enigmaax;460741 wrote:Maybe I have you mistaken...and if so, I'm sorry. But weren't you talking a lot about loyalty in the last few weeks? I mean, hey, I'm all for making your team put a decent product on the field.....I just don't then turn around and call someone out for not being loyal. Maybe I have the wrong person, but I could've sworn you dogged LeBron for disloyalty. Its about the team, right? Not a player, not an owner?

It doesn't really matter who I choose to follow, but in baseball its the White Sox. And I never claimed to be a great fan.

LBJ has a loyalty tattoo, the franchise bent over backwards for him, and he has made several statements about wanting to win a ring in Cleveland and build something, not to go chasing rings. Then he did exactly that. Plus he had that insane TV special all for his ego, when I think he knew much sooner that he wasn't going to stay. Thus embarrassing Cleveland on national TV. Thats my issue.

Also if you never claimed to being a good fan then stfu.

Commander of Awesome;460746 wrote: LBJ has a loyalty tattoo, the franchise bent over backwards for him, and he has made several statements about wanting to win a ring in Cleveland and build something, not to go chasing rings. Then he did exactly that. Plus he had that insane TV special all for his ego, when I think he knew much sooner that he wasn't going to stay. Thus embarrassing Cleveland on national TV. Thats my issue.

Ha ha. No need to rehash how you still can't clean LeBron's spooge off your team's face. But you just have no room to complain - you've already pointed out that you'll bail on your team if they don't produce. You bailed on the Indians. The biggest difference is that LeBron actually had a stake in his decision and you're just a dumbass who watches from afar (yes, I am the same). Nothing special.

Commander of Awesome;460746 wrote: Also if you never claimed to being a good fan then stfu.

Ummm....no.

krazie45;460409 wrote:I'm sorry but every single thing in this statement is wrong. Indians and Cavs fans are the worst around? Really? Have you ever checked out a Marlins game?

I'd put them in the same league, honestly. Both fan bases/cities seem to wait for the team to win before they show up for the games. Every time the Marlins played in the World Series it was sold out. Now they are average, bordering on bad and people are not showing up. However, these Marlin fans who are consistently mocked as among the worst in all of sports are ahead of the Indians in attendance.

krazie45;460409 wrote: LeBron for all the bridges he's torched managed to make the Cavs relevant in Cleveland again and Dan Gilbert continues to maintain that relevancy. Not to mention that Cleveland will support the Cavs now really as a way to spite LeBron.

Lebron did create thousands of Cavalier fans in NE Ohio. (As evidenced by the spike in attendance and revenues). The Cavaliers are relevant again and it is almost entirely due to Lebron. I remember when they were the laughingstock of the league when Ricky Davis was one of their featured players. I don't think anybody forgets the time he shot at his own basket to try and get a triple double.

Gilbert seems like he is a pretty solid owner, however let's not give him more credit than what he is due. He walked into a great situation with a guy who can win 45+ games with a bunch of Titos. You and me could have owned the Cavaliers and produced similar results. The real verdict on Gilbert will arrive sometime in the next two to three years. He is trying to rally the support of the fans and accomplished it with the very emotional letter he released and he succeeded in rallying the troops. However emotional appeals and fans "going to the Cavs games out of spite" will only last so long. Joe Cleveland fan will have to plop $60+ to go to Cavaliers game, I don't see him doing to watch a poor product. Especially since fans aren't going to Indians games right now. (The logic is that Cleveland fans become disinterested in a losing product)

jordo212000;460927 wrote:I'd put them in the same league, honestly. Both fan bases/cities seem to wait for the team to win before they show up for the games. Every time the Marlins played in the World Series it was sold out. Now they are average, bordering on bad and people are not showing up. However, these Marlin fans who are consistently mocked as among the worst in all of sports are ahead of the Indians in attendance.

Indians average more fans over the past decade than the Reds do.

KR1245;460979 wrote:Indians average more fans over the past decade than the Reds do.

The Reds didn't open Great American Ballpark until 2003. Not really a fair comparison.

jordo212000;460994 wrote:The Reds didn't open Great American Ballpark until 2003. Not really a fair comparison.

You can start at 2003, thats fine.

Reds finished ahead of the Indians in total attendance in 03,04,06
Indians finished ahead of Reds in 05,07,08,09

If the Indians and the Marlins are on the same level then you gotta throw the Reds into that mix. Numbers done lie

enigmaax;460830 wrote:Ha ha. No need to rehash how you still can't clean LeBron's spooge off your team's face. But you just have no room to complain - you've already pointed out that you'll bail on your team if they don't produce. You bailed on the Indians. The biggest difference is that LeBron actually had a stake in his decision and you're just a dumbass who watches from afar (yes, I am the same). Nothing special.

The owner Dolans bailed on me first. Plus I am still an Indians fan. I didn't become a yankees fan or a white sox fan (lmao). Nice Fail.

KR1245;461033 wrote:You can start at 2003, thats fine.

Reds finished ahead of the Indians in total attendance in 03,04,06
Indians finished ahead of Reds in 05,07,08,09

If the Indians and the Marlins are on the same level then you gotta throw the Reds into that mix. Numbers done lie

LMAO!!!!!

