PDA

View Full Version : Randa blames Gla$$


Sure-Oz
08-22-2005, 01:37 PM
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/12435462.htm

(regis. required)

"You don't wish that [the losing streak] on anybody. … Hopefully they can turn it around and win a game soon and not break any of these records." …

"It's over Allard's head. He's done the best he could with the limitations of payroll and personnel. It's not his fault one bit. He puts so much effort and time into his job." …

"He [Baird] flies all the time to see the Triple-A and Double-A teams or to go see a guy they've maybe inquired about. He's so hands on and he works so hard that his family life suffers. It's unfortunate that he seems like somewhat of a fall guy all the time for the organization." …

The best solution, Randa suggests, would be for club chairman David Glass and his family to sell the team. "I think there's a lot of hidden agendas there," Randa said. "With the revenue sharing and all the money he's getting with the TV revenues, he's making money and they're losing games. That's the problem." …

"The people in Kansas City, the frustration is building. Hopefully the Glass family ... will try to sell the team and get somebody in there that cares and wants to win."

Uatu
08-22-2005, 01:40 PM
Well that flies in the face of Glass's statements that the team is losing money. As bad as they are I have a hard time believing that they are not losing money.

Halfcan
08-22-2005, 01:43 PM
I love it. Glass=ass. I knew from the time he bought the team his intentions were to cut payroll. I worked for him at Wal-mart and have met the guy. He always says one thing but does another. Sams club cut 30 full time employees-including me with my first kid on the way. All of them were one year from being vested-to save extra money. The quarter before, profit was low because they bought a new high $$ freezer/cooler, but instead of looking at that, upper management slashed jobs hurting lots of family. The guy is truly a bastard.

Uatu
08-22-2005, 01:47 PM
I love it. Glass=ass. I knew from the time he bought the team his intentions were to cut payroll. I worked for him at Wal-mart and have met the guy. He always says one thing but does another. Sams club cut 30 full time employees-including me with my first kid on the way. All of them were one year from being vested-to save extra money. The quarter before, profit was low because they bought a new high $$ freezer/cooler, but instead of looking at that, upper management slashed jobs hurting lots of family. The guy is truly a bastard.

So you got fired from a Sam's club and David Glass is responsible?

Valiant
08-22-2005, 02:04 PM
So you got fired from a Sam's club and David Glass is responsible?


I think he is saying, Glass cares more about the money saved then the jobs... If your company bought a new computer system, but because of that profits were almost 0, you decided to fire all the expensive employees instead of looking at why there were no profits made??? Oh, and I get a 100k bonus for saving money on the firings...

Valiant
08-22-2005, 02:05 PM
Also this will be the fourth year in a row that the Royals have made a profit.. only about 10tens in the league make a profit...

Halfcan
08-22-2005, 02:16 PM
Yes I am stating that, for the very fact Glass visited our store two weeks before with a rah rah speech. Management was very clear that the team from Bentonville did not like the numbers and specifically targeted those employess not yet vested to save money. All 5 and 6 year guys got the axe. I was offered a cart pusher job at the Supercenter at $6 less per hour as long as I agreed to not pursue my retirement. Basically start over as a new employee and put 7 more years in. I looked him in the eye and told him to shove up his ass. I said you will be next you asskisser-and sure enough three weeks later the management team got it. They brought in new guys at half the salary. The Walmart way.

Just like the Royals have done-bring in new guys at a big discount. Glass deserves all the negative attention and being the laughing stock owner of MLB. Don't expect a turn around. If anything he will blame the fans and move the team. Notice the other day he said the Royals are not going anywhere-that means he is currently looking to move them to another city for more profit!!!

penguinz
08-22-2005, 02:20 PM
The team will be contracted long before it would be moved.

jiveturkey
08-22-2005, 02:21 PM
Also this will be the fourth year in a row that the Royals have made a profit.. only about 10tens in the league make a profit...It sounds like he's doing something right. :hmmm:

beavis
08-22-2005, 02:22 PM
OMGFG GLAAASZZZ N33DS TO SPEND TEH MONEY!!!!!!!!!!11111111

Halfcan
08-22-2005, 02:23 PM
Oh and as a side not Royals want 200 plus million to improve an empty stadium. What a joke. Kaufman is an awesome place with new seats, plenty of room. Just need a team. Bring over the Tbones-at least they play with heart. 200 million to that Bastard-what a joke.

beavis
08-22-2005, 02:23 PM
Also this will be the fourth year in a row that the Royals have made a profit.. only about 10tens in the league make a profit...
Imagine that, the man made a profit on his business. How dare he not lose tens of millions of dollars to make us happy! :cuss:

ChiTown
08-22-2005, 02:24 PM
The team will be contracted long before it would be moved.

I don't buy that at all.

beavis
08-22-2005, 02:24 PM
Oh and as a side not Royals want 200 plus million to improve an empty stadium. What a joke. Kaufman is an awesome place with new seats, plenty of room. Just need a team. Bring over the Tbones-at least they play with heart. 200 million to that Bastard-what a joke.
I agree, you are a joke.

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 02:25 PM
The Glass is more than half empty with the Royals. When they got rid of Randa, I dismissed this season. Even though he is getting to end of his career, he produced very well in relationship to his salary.
IIRC, there are some restrictions on what he (glass) can do with the team though.

beavis
08-22-2005, 02:26 PM
I don't buy that at all.
It has to be true. Glass' lone intention of buying the team was to stab his friend in the back by directly going against his dying wish. I mean, he obviously had to have this whole scheme drawn up from the very beginning. It only took him what, 7 years to decide he would buy the team? We are for sure going to be contracted. It's a lock.

beavis
08-22-2005, 02:27 PM
The Glass is more than half empty with the Royals. When they got rid of Randa, I dismissed this season. Even though he is getting to end of his career, he produced very well in relationship to his salary.
IIRC, there are some restrictions on what he can do with the team though.
Oh, you are so witty. Where do you come up with this stuff?

penguinz
08-22-2005, 02:31 PM
IIRC, there are some restrictions on what he can do with the team though.
Exactly. There were restrictions stating that whoever bought the team had to keep it in KC. Which is why I made the statement that I made about contraction. The restrictions also stated that if the team were re-sold any money over the amount the original buyer, in this case Glass, would go to the designated Charities.

