Dick Allen

Abre-o

An Adam Eaton throw

Shuck read that horribly

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 05:41 PM) So what will bring people to the games? As far as I can tell you still say here "people won't come to games when the team is good" If people won't come to the games when the team is good then the team does not belong in this city. That is the only thing I can take from every single one of your posts - we have a failed fanbase and the only thing keeping this team afloat is the sweetheart deal they got on the stadium revenue. Having to buy season ticket packages for WS tickets. See the 2006 White Sox, and the 2015 Royals.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 05:35 PM) So this fan base cannot support a team, even winning is not enough. They should move is the only logical end point of your argument. No. But winning 3 years in a row, unless it includes multiple WS appearances won't happen if people won't come to games when the team is good. The make money every year. They supposedly didn't when they lost 99 games and that was only $3 million, but included a $10 million signing bonus they gave Abreu after the season.

I am optimistic. They played wll for a week and were back in it. I have to assume most guys will at least come closer to their career norms, and I am not as down on Abreu as others. I think he will snap out of it in a big way Melky's slump started with a lot of at em balls. I think he will eventually be OK. Tonight would be a good time to start hitting again.

QUOTE (Boogua @ May 26, 2015 -> 04:57 PM) I heard this too, but couldn't it be a ploy to get teams that want Thibs to up their offers to the Bulls (if there are any). Ait could be. Or they might be afraid he goes to a potentially decent team like New Orleans , and does better than the Bulls. But why give up draft picks? The Bulls hold no cards.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 03:50 PM) Honestly, that was the month where I had completely turned off the White Sox because I could see them breaking down and didn't want to watch it happen. But if you think the team needs to move, why won't you just come out and say it? I never said anything about moving, you should send your resume to Fox News. You make up so many things. Even in 2005, they had a 9.5 game lead in a season they never where not in first place, and drew 50k total for a 3 game series in SEPTEMBER VS. KC.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 03:23 PM) 1. I propose an experiment. Let's actually try and find out? 2. If you're right and this franchise is that moribund and it can't fill the stadium beyond 1/2 capacity any more even if they win games, then it needs to relocate when the stadium agreement finishes. On Sept. 25th 2012 the White Sox entered their final home stand 1 game in front in the AL Central They drew 20,206. The next night 13,797 then 20,166 18,633 25,264 26,559 and 26,831. I think you have some sort of answer.

QUOTE (LDF @ May 26, 2015 -> 03:13 PM) if the sox team, in any yr, make the playoff, the sox fans who has been quietly suffering, will come out. BOOK IT. I wouldn't book it at all. The won the division in 2008 and attendance was lower than the 90 loss team in 2007. They were in first place most of 2012 and attendance was lower than the 2011 disappointment. Maybe winning the WS is a curse. Being in first place, making the playoffs doesn't have the same effect it used to create.

“They don’t understand the game,” Amaro said. "They don’t understand the process. There’s a process. And then they [b****] and complain because we don’t have a plan. There’s a plan in place and we’re sticking with the plan. We can’t do what’s best for the fan. We have to do what’s best for the organization so the fan can reap the benefit of it later on. That’s the truth.”

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 02:55 PM) You are the one who brought up payrolls and said "oh we need $180 million in payroll to be competitive". The White Sox won a world series and that juiced their payroll into the top 11 in MLB for about 7 years afterwards. The problem continues to be they had a pretty awful record during those years, with only 1 playoff appearance. That payroll boost evaporated in the last couple years and they still have failed to set themselves up as a winning franchise. Neither of these had to happen. That requires a long time of systemic failure. If the Rangers keep struggling the next couple years, you'll see something very similar happen - their payroll boost will erode as they continue to lose. I continue to think that this losing is a bad thing. No I never wrote that. The argument here is winning here and there isn't good enough, you need to win 3 or 4 years out of 5. In order to do that, as you stated, the payroll is going to jump.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 02:32 PM) If Rose gets hurt again this team as constructed should still make the playoffs and probably be a first round exit in the East. I agree. And if that happens, should Gar/Pax be next on the chopping block? I used to like Pax, but he, IMO, is delusional if he thinks his current roster should win, and if it doesn't it is on the coach. Gar I never liked. They get credit for drafting contributors late, but I read the scout that really picked those guys fled to Orlando. The next draft Teague was the selection. If they want to play a $4 million game of spite with Thibs, if I'm Michael Reinsdorf, they better get the hire right, and they better go deep in the playoffs, or it's their jobs on the line.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 02:31 PM) The real trick is that the most of the teams who do things like that move themselves higher up because they're winning a lot. The Rangers won several years in a row and, despite the lack of a world series, now have a much higher payroll than us. Before they hit those runs of success they had lower payrolls than us. The Giants had a lower payroll than us for much of the late 2000s and didn't pass us by until 2012. Those teams turned success into a model that has allowed them several years of being competitive and even lets them survive a down year or two because they climb their way back in. Since the "reign of terror" started when JR bought the team in 1981, the Rangers have won 5 division titles and 2686 games. The White Sox have won 5 division titles and 2770 games and a WS. It has been better to be a White Sox fan than Rangers fan.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 02:10 PM) Depends on why? Rose goes down again is that something you can really blame on them? Only thing they coudl have done to avoid that problem is not extending him and that's not a gamble I'll be down on them for. Rose being hurt has nothing to do with it. Thibs coached more games without him than with him, and the playoff results are going to be used against him when they do can him.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 02:16 PM) Right now 15 teams are .500 or better. 7 of them have lower payrolls than the White Sox. Yes but how many of them are teams that make the playoffs 3 or 4 years out of 5?