OWNED.

FUCKING OWNED.

To add onto that, I get sick of people criticizing Cleveland fans. There is no better pro sports town in America, imo. Our teams haven't won shit since 1946, but here we are, still blindly and proudly supporting the fuck out of them.

Most of you bandwagoners/fans from otherr parts of the state couldn't begin to fathom the suffering that actually bonds us Cleveland fans together.

hoops23;461074 wrote:LMAO!!!!!

OWNED.

FUCKING OWNED.

I also loved how he tried to give excuses like a new stadium as a reason why fans started going. Look at a team like Boston or a few other clubs who haven't had a new stadium in years yet continue to draw fans.

hoops23;461078 wrote:To add onto that, I get sick of people criticizing Cleveland fans. There is no better pro sports town in America, imo. Our teams haven't won shit since 1946, but here we are, still blindly and proudly supporting the fuck out of them.

Most of you bandwagoners/fans from otherr parts of the state couldn't begin to fathom the suffering that actually bonds us Cleveland fans together.

I will say that Cleveland really does have some passionate and loyal fans, and credit goes to them. The support for the Browns speaks for itself. And I'm honestly surprised anyone would buy tickets to an Indians game, but I have several friends who still go to games at least once a week. As for the Cavs, success has bred a strong following and reality is that attendance will decrease, I don't think that it will ever get as bad as pre Lebron.

thedynasty1998;461213 wrote: As for the Cavs, success has bred a strong following and reality is that attendance will decrease, I don't think that it will ever get as bad as pre Lebron.

I hope not, I remember going to games after school where around 7k fans showed up. Granted it was cool to be able to sit down low for $10, but it was a poor showing to some games.

hoops23;461078 wrote:To add onto that, I get sick of people criticizing Cleveland fans. There is no better pro sports town in America, imo. Our teams haven't won shit since 1946, but here we are, still blindly and proudly supporting the fuck out of them.

Most of you bandwagoners/fans from otherr parts of the state couldn't begin to fathom the suffering that actually bonds us Cleveland fans together.

I've said before I believe that Browns fans are about the most loyal bunch of fans I've ever seen. And it isn't because you've dealt with all the different titled heartbreaks - any fan would stick around when you think you are that close. It is about still filling the stadium when you win 3 games. That is cool for you, I respect that, even though I find it to be counter to the purpose of entertainment.

I don't believe that same loyalty carries over to the Indians or Cavs, by and large. I know there are some hardcore fans from each of those teams, but I've been a lot of places and there isn't a whole lot of difference between fans anywhere. A handful will keep their season tickets and still wear the gear and watch every game when things aren't going well. The rest will come and go when the sport gives them something fun to do. Either way is a personal decision and feel free to spend your time and money how you choose. But I've seen very few cities or fanbases that really sets itself apart as far as maintaining a truly loyal fanbase that will throw wads of cash at the team regardless of the team's performance.

jordo212000;460927 wrote: Every time the Marlins played in the World Series it was sold out.

Likely because there were so many available seats that the opposing fans bought them up. Tribe fans showed up in droves in Atlanta when the Tribe played the Braves in 95. My boss and a bunch of others who flew down had no trouble snagging tickets.

And as far as "loyalty" to the team goes? You can throw THAT shit out the window with the Tribe. You GET what you GIVE. Daddy NoBucks Dolan is INTENTIONALLY trying to lose by being one of the biggest cheapskates in the league. It's so blatant it's ridiculous.

It's as if he's saying "fuck you, Cleveland...now come spend money on my minor league team." It's like a real life "Major League" movie. He isn't even TRYING to win. Start TRYING by putting a MAJOR LEAGUE team on the field and fans will show up.

The problem with baseball and the Indians is the current structure of revenue sharing. You can't blame Dolan and other small market owners for not going out and spending money, because they, as owners, are profiting. Baseball does best when the large market teams are spending money and winning and the small market teams are being cheap and losing.

thedynasty1998;461381 wrote: Baseball does best when the large market teams are spending money and winning and the small market teams are being cheap and losing.

Says who? I would love to see your source for MLB's overall balance sheet and your rationale behind this.

As most are aware, some financial statements for teams were released recently and some of the highlights are:

•The Pirates earned $29.4 million in 2007 and 2008 — taking $69.3 million in revenue sharing at the same time.

•The Marlins received nearly $92 million in revenue sharing in 2008 and 2009, while producing net income of $33 million in those years.

•The Rays received $74 million in revenue sharing in 2007 and 2008 and had total net income in those years of a little more than $15 million.

•The Angels paid $31 million into the revenue-sharing pool in 2008 and 2009; the Mariners paid a little more than $24 million in 2007 and 2008. The Angels had combined earnings of $17.8 million in the two years covered in the reports; the Mariners lost $4.5 million in 2008 after showing a $17.9 million profit in 2007.

This proves that although Dolan isn't spending money and attendance might be down, he's still profiting. He's a business man first and foremost and if he can profit the most from his current structure, it's hard to get him to change.