So I will say again. The team is more likely to be contracted than moved to another city.

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 02:32 PM
Well that flies in the face of Glass's statements that the team is losing money. As bad as they are I have a hard time believing that they are not losing money.

glass has said that they lost money last year, but made money this year

penguinz
08-22-2005, 02:32 PM
Oh and as a side not Royals want 200 plus million to improve an empty stadium. What a joke. Kaufman is an awesome place with new seats, plenty of room. Just need a team. Bring over the Tbones-at least they play with heart. 200 million to that Bastard-what a joke.
You enjoy waiting in line for food and to take a piss even when the stadium is not full?

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 02:37 PM
Exactly. There were restrictions stating that whoever bought the team had to keep it in KC. Which is why I made the statement that I made about contraction. The restrictions also stated that if the team were re-sold any money over the amount the original buyer, in this case Glass, would go to the designated Charities.

So I will say again. The team is more likely to be contracted than moved to another city.


Makes sense to me, all about money with Glass.

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 02:39 PM
Makes sense to me, all about money with Glass.

i disagree :D

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 02:40 PM
i disagree :D


suprise, care to elaborate? :p

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 02:46 PM
Oh, you are so witty. Where do you come up with this stuff?

Glad I can help, it just kind of comes out naturally.
I am fortunate to have witnessed the Royals when they were good. I feel for people that were not around then, it was great to see them in the playoffs every year.

Uatu
08-22-2005, 02:50 PM
Yes I am stating that, for the very fact Glass visited our store two weeks before with a rah rah speech. Management was very clear that the team from Bentonville did not like the numbers and specifically targeted those employess not yet vested to save money. All 5 and 6 year guys got the axe. I was offered a cart pusher job at the Supercenter at $6 less per hour as long as I agreed to not pursue my retirement. Basically start over as a new employee and put 7 more years in. I looked him in the eye and told him to shove up his ass. I said you will be next you asskisser-and sure enough three weeks later the management team got it. They brought in new guys at half the salary. The Walmart way.

No corporation cares who you are. They can't descriminate against others based on family situations. Any corporation in america would cut the highest paid expendables and those not yet vested first. This is not wal-mart, it works this way in any corporation in America.

And do you really think individual personnel decisions are made at the chairman level? Glass must be a busy guy performing individual hires and fires all day every day.

ChiTown
08-22-2005, 02:55 PM
And do you really think individual personnel decisions are made at the chairman level? Glass must be a busy guy performing individual hires and fires all day every day.

Feh, you don't know the half of it.. David Glass and Jr. are generally my "Check-Out" Clerks when I shop at Wal-Mart..........

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 02:58 PM
suprise, care to elaborate? :p

i think Glass is willing to pay what it takes to compete if it's realistic and he really had some range of how much.

right now ... it's neither


30 million ... 50 million, both gets your generally the same results


why would anyone dump an extra 20 million down the drain when you don't know whether it's gonna make any difference?

last year we spent 54 million and lost 100+


why do the same again?


it's one thing to lose money ... quite another to lose money with no end in sight.

you bring a salary cap of 90 million to baseball and i bet Glass starts spending more. He'll know there is SOME limit to how much the others can spend.

right now if he spent 100 ... the other teams will just spend 200 million


Glass is trying to do know what so many have bitch about before ...a full youth movement.

as soon as these young guys show they are ready to really contribute he will spend the money and bring in veterans to complete the picture.

until the young guys are at least decent it's a waste to take a 20 million dollar financial lost to only lose 100 games versus 110.


as soon as baseball gets a salary cap you'll see Glass spending money AND wanting a new stadium and all those other "we are competing" things that owners do.

right now we are trying get a player development organization going.

Uatu
08-22-2005, 03:04 PM
Feh, you don't know the half of it.. David Glass and Jr. are generally my "Check-Out" Clerks when I shop at Wal-Mart..........

The other day I was in the bathroom at Sam's dropping a deuce, and the toilet paper was empty.

I bet David Glass decided to cheap out on TP at that store and that specific stall, becuase he knew I would have the buffet at KFC earlier in the day and be in there precisely at 7:28 PM on August the 20. Just to screw me personally, and also to save $.15 on a roll of chit paper because he's such a cheap a$$.

Good thing I made a clean getaway.

penguinz
08-22-2005, 03:13 PM
OMG! You do that in public restrooms!!!!!!!!!!!!

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 03:17 PM
i think Glass is willing to pay what it takes to compete if it's realistic and he really had some range of how much.

right now ... it's neither


30 million ... 50 million, both gets your generally the same results


why would anyone dump an extra 20 million down the drain when you don't know whether it's gonna make any difference?

last year we spent 54 million and lost 100+


why do the same again?


it's one thing to lose money ... quite another to lose money with no end in sight.

you bring a salary cap of 90 million to baseball and i bet Glass starts spending more. He'll know there is SOME limit to how much the others can spend.

right now if he spent 100 ... the other teams will just spend 200 million


Glass is trying to do know what so many have bitch about before ...a full youth movement.

as soon as these young guys show they are ready to really contribute he will spend the money and bring in veterans to complete the picture.

until the young guys are at least decent it's a waste to take a 20 million dollar financial lost to only lose 100 games versus 110.


as soon as baseball gets a salary cap you'll see Glass spending money AND wanting a new stadium and all those other "we are competing" things that owners do.

right now we are trying get a player development organization going.


What number youth movement are we on since he has been the owner? If we had kept all of the superstar players we have developed, I think the Royals would be a strong contender every year and making money. He would not pony up and invest to keep those guys, instead he whined about being small market.

I agree the farm system is not what it used to be, but why? With the Royals record they are constantly getting high draft choices, correct? Who is at the helm? IIRC we are not spending what we used to on the farm system.

Bottom line for me, the Royals have not been a winner since EK died.

Ari Chi3fs
08-22-2005, 03:26 PM
If Baird had paid Raul Ibanez... instead of Juan Gone... and Kept Brent Mayne instead of picking up Benito Santiago.

Mayne could handle the young pitching staff.

2004 would have been much better... and so would have 2005. Just my take.

Dr. Facebook Fever
08-22-2005, 03:47 PM
If Baird had paid Raul Ibanez...
... my favorite player since Frank White...........................


:(

Uatu
08-22-2005, 03:48 PM
OMG! You do that in public restrooms!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, the last time I didn't do it in the restroom they threw me out of the store.