QUOTE (gatnom @ May 26, 2015 -> 02:04 PM) My point is that there are some posters on here who seem to blame the fans for not attending enough games to provide enough money for this team to be successful. This team absolutely has enough resources to be successful, moribund fan base or not. The guys in charge have just failed at scouting and/or developing their players, which has lead to our one playoff appearance since 2005. I liked the off season, fwiw. I don't think anyone is blaming the fans for not coming to the games, but saying, hey, you don't come to the games, it's pretty hard to have the $180 million payroll required to provide the latest hurdles that need to be cleared to attend. If the fans don't come out when they are winning, it's pretty hard to argue against the limited opportunities they will have to improve, and be a team that can be expected to be in the playoffs each season. Again, I have bashed the attendance, but I don't blame people for not going. Just don't b**** and moan when the winning isn't sustained when you won't support the winning in the first place.

This Thibs stuff is crazy. Now there are multiple reports the Bulls are going to wait until all the coaching vacancies are filled, and then fire him. Pay him $4 million next season out of spite, and make him sit. Cowley said a player told him the exit interview was a slam Thibs fest. If the Mayor is hired and the Bulls don't improve their playoff performance, what kind of rope does Gar/Pax get, since they seem to blame this all on Thibs, who they hired, along with Vinnie Del Negro. I have a feeling the Bulls are going to be really bad in a few years.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ May 26, 2015 -> 01:28 PM) How many times does it have to be said that it is because of Fangio? And come on now, the Cowboys would have sniffed around. No doubt McDonald would be 31 when the season started. What was the best case scenario for him? That he has a decent year and the Bears go 8-8? I understand there are bad guys on every team, including the Bears. But I agree, this signing, although it costs the Bears no money, still makes the new regime look utterly incompetent.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 26, 2015 -> 01:15 PM) They didn't get burned at all. As others have said, it was low risk, decently high reward. The fact that George had to come out and make statements to justify the signing is the real problem here. Who the hell cares? It's a business. It's a sport. They're not role models and they shouldn't be role models. If they are for you, adjust your life and/or parenting. The Ray Rice video changed everything for wife beaters. I just saw a neighbor of mine taken away in handcuffs after choking his girlfriend a couple of weeks ago.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ May 26, 2015 -> 01:14 PM) Hard to say that, the 49ers just went into total self destruct mode. Had they still been in Win Now mode with Harbaugh and Fangio in charge then McDonald may still be there Are the Bears in win now mode? That's the thing I don't understand. Read Biggs article. It's pretty good, at least from my point of view.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 26, 2015 -> 01:11 PM) Why? What does the Bears offering this guy a second chance and then cutting him when he gets arrested again have anything to do with a player in the future? Because they got burned. If you really think George McCaskey will approve a similar case in the future, I totally disagree, and good for him. I think teams can still win wife beater-free.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ May 26, 2015 -> 01:06 PM) No, it's kind of someone's job to protect yourself from something like this, not predict it. The NFL is littered with bad guys, in every locker room, you cannot insulate yourself from all of them. They gave this guy a nice non guaranteed chance and he blew it immediately. It's egg on the face for sure, but there isn't any long term ramifications here. Predicting it is also a part of it. There is a reason the 49ers cut him. If they didn't think he would be any more trouble, he probably still is with them.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 26, 2015 -> 01:06 PM) Is financial risk the only one here? Is there a PR risk issue? They also have a potential fine of $150k from the NFL front office for now having signed 2 people with law-enforcement issues, that fine could increase if anyone else gets into trouble. I agree the PR is a huge part of this. And everyone seems to be ignoring that yes there are bad guys in every locker room, and some day, when the Bears actually have a shot of winning something, one of these guys will be available to help them, and the answer from George McCaskey will be undoubtedly be no.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ May 26, 2015 -> 12:58 PM) Well it's a GM's job to make sure he is looking out for the best of the organization, but the fact is they signed him to a non-guaranteed contract and let him go as soon as he got in trouble again. While I agree that the initial character statements by the organization were stupid, this was absolutely a solid football move (low risk, high reward). Low financial risk. They all look like fools right now.