And to think that Dolan ultimately doesn't want the Yankees in the World Series is just ignorant, because Dolan's pockets get heavier with the more success that the Yankees and other large market teams have.

It does not prove that the Dolans are making money because they borrowed a shit ton of money to buy the indians back in '00. Remember they paid significantly more than what the Dogers were sold for around the same time. They are having to take every cent they profit and put it towards their debt payments.

Also your statement that baseball is at its best when the small market teams suck is also dumb. Baseball is at its best when those teams are competeing and thus fans go to the games, Yankees will always draw a crowd, same with Red Sox. Thus when small market teams are sdecent more people go to the park, more people are interested in baseball, and the less that teams like Marlins etc take from pool meaning more money for every club. Nice FAIL.

Commander of Awesome;461175 wrote:I also loved how he tried to give excuses like a new stadium as a reason why fans started going. Look at a team like Boston or a few other clubs who haven't had a new stadium in years yet continue to draw fans.

The new stadium makes his argument even weaker. Normally when franchises open a new stadium its a draw to fans and they come out to check it out and sell out the stadium. Somehow with a new stadium the Tribe still beat the Reds out in attendance lol. Go ahead and pair the Tribe and Marlins in the same group (which is a joke troll statement), that group is still better than the reds.

The fact Jordo tried to compare a Cleveland franchise to a Florida based franchise is the biggest joke I have seen on this forum in awhile. Florida fans are the WORST fans in this country, if not the world. Congrats they sold out their stadium for the World Series. It's not too much for a franchise to ask its "fans" to watch their "team" play for a title. The difference is, after those 2 world series the fans still didn't show up. I never saw that happen with the tribe (see 455 consecutive sold out games).

At least wait for the Reds to sell out 100 consecutive games before you talk shit about Tribe fans. Did the reds even sell out every game this season? A winning season I might add.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/joe_sheehan/08/25/pirates.finances/

Commander of Awesome;461405 wrote:It does not prove that the Dolans are making money because they borrowed a shit ton of money to buy the indians back in '00. Remember they paid significantly more than what the Dogers were sold for around the same time. They are having to take every cent they profit and put it towards their debt payments.

Also your statement that baseball is at its best when the small market teams suck is also dumb. Baseball is at its best when those teams are competeing and thus fans go to the games, Yankees will always draw a crowd, same with Red Sox. Thus when small market teams are sdecent more people go to the park, more people are interested in baseball, and the less that teams like Marlins etc take from pool meaning more money for every club. Nice FAIL.

Truth.

A few days back, financial numbers were released that opened the gates for my Pirates to get more "cheap-ass owners pocketing profits" ridicule. People who blog about the team (and in the case of Dejan K., actually report on it) did research to find out that most of those "profits" are being funneled into paying debts. I think team president Frank Coonelly recently said the club currently has a "manageable" $100M or so debt at the time. Which is why all their money spent is in development, as opposed to bidding wars for upper-tier players. As a fan, it sucks experiencing losing season after losing season, but what can you do? Unless you have an owner with seemingly unlimited funds (ala the Bankees), all you can do is hope your team can pull a Minnesota and find a way to constantly stay in contention despite not having all that deep of pockets (although they've become much bigger spenders the last year or two). San Diego might be a better pick. They started this year with a payroll barely bigger than the Pirates, but have kicked ass.

As for the "baseball is great when big-market teams are good and small-market teams suck" argument...only in TV ratings for the postseason, as certain teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, etc. will draw more casual fans to watch than teams like the Marlins, Pirates, Indians, etc. But there's no logical way it can be good for the sport when you're essentially telling a good number of teams that, while others will be able to buy their way into contention year after year, you'll have to hope for a perfect storm of players coming together to have a 2-3 year run of being in contention. Baseball is faltering as the "national pastime" because of the major sports, it's the one with the wide disparity between the haves and have-nots.

Heretic;461429 wrote:Truth.
that most of those "profits" are being funneled into paying debts.......

As for the "baseball is great when big-market teams are good and small-market teams suck" argument...only in TV ratings for the postseason, as certain teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, etc. will draw more casual fans to watch than teams like the Marlins, Pirates, Indians, etc. But there's no logical way it can be good for the sport when you're essentially telling a good number of teams that, while others will be able to buy their way into contention year after year, you'll have to hope for a perfect storm of players coming together to have a 2-3 year run of being in contention. Baseball is faltering as the "national pastime" because of the major sports, it's the one with the wide disparity between the haves and have-nots.

On your first point, under their current structure they are maximizing their revenue. Whether that goes to pay down debt or into the owner's pocket, it doesn't matter. If they didn't generate as much in revenue sharing, they wouldn't be able to pay down their debt as quickly.

On your second point, I didn't necessarily mean it's what is best for baseball fans, I meant it's what seems to be the most profitable for owners. The Yankees are going to make more money by playing in the World Series than the Indians would, and therefore that is what is best for owners in general due to the revenue sharing.

I was looking at this from a numbers standpoint only, not what benefits the fans.

It's simple. Owning a sports franchise loses money. It's almost guaranteed.

In my sports econ class we learned the only reason to own a sports team is to have fun with it, because from a pure business standpoint it's a terrible decision financially.