Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Miami Herald Blog)   8 of 9 Miami-Dade commissioners who voted for the Marlins' new park would have voted against it if they knew the Marlins would slash payroll a year later. Tag is for gullible, gullible commissioners   (miamiherald.typepad.com) divider line 26
    More: Dumbass, Marlins, Miami, University of Montevallo, Jeffrey Loria, Little Havana, Miami-Dade, payrolls, commissioners  
•       •       •

619 clicks; posted to Sports » on 02 Dec 2012 at 12:57 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



26 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-12-02 11:53:18 AM  
Well, how would they know what the Marlins might do? It's not like there was any precedent for such an action...
 
2012-12-02 12:31:09 PM  
Even Charlie Brown can recognize patterns of behavior better than these jackholes.
 
2012-12-02 12:31:31 PM  
I thought they were cutting back operational staff or cutting wages.

But player trades? Nah. Nothing to biatch about.
 
2012-12-02 01:00:21 PM  
perhaps taxpayers should not pay for stadiums to enrich douchenozzle that all want to steal public money. stop paying for stadium. particularly baseball and football specific stadiums.

god americans are farking tarded. if you negotiate with hostage takers they will take more hostages.
 
2012-12-02 01:12:34 PM  
FTA: "I polled eight of the nine Miami-Dade County commissioners who voted in favor of the new stadium in March 2009; the ninth, Rebeca Sosa, was on a cruise last week. Though all were disappointed and some furious with the payroll-slashing, only two (Javier Souto, Natasha Seijas) said they would have voted against the ballpark if they knew the Marlins would slash payroll to this extent. Another, Audrey Edmonson, said she "may have voted differently."

Umm, only two would have voted against it...

/Reading comprehension, how does it work?
 
2012-12-02 01:16:45 PM  
How many of those commissioners are having their disappointment assuaged by the sudden influx of campaign contributions?
 
2012-12-02 01:22:26 PM  

Prey4reign: How many of those commissioners are having their disappointment assuaged by the sudden influx of campaign contributions?


This is Miami --- Straight CASH.
 
2012-12-02 01:33:51 PM  
Subby fails in that only two of them would have been nos and a third would have thought about it.

Subby mitigates fail in that those two votes would have been the difference in killing the stadium.
 
2012-12-02 01:46:21 PM  

Gosling: Subby fails in that only two of them would have been nos and a third would have thought about it.

Subby mitigates fail in that those two votes would have been the difference in killing the stadium.


Subby also fails in noting that when it comes to taking taxpayer money for anything at all, no politician will ever say no. Headline is full of shiat.
 
2012-12-02 02:17:34 PM  
But they would have kept the $$$ bribes.
 
2012-12-02 02:43:11 PM  
So Why didnt they put it into the contract that the salary must remain at a certain level for a certain period of time or else all public funds revert to a loan at X percent with the stadium and other assets he owns as collateral... you know why ? Because they probably tried and he wouldnt do the deal.

THAT should tell you all you needed to know about his plans.
 
2012-12-02 02:49:22 PM  
They would have voted the same way. They're just saying that now because their constituents are pissed and they hope everybody forgets or the Marlins get better by the time the next election cycle comes around.
 
2012-12-02 03:26:15 PM  

relaxitsjustme: They would have voted the same way. They're just saying that now because their constituents are pissed and they hope everybody forgets or the Marlins get better by the time the next election cycle comes around.


They won't be. The ownership group of the Marlins does not want to spend money under any circumstances. They did for a while to con Miami Into giving them this stadium, but now that they have it, fark you Miami.
 
2012-12-02 03:28:57 PM  

relaxitsjustme: They would have voted the same way. They're just saying that now because their constituents are pissed and they hope everybody forgets or the Marlins get better by the time the next election cycle comes around.


It's too late for Tampa in any case. The Rays are never ever ever going to get a replacement for Tropicana Field now. If the Rays want a new ballpark, they'll have to find some other city willing to give it to them. (And I know Sacramento is looking at using baseball as a backup plan in case they lose the Kings.)

/like, ever
 
2012-12-02 03:37:50 PM  
All this butthurt would make more sense if the team didn't stink so bad. Would all these critics be happy if they kept a bunch of overpaid underperforming losers?
 
