Comments on Dodger Divorce: A change at the top.

In response to Tony's post.. This is my expla...

2009-12-09T21:21:00.863-08:00

In response to Tony's post..

This is my explanation of why Selig approved the deal for the McCourt to buy the Dodgers in 2003/2004, it is solely based on second hand and third hand sources, and following the McCourts' finances for a couple years, especially their ownership in the 24 acres of South Boston property, aka Fort Point Channel/Fan Pier properties. (okay near the Fan

Thanks for the post, Josh. I think you post puts t...

2009-12-09T20:51:04.230-08:00

Thanks for the post, Josh. I think you post puts together how perilous the Dodgers operating expenses are for 2010. I have been reading the Dodgers are offering only one year contracts, and I am not surprise that Wolf bolted for the Brewers.

In response to 6p00e550198bcb8834

Southern California is a huge market. However it is bit fractured. The Dodgers don't own the

Tony, let me explain it to you: LA is a huge mark...

2009-12-09T07:07:36.006-08:00

Tony, let me explain it to you:

LA is a huge market, and the Dodgers are an iconic franchise. With the right owner, they could turn into the Yankees West, dominating the NL and making it harder for the small market teams to compete, and even robbing middle-market teams like the Cardinals, Giants, and Rockies of the opportunity to feel they have a chance of winning the division or

No one has yet to explain to me why Bud Seelig app...

2009-12-09T01:03:02.460-08:00

No one has yet to explain to me why Bud Seelig approved the Mccourts, as opposed to Malcolm Glazer, Eli Broad, Alan Casden, Dave Checketts, or any one else with big bulging pockets. Who ARE these people? Were they in fact the beard for Fox, hand selected to siphon back every last dime that Murdoch put into the Dodgers during the News Corp. era? How does Bud Seelig deserve an annual salary of $20

David-- In reality, public opinion can only force...

2009-12-08T16:26:01.093-08:00

David--

In reality, public opinion can only force an owner to sell when the public stops going to games. That's not going to happen in Los Angeles, not in any meaningful sort of way. The market's too big, the brand too strong, and the Stadium too gorgeous. And about when a sale would even be possible...say Frank put the team on the market tomorrow. Jamie would likely file a

Thank you for encapsulating what I have been sayin...

2009-12-08T15:35:45.565-08:00

Thank you for encapsulating what I have been saying privately to friends. I am a long time Dodger fan and I just feel that the current operating margins are so slim that no significant changes can be made.

I guess my question is this - it seems like the Dodgers are the McCourts' main source of income (or at the very least, a significant source), and so the team has to be run at

Great post. At what point, if any, could we expec...

2009-12-08T14:29:13.082-08:00

Great post. At what point, if any, could we expect public opinion to sway so fiercly against the current owner that it forces a sale of the team? Based on what I'm reading, it's become doubtful that either of the McCourts has the financial wherewithal to run a competitive, big market MLB club. Is there any history in pro sports of public opinion shifting so radically against an owner