Halfcan
08-22-2005, 03:48 PM
WTF-My point was Glass stood there and said a bunch of crap that was not true when he knew 30 people were getting axed including management. Did he make each decision-no I did not say that. Plus he has made money with the Royals. Plus there is not one thing wrong with Kaufman-if you think the K needs 200 mil your sniffing glue to much.

penguinz
08-22-2005, 03:53 PM
I think you are the one huffing glue. Both stadiums need lots of money in them to get them up to par with the other stadiums around the league.

tk13
08-22-2005, 03:54 PM
i think Glass is willing to pay what it takes to compete if it's realistic and he really had some range of how much.

right now ... it's neither


30 million ... 50 million, both gets your generally the same results


why would anyone dump an extra 20 million down the drain when you don't know whether it's gonna make any difference?

last year we spent 54 million and lost 100+


why do the same again?


it's one thing to lose money ... quite another to lose money with no end in sight.

you bring a salary cap of 90 million to baseball and i bet Glass starts spending more. He'll know there is SOME limit to how much the others can spend.

right now if he spent 100 ... the other teams will just spend 200 million


Glass is trying to do know what so many have bitch about before ...a full youth movement.

as soon as these young guys show they are ready to really contribute he will spend the money and bring in veterans to complete the picture.

until the young guys are at least decent it's a waste to take a 20 million dollar financial lost to only lose 100 games versus 110.


as soon as baseball gets a salary cap you'll see Glass spending money AND wanting a new stadium and all those other "we are competing" things that owners do.

right now we are trying get a player development organization going.
The end of the world has arrived. I completely support Laz 100%. :D

tk13
08-22-2005, 04:03 PM
What number youth movement are we on since he has been the owner?

One? Sure we had some talent when he took over in 2000, but having two great players in Dye and Damon does not equal youth movement. That team had no pitching. Whatsoever. They had some guys who were supposed to have potential, but they were all drafted when Herk Robinson was the GM and we had no owner. This year is the first time we've truly gone with a total core of predominantly young players under Glass.

And if Randa didn't totally suck balls and look like he was washed up last year, maybe he could've kept his job and we wouldn't have gone after a young 3B in the Beltran trade. The guy was horrible in the first half of the season when this team was going down the tubes. Yet it seems like so many fans of KC act like not picking up his option and grossly overpaying him was this horrible move that showed we weren't committed to winning. Garbage.

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 04:16 PM
One? Sure we had some talent when he took over in 2000, but having two great players in Dye and Damon does not equal youth movement. That team had no pitching. Whatsoever. They had some guys who were supposed to have potential, but they were all drafted when Herk Robinson was the GM and we had no owner. This year is the first time we've truly gone with a total core of predominantly young players under Glass.

And if Randa didn't totally suck balls and look like he was washed up last year, maybe he could've kept his job and we wouldn't have gone after a young 3B in the Beltran trade. The guy was horrible in the first half of the season when this team was going down the tubes. Yet it seems like so many fans of KC act like not picking up his option and grossly overpaying him was this horrible move that showed we weren't committed to winning. Garbage.


Grossly overpaying? He is a lifetime 286 hitter that ended up at 287 last year. That is only 4pts below is 291 in 2003. I agree, he was not up to par in the first part of the season, but he has been steady his whole career. He is a model BB player that likes KC. What was his option, 1 mil?
Dye and Damon are not the only ones. Beltran is the biggest of all of them, it is a trend. This has been going on since EK died, sorry I usually agree with you but not on this.

The Royals have developed a rep for unloading talent that they "can not afford."

redbrian
08-22-2005, 04:21 PM
I think Joe and a couple of his buddies who have made millions off of baseball should buy the team and show us how a good owner would handle the situation.

I won't hold my breath on that one.

Uatu
08-22-2005, 04:24 PM
WTF-My point was Glass stood there and said a bunch of crap that was not true when he knew 30 people were getting axed including management. Did he make each decision-no I did not say that.

You never said what he said in this pep talk that wasn't true. You just said the store was performing poorly and berated management for making personnel changes as a result.

You're the one here with an axe to grind the size of Texas, making your personal experience with Wal-Mart into some kind of personal character issue.

Sure-Oz
08-22-2005, 04:32 PM
I think hte main problem is bringing up the young guys too soon or not panning out, i still say let them stay in AAA for a bit and prove they belong to the majors, AAA is just a wasteland in our system, let them face a better competition if brought back down. Affeldt also needs to start i think, hes lost ion hte bullpen or trade him for something.

tk13
08-22-2005, 04:43 PM
I think hte main problem is bringing up the young guys too soon or not panning out, i still say let them stay in AAA for a bit and prove they belong to the majors, AAA is just a wasteland in our system, let them face a better competition if brought back down. Affeldt also needs to start i think, hes lost ion hte bullpen or trade him for something.
Actually, we did try to do that. But Graffanino and Truby were hurt all through spring training so those other guys had to be thrust into that position. Same thing with guys like Brian Anderson and Scott Sullivan getting hurt. Put youngsters in a position where they had to play...

And also for the record, Randa's option was $3.5 million dollars.

Sure-Oz
08-22-2005, 04:51 PM
Actually, we did try to do that. But Graffanino and Truby were hurt all through spring training so those other guys had to be thrust into that position. Same thing with guys like Brian Anderson and Scott Sullivan getting hurt. Put youngsters in a position where they had to play...

And also for the record, Randa's option was $3.5 million dollars.
Yeah Randa wasn't a viable option, i just want to continue to see these guys improve, but calling up JP Howell etc when they aren't ready is dumb, they were so careful with zach, keep it up with the others. Yeah injuries def. have hurt this team, we'll see how next year goes.

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 05:27 PM
The end of the world has arrived. I completely support Laz 100%. :D

Halfcan
08-22-2005, 05:27 PM
How is the K not up to snuff? Ever see Yankee stadium-it is in a horrible part of town, when it rains sewage backs up and gives the whole area the stench of death. They are finally getting a new stadium-but for decades it has been worse than the K.

I have also been to the Rangers ballpark several times. Including the Allstar game. It cost a bundle and low and behold they have lines at the concession stands. It is bigger and nicer but does not have the same feel as the K-not even close.

