting to actually give this team the influx of cash that it needs to contend...

Damn, I miss "ROYALS" baseball. those were the days.
You work at McDonalds, don't you?

beavis
02-02-2005, 01:04 PM
You could become a Cardinal fan. We at least have a shot at one someday.:p
No you don't.

Cochise
02-02-2005, 01:08 PM
You work at McDonalds, don't you?

Man, there is no need for insults.

He at least works at Burger King.

BigRedChief
02-02-2005, 02:39 PM
No you don't.

have you been to end all be all "We don't need no stinking bages" web page? http://www.darryl.com/badges/

Defintley lays claim to the person or persons who have too much time on their hands title.

BigRedChief
02-02-2005, 02:41 PM
You work at McDonalds, don't you?

He's gonna make a killing off of www.firecarlpeterson.com (http://www.firecarlpeterson.com) so you'd better be nice to him.

beavis
02-02-2005, 02:43 PM
have you been to end all be all "We don't need no stinking bages" web page? http://www.darryl.com/badges/

Defintley lays claim to the person or persons who have too much time on their hands title.
Ha, that's pretty funny.

beavis
02-02-2005, 02:44 PM
Man, there is no need for insults.

He at least works at Burger King.
Well with that kind of logic, I bet he just gives away Whoppers.

Which one do you work at?

cmh6476
02-03-2005, 08:32 AM
will never happen. The State of MO is going to get the Chiefs their stadium improvements, and along with those improvements comes money to spice up Kauffman and money for St. Louis, so the damn thing will get passed.

Mark my words ;)

beavis
02-03-2005, 01:22 PM
will never happen. The State of MO is going to get the Chiefs their stadium improvements, and along with those improvements comes money to spice up Kauffman and money for St. Louis, so the damn thing will get passed.

Mark my words ;)
Money for St. Louis? They need another new stadium?

cmh6476
02-03-2005, 06:07 PM
Money for St. Louis? They need another new stadium?
no, but in order to get the deal done you have to throw in money for StL. They're not stupid. The state just made them pay for their own new stadium, they're not gonna up and give KC whatever they want.

The tax that opposing players pay whenever they come to KC, StL, etc. to play will more than pay for the new stadium improvements. It was designed to go to the arts fund, but Governer Holden transferred it to the general revenue. I'm about 85% certain the legislature will divert that money to improvements at Kauffman and Arrowhead, and throw in some money for St. Louis.

beavis
02-03-2005, 09:42 PM
no, but in order to get the deal done you have to throw in money for StL. They're not stupid. The state just made them pay for their own new stadium, they're not gonna up and give KC whatever they want.

The tax that opposing players pay whenever they come to KC, StL, etc. to play will more than pay for the new stadium improvements. It was designed to go to the arts fund, but Governer Holden transferred it to the general revenue. I'm about 85% certain the legislature will divert that money to improvements at Kauffman and Arrowhead, and throw in some money for St. Louis.
Everything I've heard thus far has the money coming from local revenue (ie city or county taxes).

Mr. Laz
02-03-2005, 10:20 PM
You're right. Sure baseball's structure is incredibly inequitable, but he should be happy to lose $50 million a year so you can watch a winning team on your tv....
we dont agree about much ... but if i'm reading your sarcasm right, we agree about this.


it's BS to expect the owner of the Royals to lose 10's of millions of dollars each year.

Kauffman WOULDN'T HAVE!!


fix our farm system, fix baseball's financial structure even if it takes locking the players out for a year or 2.


then be prepare to spend your "profits" from the team back into the team.


David Glass is far more financially giving than lamar hunt about his sport's team.

i'm willing to bet that Glass wouldn't Balk at making less than 30 million per year.

tk13
02-03-2005, 10:45 PM
we dont agree about much ... but if i'm reading your sarcasm right, we agree about this.


it's BS to expect the owner of the Royals to lose 10's of millions of dollars each year.

Kauffman WOULDN'T HAVE!!


fix our farm system, fix baseball's financial structure even if it takes locking the players out for a year or 2.


then be prepare to spend your "profits" from the team back into the team.


David Glass is far more financially giving than lamar hunt about his sport's team.

i'm willing to bet that Glass wouldn't Balk at making less than 30 million per year.
According to Forbes, who does all this stuff that we go by (like the Chiefs making 24 million in 2003 and around 33 million in 2002), the Royals made $6.6 million in 2003 when they were in first place for most of the year. I imagine the 2004 numbers will be out fairly soon. Looking it over, the average operating income for baseball teams is like -1.9 million, and there are teams that lose money, but I think that number is skewed by the fact that the Yankees and Rangers lost a combined $55 million in 2003.

chiefsfan987
02-03-2005, 10:45 PM
Of course that would just be the Royals luck if MLB had a lockout from 2007-2008. Thats when the Royals are going to be competitive again now that they're committed to a youth movement and have a good core of young guys that should be ready to compete by then. I seem to recall the Royals on the verge of playoffs the last time MLB decided to strike.