Dayton Moore agrees to a 2-year extension

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

It's hard even if there is money available..

I just don't see money as the issue. Money will make it easier, cover up mistakes but no guarantees.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Funny how Theo Epstein was a genius in Boston yet in Chicago, he can't get anything right and is on his second manager.

What the Royals need is the Cardinals way. Not just build via the draft but, develop those players so that they are ready when they reach the majors.

Teach the same thing in low A that you teach at the Big Show.

The Royals can defintely use the same approach the Cardinals have used. It's doable for the royals.

[Al Bundy]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

I just don't see money as the issue. Money will make it easier, cover up mistakes but no guarantees.
What the Royals need is the Cardinals way. Not just build via the draft but, develop those players so that they are ready when they reach the majors.

Teach the same thing in low A that you teach at the Big Show.

The Royals can defintely use the same approach the Cardinals have used. It's doable for the royals.

Introduce 'Roids in A ball.. great plan.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Al Bundy

Introduce 'Roids in A ball.. great plan.

Don't be an idiot.

2011 WS Champs
2012 one win from a WS
2013 two wins from a WS championship

Best core group of players in the next 5 years according to Baseball prospectus.

It's not Roids, really, thats the reason?

It's a template for the Royals to follow.

[Al Bundy]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Don't be an idiot.

2011 WS Champs
2012 one win from a WS
2013 two wins from a WS championship

Best core group of players in the next 5 years according to Baseball prospectus.

It's not Roids, really, thats the reason?

It's a template for the Royals to follow.

Your franchise benefited from Steroids, it's ok, we know it, you know it, MLB knows it.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

I just don't see money as the issue. Money will make it easier, cover up mistakes but no guarantees.
What the Royals need is the Cardinals way. Not just build via the draft but, develop those players so that they are ready when they reach the majors.

Teach the same thing in low A that you teach at the Big Show.

The Royals can defintely use the same approach the Cardinals have used. It's doable for the royals.

Your views are overly simplistic.

Kansas City and the Royals ****ed up when they renovated the K. A downtown stadium should have been built, period. If they had, there would be far more money for the club because of fan support.

I'm sorry, but this isn't the 1980's. People have HDTV's and the Royals have a shit TV contract. KC is so spread out that the novelty of going to 80 games a year, without public transportation, wears off quickly for people living in JoCo or Blue Springs or Liberty, etc.

People that act as if there's a better qualified candidate just hanging around somewhere to deal with the Glass family, revenue issues, the farm system and the trials and tribulations of building a team, on a small budget, are smoking opium.

The Royals are not the Cardinals. Or the Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers or Giants.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Your views are overly simplistic.

Kansas City and the Royals ****ed up when they renovated the K. A downtown stadium should have been built, period. If they had, there would be far more money for the club because of fan support.

Stadiums have proven to not be a cure for the financial woes of teams.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I'm sorry, but this isn't the 1980's. People have HDTV's and the Royals have a shit TV contract. KC is so spread out that the novelty of going to 80 games a year, without public transportation, wears off quickly for people living in JoCo or Blue Springs or Liberty, etc..

Same issue down here in Florida. People have too much other things to do. They make excuses that they won't spend 30 minutes to drive to the stadium. etc.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The Royals are not the Cardinals. Or the Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers or Giants.

They were at one time and could be again.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Your views are overly simplistic.

Kansas City and the Royals ****ed up when they renovated the K. A downtown stadium should have been built, period. If they had, there would be far more money for the club because of fan support.

Bullcrap.

They would have had a small temporary bump due to the "new park smell", but then they would have settled in at roughly what they always drew. Perhaps (or probably) even LESS long-term because it would be a LOT less convenient to go to games, and no one wants to F'ing go downtown.

[DJJasonp]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Bullcrap.

They would have had a small temporary bump due to the "new park smell", but then they would have settled in at roughly what they always drew. Perhaps (or probably) even LESS long-term because it would be a LOT less convenient to go to games, and no one wants to F'ing go downtown.

which is exactly what happened in San Diego.

That said, given a choice, I'd much rather have a ton of dining and drinking options within walking distance (and public transportation as Dane said), than the other (and I LOVE the 'K').

While I called out San Diego to defend your statement - it all boils down to winning. Win, and the people will come. Win, AND you have dining and drinking options and public transportation - and they will come more often.

[Three7s]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Bullcrap.

They would have had a small temporary bump due to the "new park smell", but then they would have settled in at roughly what they always drew. Perhaps (or probably) even LESS long-term because it would be a LOT less convenient to go to games, and no one wants to F'ing go downtown.

I agree. When the Royals were CLEARLY in the race in September, what did the K average? I think it was 25-30k on most nights with a few sellouts. They'll come if you win, no matter where it is.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Bullcrap.