Been to Angels-beautiful park, stayed in the suite-but same thing-In my opinion K is better.

The Cards have played forever in the small ballpark they have now. Yes they are building a new one-but I liked the old one. It reminds you of the days when baseball was great. Now there, they needed the 200 mil to renovate like the Packers did, but leave the old place.

WhiteSox have a nice new park too-but in a terrible neighborhood. Seems everyone wanted a downtown stadium to boost the economy in that run down area-sound familiar. Given a choice fans will go with the Cubs and their old stadium. Bigger and Newer is not always better.

The people who want to build a downtown stadium just don't know baseball. Been going to the K since the first season-It was awesome then and still is.

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 05:37 PM
And also for the record, Randa's option was $3.5 million dollars.


I stand corrected, again. Was that for one year? So Sweeney is worth over ten and Randa was not worth a third of that? :hmmm:

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 05:50 PM
I stand corrected, again. Was that for one year? So Sweeney is worth over ten and Randa was not worth a third of that? :hmmm:
so He did spend money ... just not the right way

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 06:06 PM
so He did spend money ... just not the right way


I will not argue that he has done "selective spending" with a profit in mind. Hell, juangone is proof of that, big name coming to town should sell some tickets.
He has not been consistent, if he were to keep a few of these guys I would not have a problem. He has kept one, period. Cubs fans up here are licking their chops over Zach Greinke when his contract runs it's course. How about DeJesus when he does the same?

I know MLB is fugged up, but I am burned out on the Royals losing. I think Glass is doing a Wal Mart on Royals fans.

Valiant
08-22-2005, 06:18 PM
Imagine that, the man made a profit on his business. How dare he not lose tens of millions of dollars to make us happy! :cuss:


Millionaires do not own teams to make money... They own them for bragging rights, and if the team happens to make money then great for them...

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 06:24 PM
Millionaires do not own teams to make money... They own them for bragging rights, and if the team happens to make money then great for them...


Exactly, I can not name a single winning team that has an owner that uses the team as a profit center. They use the teams to satisfy their massive egos.

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 06:29 PM
Millionaires do not own teams to make money... They own them for bragging rights, and if the team happens to make money then great for them...
well it's nice of you to tell them that they aren't in it for the money


you gonna tell them how much they should lose each year as well?



~says the people who will complain about paying more than 5 bucks a ticket~

Halfcan
08-22-2005, 06:30 PM
Jack Harry slammed Dan Glass tonight. He said he was a baseball guy wanna be. Basically said he should be fired. His only qualification was his Daddy has deep pockets. He also called the Royals wanting 200 mil a joke.

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 06:30 PM
Exactly, I can not name a single winning team that has an owner that uses the team as a profit center. They use the teams to satisfy their massive egos.

bull ...


steinbrenner makes huge money even with the 200 million dollar payroll

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 06:33 PM
bull ...


steinbrenner makes huge money even with the 200 million dollar payroll


Now he does, but he did not initially. When EK was giving him a run for his money before cable, he was losing a lot of money. His ship building business supported that team.

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 06:36 PM
Now he does, but he did not initially. When EK was giving him a run for his money before cable, he was losing a lot of money. His ship building business supported that team.
EK was giving him a run for the money because the financial landscape was close to being even.

since then new york's population exploded to like 26 million ... compared to 5 million in kc

steinbrenner makes more on his cable tv rights then the royals total income for 2/3 years


EK wouldn't be spending with steinbrenner now

Valiant
08-22-2005, 06:39 PM
I think you are the one huffing glue. Both stadiums need lots of money in them to get them up to par with the other stadiums around the league.


And for what??? Redoing the K will not increase profits much, especially after the first few years... Almost all(75%) of the small market teams in baseball that got new stadiums and a few big market teams, increase in ticket sales the next year like they we suppose too... But guess what the sales dropped agian because those teams were not winning...

Does not matter how old your stadium is as long as you put out a winning team... look at the Packers in their stadium, hell the Chiefs in their stadium when they are doing well.. We fill the thing up when doing well, and we barely sell out thanks to buisness buying the rest of tickets that fans do not when we are not doing hot...

A new stadium or improvements will not mean shit to the Royals until there is a cap for all teams... The reason why the royals do not get fans filling up the stadiums is because they will not sign their young stars... The team would have a better chance at winning if they would sign their young veterans and bring up their youth when they are ready like the Twins and A's... The fans know that we cannot sign our talent, so why come out...

If this team was ran like it was under EK, we would have had Damon, Beltran, Ibanez as our outfielders this year and Sweeney at DH... And our pitchers would have been brought along slowly like they are suppose to...

Glass is running this team to make money and chump change at that... He made 1.2million last year of the Royals...

As for the Chiefs why do they need a new stadium to be competive??? Or do you mean so the owners can make 40-50million instead of 30million... The product will be the same no matter what in the NFL thanks to the cap....

As for baseball the only way you make money and succeed is to follow the A's method... Pay your veterans and bring your youth up when you can... Guess what when you win consistantly the stadium will be packed and you make money... Like we did in the 80's...



Agian you do not own a ****ing pro sports team to brag about making a few million dollars...

Valiant
08-22-2005, 06:42 PM
EK was giving him a run for the money because the financial landscape was close to being even.

since then new york's population exploded to like 26 million ... compared to 5 million in kc

steinbrenner makes more on his cable tv rights then the royals total income for 2/3 years


EK wouldn't be spending with steinbrenner now


You are right, but he would be spending to retain Beltran/Damon/Ibanez.. If the ownership would have tried to keep their stars you would see at leask 20k fans per game.. And proley 20 more wins or more, because we wouldnt be forcing rookies at this level that are not ready...

Of course we are dealing in what if's, and EK might have spent 100million to win a championship...

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 06:45 PM
EK was giving him a run for the money because the financial landscape was close to being even.

since then new york's population exploded to like 26 million ... compared to 5 million in kc

steinbrenner makes more on his cable tv rights then the royals total income for 2/3 years


EK wouldn't be spending with steinbrenner now

New Yorks population has always dwarfed KC's.

I would interject that IMO EK would be spending right along with him, he had bottomless pockets and wanted to kick some Yankee ass. Do you think EK ever made any money on the Royals? I for one do not, but stand to be corrected, it was about winning. He cared about the market and the team, why else would he have left so much operating money and the contract that keeps the team from being moved? If the winning tradition would have continued, imagine what the revenue stream would be now for the Royals.