2012-12-02 03:38:27 PM  
Marlins' stadium would be worth it if it teaches other townships not to vote for publicly funded stadiums.

/It won't
 
2012-12-02 05:28:46 PM  
I don't see what the problem is. The ownership is just asserting his free market prerogative like any honest, patriotic American.

/E Pluribus Unum is passé. Caveat Emptor, biatches.
 
2012-12-02 08:50:15 PM  
I'm glad that I decided not to ever go to that stadium when they announced the crap ass location they were going to build it in.

Miami, the banana republic at its finest.
 
2012-12-02 10:04:06 PM  
It will make a nice cricket grounds when the Marlins finally fold/move.
 
2012-12-03 09:40:15 AM  
It kind of amazes me that baseball isn't much bigger down there.
 
2012-12-03 10:47:37 AM  

iron_city_ap: It kind of amazes me that baseball isn't much bigger down there.


Yeah me too ESP a team that has already won 2 WS, large Cuban population and a huge merto city that has millions of tourists each year.
I dont think people would care so much if it was a beautiful ballpark. God damn that thing is ugly on the inside. Its like a big green screen. What do they turn it into a special effects soundstage when the Marlins are not playing or something? it makes the inside of the Trop look not so bad. And what the fark is that thing in center field!?!?
And it also could be that the city knows the teams M.O. There is no player loyalty there. There never has been a star player to identify the team with. This the third time ive seen them hold a fire sale on every good player.
 
2012-12-03 10:52:26 AM  
" Though all were disappointed and some furious with the payroll-slashing, only two (Javier Souto, Natasha Seijas) said they would have voted against the ballpark if they knew the Marlins would slash payroll to this extent."

Subby needs to work on his reading comprehension.
 
2012-12-03 12:28:41 PM  

ItchyMcDoogle: Yeah me too ESP a team that has already won 2 WS


The 2 titles mean nothing because they gutted the team each time.

Winning is great, but win or lose, fans enjoy a team they can identify with.. that they can actually follow year-to-year. When your team wins a WS, part of the thrill of the following season is seeing how the same core group of guys defend it.. to see if they can push and do it again.
 
2012-12-03 12:54:51 PM  
The new TV deals work out to $75 million per team, per year.
You pull in 2.5 million fans a year at $20 a piece. That's $50 million a year.
You get a local TV contract at what, $20 million a year.
You get a local radio contract for another $5 million a year.
You get around $50 million a year from concessions (that's $20 per person at the park)
Let's set aside merchandise because that varies dramatically.

That's $170 million a year in revenue for a middle of the road team in a non-major market. Even if you assume $17 million in profit, $20 million a year for your front-office, $10 million a year for management, you should be able to have a $100 million payroll and still have over $20 million plus your merchandise revenue for everything else.

Yeah, this is back-of-the-envelope and I'm probably missing something, but there's no reason AT ALL that fans should stand for teams to put out there a fifty, sixty, seventy million dollar payroll.
 
2012-12-03 02:07:52 PM  

meanmutton: The new TV deals work out to $75 million per team, per year.
You pull in 2.5 million fans a year at $20 a piece. That's $50 million a year.
You get a local TV contract at what, $20 million a year.
You get a local radio contract for another $5 million a year.
You get around $50 million a year from concessions (that's $20 per person at the park)
Let's set aside merchandise because that varies dramatically.

That's $170 million a year in revenue for a middle of the road team in a non-major market. Even if you assume $17 million in profit, $20 million a year for your front-office, $10 million a year for management, you should be able to have a $100 million payroll and still have over $20 million plus your merchandise revenue for everything else.

Yeah, this is back-of-the-envelope and I'm probably missing something, but there's no reason AT ALL that fans should stand for teams to put out there a fifty, sixty, seventy million dollar payroll.


Parking.
 
2012-12-03 02:35:13 PM  
I don't know why these chickenshiat county commissioners think they "have to" vote for keeping professional sports teams in town at any cost. "I don't waste your tax dollars" has never been a bad campaign slogan.

Besides, based on objective measures such as attendance at games, the locals don't actually care much about the team.
 
Displayed 26 of 26 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report