They would have had a small temporary bump due to the "new park smell", but then they would have settled in at roughly what they always drew. Perhaps (or probably) even LESS long-term because it would be a LOT less convenient to go to games, and no one wants to F'ing go downtown.

I couldn't disagree more.

When given the opportunity, the Royals should have chosen a more centralized location for their stadium. Not only would they have benefited from easier access from Kansans but from locals living and working downtown.

It would have given people an excuse to go downtown, which in turn would have help revitalize downtown.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I couldn't disagree more.

When given the opportunity, the Royals should have chosen a more centralized location for their stadium. Not only would they have benefited from easier access from Kansans but from locals living and working downtown.

It would have given people an excuse to go downtown, which in turn would have help revitalize downtown.

I can tell you for a fact that I would go to a lot fewer games if I had to fight my way downtown and look for parking. I am not alone, and its not like downtown KC is a thriving metropolis with tons of people living in the area and ready to walk up.

I think there would be fewer fans, and less money long term with a downtown stadium, and I don't give a damn about revitalizing KC at the expense of the Royals.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by alnorth

I can tell you for a fact that I would go to a lot fewer games if I had to fight my way downtown and look for parking. I am not alone, and its not like downtown KC is a thriving metropolis with tons of people living in the area and ready to walk up.

I think there would be fewer fans, and less money long term with a downtown stadium, and I don't give a damn about revitalizing KC at the expense of the Royals.

At the expense of the Royals?

[DJJasonp]

Originally Posted by alnorth

I can tell you for a fact that I would go to a lot fewer games if I had to fight my way downtown and look for parking. I am not alone, and its not like downtown KC is a thriving metropolis with tons of people living in the area and ready to walk up.

I think there would be fewer fans, and less money long term with a downtown stadium, and I don't give a damn about revitalizing KC at the expense of the Royals.

I just dont get this mentality. I live in San Diego - and I guarantee you, it's easier to get in and out of Petco, than it is geting in and out of Qualcomm (the padres old stadium). Especially OUT after a game.

When public transit exists, it adds so many different options as to where you park, how close you park, etc. etc.

Not to mention, the hundreds, if not thousands, who can drink....hop on a trolley for the game...drink.....hop on a trolley home.....and not put people's lives at risk.

When I was in KC for the raiders game, I literally ran to my car to get a jump on what was surely highways full of inebriated drivers.

That's not to say it cant happen in a downtown stadium setting......but at least you got options if mass transit is done right.

[PunkinDrublic]

Originally Posted by DJJasonp

I just dont get this mentality. I live in San Diego - and I guarantee you, it's easier to get in and out of Petco, than it is geting in and out of Qualcomm (the padres old stadium). Especially OUT after a game.

When public transit exists, it adds so many different options as to where you park, how close you park, etc. etc.

Not to mention, the hundreds, if not thousands, who can drink....hop on a trolley for the game...drink.....hop on a trolley home.....and not put people's lives at risk.

When I was in KC for the raiders game, I literally ran to my car to get a jump on what was surely highways full of inebriated drivers.

That's not to say it cant happen in a downtown stadium setting......but at least you got options if mass transit is done right.

Yeah but I still still remember when I lived in SD that you could take the trolley out to Qualcom. Is that not an option now?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by DJJasonp

I just dont get this mentality. I live in San Diego - and I guarantee you, it's easier to get in and out of Petco, than it is geting in and out of Qualcomm (the padres old stadium). Especially OUT after a game.

When public transit exists, it adds so many different options as to where you park, how close you park, etc. etc.

Not to mention, the hundreds, if not thousands, who can drink....hop on a trolley for the game...drink.....hop on a trolley home.....and not put people's lives at risk.

When I was in KC for the raiders game, I literally ran to my car to get a jump on what was surely highways full of inebriated drivers.

That's not to say it cant happen in a downtown stadium setting......but at least you got options if mass transit is done right.

The problem is that the mass transit is only limited to buses. There's no rail or anything that would help ease the traffic. And I drive through downtown occasionally through work, and it's a mess during rush hour, and the infrastructure is poorly designed, and there is not enough parking garages in downtown to even come close to hold 15,000-20,000 (or more for some games) people.

I personally like where the K and Arrowhead is located at, because other than trying to get in and out is a pain at times (this is more of a parking Nazi/stadium layout issue), I like it that it's close to I-70 or I-435. I just wish the Chiefs/Royals/Jackson County would had made some improvements on getting in/out from the stadium more manageable.

But on the other hand, I been through worse. I went to the Fiesta Bowl in Arizona last year, it took me a hour and a 1/2 to get out of the ****ing parking lot. That was poorly managed.