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 06:49 PM
New Yorks population has always dwarfed KC's.

I would interject that IMO EK would be spending right along with him, he had bottomless pockets and wanted to kick some Yankee ass
yes... new york's population has always been more ... but cable television hasn't always been there. Television advertising money hasn't always been there.

t.v. money changed everything



no way EK is losing 120 million PER YEAR to compete with the yankmees.

no way


EK was a relatively frugal guy

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 06:52 PM
no way EK is losing 120 million PER YEAR to compete with the yankmees.

no way


EK was a relatively frugal guy


I call Bullshit! I remember when he signed Willie Wilson and Dan Quisenberry to lifetime contracts. I was screaming for them to both be traded, a whole other discussion. Unheard of money at the time, the Royals had one of the largest payrolls in baseball. He was anything but frugile. He spent what it took to win.


Oh, and we agree that cable/satellite has made the playing field unfair. But if they had kept the winning up, how big would the market be?

see Cubs/Cardinals

Mr. Laz
08-22-2005, 06:55 PM
I call Bullshit! I remember when he signed Willie Wilson and Dan Quisenberry to lifetime contracts. Unheard of money, the Royals had one of the largest payrolls in baseball. He was anything but frugile. He spent what it took to win.
back then contracts were a million per year ... not 20 million


hate to break it to ya... but it's been talked about before by people that were close to him.

he wouldn't be spending 200 million on his payroll ... and i wouldn't expect him to.

your old and romanticizing

Valiant
08-22-2005, 06:58 PM
well it's nice of you to tell them that they aren't in it for the money


you gonna tell them how much they should lose each year as well?



~says the people who will complain about paying more than 5 bucks a ticket~


Facts are facts... Most of the owners of pro sports have said publically that they are in it for championships... You are trying to tell me that men worth 900million dollars, cannot afford to lose 4-15 million the first couple of years to build a winner... Are you David Glass???

You have to build a winner first before fans will fill the stadium and make you money, not the other way around... We had the stars and did not keep them, now we are doing the same thing agian like we did six years ago... Last year we failed miserably with our veteran FA signings, but guess what that is what you have to do... If it works out like for the A's you will make all that money back in a few years and be competing for the division crown...

But some people on here are fine with an owner only trying to pull a profit and not care about winning...

Valiant
08-22-2005, 07:02 PM
yes... new york's population has always been more ... but cable television hasn't always been there. Television advertising money hasn't always been there.

t.v. money changed everything



no way EK is losing 120 million PER YEAR to compete with the yankmees.

no way


EK was a relatively frugal guy


I agree there.. but if we filled the stadium like we did then and had a 85million dollar payroll we would MAYBE lose 5-10 million, but be in contention for playoffs or more... The club right now is playing to be in contention for worse teams...There are clubs who win more games in one season then we do in two... Why?? because we cannot or willnot sign our stars... Hell look at our rookie Alex Gordon this year...
When you have former players that were loyal calling out the organization you know there are problems outside of the angry fanbase...

HemiEd
08-22-2005, 07:04 PM
back then contracts were a million per year ... not 20 million


hate to break it to ya... but it's been talked about before by people that were close to him.

he wouldn't be spending 200 million on his payroll ... and i wouldn't expect him to.

your old and romanticizing

Actually George Brett was the first million dollar guy on the Royals IIRC and then the contracts grew. Quiz and Willie signed 15/25 year contracts or something like that were crazy money at the time. He kept the players, almost all of them (I can not remember if he was still alive when Tartabull left), and did not let them leave whatever the cost.
I know the contracts are much higher now but the money is worth less, it is all relative.
And yes I am old, I bought a Coke for a nickel more than once. :p

redbrian
08-22-2005, 08:27 PM
George S makes $140 million on media rights alone, he does not lose money on the Yanks at worst he breaks even.

beavis
08-22-2005, 11:10 PM
The end of the world has arrived. I completely support Laz 100%. :D
It's a scary thought, isn't it? :)

beavis
08-22-2005, 11:12 PM
I call Bullshit! I remember when he signed Willie Wilson and Dan Quisenberry to lifetime contracts. I was screaming for them to both be traded, a whole other discussion. Unheard of money at the time, the Royals had one of the largest payrolls in baseball. He was anything but frugile. He spent what it took to win.

He was also making a huge profit off them at a time. I'd have a lot less respect for Mr. K if he took any kind of loss on the Royals. Though I know there's no way in the world he would.

beavis
08-22-2005, 11:16 PM
I've come to realize that talking to the "Glass should spend $100 million on payroll a year so we have a chance at winng even though he'll lose 100% of his net worth in a couple of years" crowd is pretty much the equivalent of speaking to a brick wall. What I have a problem understanding is how you lead chip eaters are able to balance your checkbook. I'd think that tying your shoes every morning would be a task beyond your capabilities.

Valiant
08-23-2005, 12:39 AM
I've come to realize that talking to the "Glass should spend $100 million on payroll a year so we have a chance at winng even though he'll lose 100% of his net worth in a couple of years" crowd is pretty much the equivalent of speaking to a brick wall. What I have a problem understanding is how you lead chip eaters are able to balance your checkbook. I'd think that tying your shoes every morning would be a task beyond your capabilities.


No, I really do not think that is what anybody is saying.. The A's and the Twins run their teams just fine with the strategy imposed... We will find out next year if Glass is trying to win, or trying to make a few million..

Then we have these dipshits who think the organization is doing a steller job like yourself... I mean I see why it is so hard to understand that if the Royals had kept their star talent, that this year would have been the same..

This club could have competed if we would have tried and kept them... Our salary would have been in the 65-80million range a year, we would be at or above .500,

Having kept Damon, Beltran, Ibanez and we never see a 19game losing streak.. Bring in quality veteran pitchers at 4-5 million a year and we do not see our rookies being rushed into the big leagues.. This team is ran like a joke, and everybody knows it shit except for you and people like you... The statement above is prolley a joke to you, but this is how the A's and Twins got to were they are competive and make money...

No, we will not spend 100mill a year on this team, but you put a quality product and the fans will fill the stadium... And in turn you make your money back and win a ****ing championship.. Kind of like what owning a pro sports team should be like...

(of course MLB needs to pull a NHL to get all the teams in the same range of cap, say a soft cap of 55million - hard cap of 150million) Then after about 5-10 years hopefully the league can operate like the NFL...

tk13
08-23-2005, 12:53 AM
The only problem with that is, Beltran was NEVER, EVER going to play here. He wanted to play in a huge market. That's what Boras wanted. Jayson Stark of ESPN said when covering Carlos as a FA, that Boras was telling some teams that they had to start at 10 years, 200 million to even consider getting him. There's no way we weren't one of those teams. He wasn't going to cut us a deal, Boras was going to totally rape us if we wanted to keep Beltran.

beavis
08-23-2005, 02:02 AM
No, I really do not think that is what anybody is saying.. The A's and the Twins run their teams just fine with the strategy imposed... We will find out next year if Glass is trying to win, or trying to make a few million..

Then we have these dipshits who think the organization is doing a steller job like yourself... I mean I see why it is so hard to understand that if the Royals had kept their star talent, that this year would have been the same..

This club could have competed if we would have tried and kept them... Our salary would have been in the 65-80million range a year, we would be at or above .500,

Having kept Damon, Beltran, Ibanez and we never see a 19game losing streak.. Bring in quality veteran pitchers at 4-5 million a year and we do not see our rookies being rushed into the big leagues.. This team is ran like a joke, and everybody knows it shit except for you and people like you... The statement above is prolley a joke to you, but this is how the A's and Twins got to were they are competive and make money...

No, we will not spend 100mill a year on this team, but you put a quality product and the fans will fill the stadium... And in turn you make your money back and win a ****ing championship.. Kind of like what owning a pro sports team should be like...

(of course MLB needs to pull a NHL to get all the teams in the same range of cap, say a soft cap of 55million - hard cap of 150million) Then after about 5-10 years hopefully the league can operate like the NFL...
I've never once said they are doing a stellar job. There are a lot of things they could do better. In fact, a lot of the moves they make I call them out on. But if you think keeping the players we've lost via free agency was going to make us a contender, you are really kidding yourself.

A $65-80 million payroll would put us at losing $15-$30 million a year. Sorry to tell you, but the Royals could go out and win the World Series, and they still aren't going to take in enough revenue to support at $100 million payroll. This is the fact that you goons don't understand.

Bitch about the roster moves all you want. I think it's a HUGE mistake to bring the likes of Nunez and Burgos up with no experience beyond A ball and let them get shelled. I thought it was asinine to send Mike Wood down when he'd been one of our most consistent pitchers all year. But this Glass is too cheap to spend money arguement is weak. And don't try to tell me it's not what people are saying, because I bet with relative ease I could go back a couple of threads and pull about 20 quotes that say exactly that.

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 02:47 AM
He was also making a huge profit off them at a time. I'd have a lot less respect for Mr. K if he took any kind of loss on the Royals. Though I know there's no way in the world he would.


Do you have any proof of this or is it something your parents told you? How could you have any personal knowledge of it? I personally remember it differently. The media may have been misleading us at the time but they were diligent in thier coverage of the Royals and EKs spending. Now don't you have a check book to go balance?

tk13
08-23-2005, 03:22 AM
Do you have any proof of this or is it something your parents told you? How could you have any personal knowledge of it? I personally remember it differently. The media may have been misleading us at the time but they were diligent in thier coverage of the Royals and EKs spending. Now don't you have a check book to go balance?
http://www.timesleader.com/mld/kansascity/sports/columnists/jeffrey_flanagan/11556440.htm

Glass was warned he would be vilified about payroll

JEFFREY FLANAGAN
Posted on Wed, May. 04, 2005


So David Glass acknowledged the Royals made $3 million last year but also that he has lost $27 million since buying the team in 2000.

And if you listen to some fans, losing $27 million isn't enough. Fans today seem infuriated with any owner not willing to lose millions and millions each season. Any owner not willing to do so is cheap.

“I told David when he bought the team,” former general manager Herk Robinson said, “that he'd just bought a license to get criticized for not spending enough and not losing enough money. To some fans, you're only a good owner if you run up a huge debt. I don't get it.”

Many of these same Royals fans also exist in this fantasy world that if Ewing Kauffman still owned the team that he'd be willing to lose a fortune to make the Royals competitive with the big boys in baseball, namely the Yankees and Red Sox.

“I've heard that stuff, too, and it's utter baloney,” Robinson said. “Mr. K hated to lose money on the Royals. He considered that really bad business. He'd get upset if they team lost $500,000 in a season.

“And I can promise you that he wouldn't be spending so much that he'd have an $80 million payroll because that would mean he'd be losing, what, $40 million? There's no way.

“The truth is, I doubt very much that Mr. K would even own the Royals if he were alive today. He wouldn't be interested in the present system where one team can spend $200 million on payroll and other teams can't spend $50 million. That wasn't him. He'd have much rather spent the money on his charity foundations. He figured the money he gave away there went a lot further in society.”

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 03:37 AM
Nice link TK! I would imagine Herk Robinson would have a pretty accurate opinion of EK, much better than my memory for sure. I am still trying to understand the big contracts that he handed out during the glory years to Willie Wilson and Dan Quisenberry and others though. I was shocked at the time by them. I know the Royals were consistently selling out or close to it on a regular basis.
If the team was not losing a lot of money when EK was alive, why did he have to leave that huge sum for them to operate on? Surely if they were at or near break even, they could have sustained themselves. It seems they burned through it with no problem.

Chief Henry
08-23-2005, 07:42 AM
I told you guys back in the spring that you needed to go down to Arkansas to the Walmart share holders meetings and start bitching down there.

If MLB opens up Vegas for a team, look out, Glass
could double the value of the team over night by moving it to Vegas. Then he'll spend some $$$
to put a quality team on the field. Then the value of his team will be 3X what it was in KC and he'll sell the team.

I know about the "so-called" contract that he can't move the team from KC that Ewing Kauffman made him sign. But we all know that contracts are made to be broken. Even Mr. Kauffman would not impede
someone from doubling and tripling his money.

petegz28
08-23-2005, 08:31 AM
I don't buy that at all.


I do....the league owners are no fan of Glass. And unfortunately it might take the threat of contraciton to actually get Glass to give a damn about his team.

RufusRJones
08-23-2005, 08:48 AM
I think the point the Glass haters are trying to make is that it takes money to make money. A business or a baseball team, whatever, has to keep some of its home grown talent. You cannot consistently let high performers leave. The Royals have basically kept one star player and surrounded him with a lot of youngsters. It hasn't worked well. I think if the Royals had chosen to keep at least one from the Dye, Damon, Beltran, Ibanez crowd it would make a significant difference in the performance of the team. Having one great hitter in your lineup isn't really very effective. How many good pitches do you think Sweeney sees a week?

At any rate, the Royals probably will never have a high or even middle of the road payroll, but what they can do is keep more than one player. Keeping two to three high performing players would make a difference, and they would pay for themselves in increased attendance, merch and consession sales. KC loves a winner...

petegz28
08-23-2005, 09:08 AM
The problem I have with Glass is he constantly complains about the rules of the game needing to be changed instead of playing by the ones that exist. He can fight and argue to chang ethe rules all he wants. In the mean time he needs to play by the rules as they are and out a competetive team on the field and stop jacking with all these guys who have never even been in AAA ball.

Dr. Facebook Fever
08-23-2005, 09:13 AM
I think the point the Glass haters are trying to make is that it takes money to make money. A business or a baseball team, whatever, has to keep some of its home grown talent. You cannot consistently let high performers leave. The Royals have basically kept one star player and surrounded him with a lot of youngsters. It hasn't worked well. I think if the Royals had chosen to keep at least one from the Dye, Damon, Beltran, Ibanez crowd it would make a significant difference in the performance of the team. Having one great hitter in your lineup isn't really very effective. How many good pitches do you think Sweeney sees a week?

At any rate, the Royals probably will never have a high or even middle of the road payroll, but what they can do is keep more than one player. Keeping two to three high performing players would make a difference, and they would pay for themselves in increased attendance, merch and consession sales. KC loves a winner...
If we'd have paid/kept the players we've had over the years... Beltran, Damon, Dye, Ibanez, Wells, Cone etc..... I can only imagine how many more games we could have won...

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 09:25 AM
If we'd have paid/kept the players we've had over the years... Beltran, Damon, Dye, Ibanez, Wells, Cone etc..... I can only imagine how many more games we could have won...

i can only imagine how high our payroll would be

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 10:00 AM
If we'd have paid/kept the players we've had over the years... Beltran, Damon, Dye, Ibanez, Wells, Cone etc..... I can only imagine how many more games we could have won...


And how more more revenue would be generated by putting a million more butts in the seats per season? :hmmm:

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 10:04 AM
And how more more revenue would be generated by putting a million more butts in the seats per season? :hmmm:

been figured out already as well

even if the royals sold out every game they still wouldn't make anywhere near enough to compete financially with the big markets.


t.v. is where the real money is

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 10:08 AM
been figured out already as well

even if the royals sold out every game they still wouldn't make anywhere near enough to compete financially with the big markets.


t.v. is where the real money is



Doooommmmed I tell ya...........

beavis
08-23-2005, 10:12 AM
I do....the league owners are no fan of Glass. And unfortunately it might take the threat of contraciton to actually get Glass to give a damn about his team.
Actually, it shows how little you know. Unless you count 29 out of 30 as being "no fan of Glass".

beavis
08-23-2005, 10:15 AM
If we'd have paid/kept the players we've had over the years... Beltran, Damon, Dye, Ibanez, Wells, Cone etc..... I can only imagine how many more games we could have won...
About 10.

Wells? :hmmm:

beavis
08-23-2005, 10:16 AM
If MLB opens up Vegas for a team, look out, Glass
could double the value of the team over night by moving it to Vegas. Then he'll spend some $$$
to put a quality team on the field. Then the value of his team will be 3X what it was in KC and he'll sell the team.
Do I really have to explain this again?

ChiTown
08-23-2005, 10:18 AM
I do....the league owners are no fan of Glass. And unfortunately it might take the threat of contraciton to actually get Glass to give a damn about his team.

Link?

You know, the one that says that the other league owners aren't a fan of David Glass? tks in advance.

beavis
08-23-2005, 10:20 AM
If the team was not losing a lot of money when EK was alive, why did he have to leave that huge sum for them to operate on? Surely if they were at or near break even, they could have sustained themselves. It seems they burned through it with no problem.
There was a period of several years of transition between Mr.K and Glass. I highly doubt he would leave them ownerless with no cash reserves.

Uatu
08-23-2005, 10:20 AM
Actually, it shows how little you know. Unless you count 29 out of 30 as being "no fan of Glass".

People think the league owners are split 50/50 on the matter but it simply isn't true.

beavis
08-23-2005, 10:20 AM
Link?

You know, the one that says that the other league owners aren't a fan of David Glass? tks in advance.
Don't hold your breath.

beavis
08-23-2005, 10:21 AM
People think the league owners are split 50/50 on the matter but it simply isn't true.
It's essentially Steinbrenner vs. everyone else.

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 10:24 AM
There was a period of several years of transition between Mr.K and Glass. I highly doubt he would leave them ownerless with no cash reserves.


You still did not address the point. If the team was not losing money, where did it go.

beavis
08-23-2005, 10:37 AM
You still did not address the point. If the team was not losing money, where did it go.
I don't know that they were losing money at the time. I was trying to tell you that it would be stupid for an owner who was trying to ensure his business would be here after his death to leave that business with no cash reserve. The proceeds of the sale of the Royals (and I assume any cash they had) went to the charity that owned them at the time.

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 11:41 AM
You still did not address the point. If the team was not losing money, where did it go.
now your just being stubborn


Glass told you ... the organization made 3 million last year BUT they have lost 27 million since he took over.

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 11:51 AM
now your just being stubborn


Glass told you ... the organization made 3 million last year BUT they have lost 27 million since he took over.


You need to catch up. What we are talking about is the point that Bowser and TK13 were making that EK did not and would not lose money. I am not buying in to it, even though the appropriate article quoting Herk Robinson was submitted. If the team was not losing money when he owned it and the team was successful, where did all the money go that was endowed to the team upon his death?

Here is a link the someone more qualified than me can get some information from.
http://www.sports-wired.com/teams/team.asp?Name=BE

It appears to me that when the Royals were winning that they had a salary close to 2/3 of the Yankee payroll and drew well over 2 million fans for quite a stretch. I do remember that good seats were very hard to come by back then.

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 11:55 AM
even though the appropriate article quoting Herk Robinson was submitted..
stubborn is as stubborn does

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 12:00 PM
stubborn is as stubborn does


So where did the money go?

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 12:05 PM
So where did the money go?
your ranting alot but not making much sense

where did what money go?


EK was not a man to lose a ton of money ... everyone i've heard that knew the man has said the same thing. EK wanted to win, but also ran the team as a business.

beavis
08-23-2005, 12:11 PM
So where did the money go?
Man, how many times do I need to say it? Are you just not reading at this point?

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 12:13 PM
Man, how many times do I need to say it? Are you just not reading at this point?
what money is he talking about?


does he really mean "where did the money come from?" talking about how did EK pay for a competitive team against the yanks?

or what?

beavis
08-23-2005, 12:21 PM
what money is he talking about?


does he really mean "where did the money come from?" talking about how did EK pay for a competitive team against the yanks?

or what?
He's talking about the money that the Royals had after the death of Mr. K and prior to Glass taking over the team. Since the proceeds of the sale went to Mr. K's charity, I'd assume that's where it went.

He thinks the team was operating under a loss while Mr. K was in charge, which I know isn't true. But he'll keep spouting it hoping it magically comes true so he can be right.

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 12:23 PM
Man, how many times do I need to say it? Are you just not reading at this point?

You said you assume it went to the charity...........


what money is he talking about?


does he really mean "where did the money come from?" talking about how did EK pay for a competitive team against the yanks?

or what?


The gazillion dollar endowment that EK left for the Royals to run on. We used to hear updates on how that money was holding up prior to Glass buying the team. If they were not losing money, where did it go?

My point is that EK was commited to winning and did not let money get in his way, simple as that. He followed the A's into KC who developed into a minor league team for the Yankees, selling players to them. EK did run the team as a business by investing in a competitive product.

Uatu
08-23-2005, 12:25 PM
It appears to me that when the Royals were winning that they had a salary close to 2/3 of the Yankee payroll

Well duh, we may have not been at the bottom of the league in payroll, but the difference between the top and the bottom was also not $180 million.

In 1988 the Yankees' payroll was $18.9 million. The Royals' was $11.5. The lowest in baseball was about $6 million. Top to bottom team difference of $12 million.

In 2005 the Yankees' payroll is $208 million. The lowest is $29 million. Top to bottom team difference of $179 million.

See just a slight a difference there?
:rolleyes:

Uatu
08-23-2005, 12:32 PM
My point is that EK was commited to winning and did not let money get in his way, simple as that. He followed the A's into KC who developed into a minor league team for the Yankees, selling players to them. EK did run the team as a business by investing in a competitive product.

If you don't understand the difference between the business side of baseball in the 1980 and 2005 then I don't know what to tell you.

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 01:34 PM
You said you assume it went to the charity...........

The gazillion dollar endowment that EK left for the Royals to run on. We used to hear updates on how that money was holding up prior to Glass buying the team. If they were not losing money, where did it go?

My point is that EK was commited to winning and did not let money get in his way, simple as that. He followed the A's into KC who developed into a minor league team for the Yankees, selling players to them. EK did run the team as a business by investing in a competitive product.

he left money to fund the Royals until it was sold


the money went to charity after the Royals were sold

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 01:40 PM
My point is that EK was commited to winning and did not let money get in his way, simple as that. He followed the A's into KC who developed into a minor league team for the Yankees, selling players to them. EK did run the team as a business by investing in a competitive product.'
how many times and by how many people does it have to be said before you listen?

1. EK was not into losing big money while running the royals

2. the payroll problem was not as big back in EK era because the money situation was completely different. the primary income was ticket sales back then so the yankmees and Royals were close to be even.

if both team were competitive and fill their stadium is was fairly even.


but as soon as the population/tv money exploded so did the difference in payroll between the royals and yankmees.

we talking a difference of a couple of million turning into a couple HUNDRED million.


the royals could sellout every game and the yankmees could not sell a single ticket AND NEW YORK WOULD STILL OUT EARN the royals almost 2 to 1.

HemiEd
08-23-2005, 04:02 PM
'
how many times and by how many people does it have to be said before you listen?

1. EK was not into losing big money while running the royals

2. the payroll problem was not as big back in EK era because the money situation was completely different. the primary income was ticket sales back then so the yankmees and Royals were close to be even.

if both team were competitive and fill their stadium is was fairly even.


but as soon as the population/tv money exploded so did the difference in payroll between the royals and yankmees.

we talking a difference of a couple of million turning into a couple HUNDRED million.


the royals could sellout every game and the yankmees could not sell a single ticket AND NEW YORK WOULD STILL OUT EARN the royals almost 2 to 1.


I see a lot of opinion in your statements, no facts. What population explosion is it that you keep referring to? The facts are, it has been relatively flat. The latest numbers I could find were for 1990.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027.html
I know the markets include many cities but here is an example:
NY City 1980 7 million 1990 7.3 million
KCMO 450K 435K
KCK 160K 150K
Wichita 280K 300K
DesMoines 191K 193K

I agree that TV revenue is one sided, no doubt about it. I wonder why so many people are willing to pay for the Yankee product? Have the Royals developed a cable market yet? I had cable in Wichita in 1977, it has been around a while.
I know I cancelled the $162 Direct TV "extra innings" this year because I did not feel the product was worth it. They were only going to show 50 Royals games and we know how that is going. I have been a dedicated Royals fan for a long time, but I am about burnt out.

I stand by my point that if they ran the franchise like a business and invested in a sellable product people would buy it. The team is being run like Wal-Mart. Lowest price players every day. I know Beltran was going to leave the day he set foot on the field, but he was the exception. Damon, Ibanez, Dye etc. would have stayed if paid fairly.

Now talking about money, I could buy a soda for fifteen cents in 1980, a new Oldsmobile for under $10,000 and my home cost one eighth of what it is worth now. The Royals payroll is only about double what it was in 1980, give me a break. Glass needs to invest in team and keep the players the system develops and quit blaming MLB for being cheap. He will continue to lose money long term if he does not change IMO.

Mr. Laz
08-23-2005, 04:10 PM
I see a lot of opinion in your statements, no facts. .
fine ... think what you want, i'm done



i can't believe how completely clueless you are on the subject