Dick Allen

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 02:37 PM) They are trying to do so up to a given point. They have a line - having their buddies in the front office, turning a consistent profit - that they will not cross. Yet a good portion of Soxtalk wants them to be worse than mediocre and get rid of all of their best players, and claim Rick Hahn really has nothing much to do with the personnel decisions unless they are good ones.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 02:32 PM) They signed Jimmy Rollins to be the opening day starting shortstop this year. They signed Austin Jackson to be the starting centerfielder. They signed the two-headed Navarro/Avila monster to be the catching tandem. Avi Garcia has been a starting player, replacing the great Adam LaRoche. They doubled down this summer by acquiring 34 year-old James Shields to be in the starting rotation for the remainder of this year and now for the next two years. Now what was that you were saying about the team "trying not to be mediocre"? Unfortunately HOFers weren't available. Jimmy Rollins replaced Alexei Ramirez. How is he doing? They wanted someone short term because Anderson was coming. Austin Jackson was fine in CF. Navarro/Avila replaced Tyler Flowers/Soto. Avi Garcia was supposed to be a bench player, LaRoche retired unexpectedly. Shields was trying to beat the pitching market. If Erik Johnson had shown anything, they don't make that trade. All of those moves could be considered upgrades at the time they were made.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 02:17 PM) They're unwilling to tolerate it from the players, but they're perfectly ok with it from management as long as they make an enthusiastic presentation at the end of the year explaining why it wasn't their fault. I would be one of the first to say in the real world results trump effort. We like to tell our kids that they go hand in hand, and often they do. Sometimes they do not. They are trying to not be mediocre. They haven't done a good job of it. Moving on from KW and RH makes a lot of sense, but it doesn't appear like that is in the cards at least for another year.

QUOTE (captain54 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 02:05 PM) Every year, it's a roll of the dice.. the fan base is tired of it… the roster has been turned over numerous times in the last few years and have produced ZERO results.. which gets back to the "trying" issue again.. by maintaining the status quo in the organization, despite the results, it sends a message to the fan base that you are tolerating mediocrity…. I agree someone else at this point should probably be making baseball decisions, but the amount of changes made in recent years indicates they are not tolerating mediocrity. They are trying to overcome it. If they were tolerating it, they would keep the same players around year after year.

QUOTE (captain54 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 01:43 PM) I pretty much agree with everything you've said.. You make total sense... I have no argument, except for the fact that they are "trying" "trying" in my eyes would mean serious evaluation and if need be, making people who are, and have been in positions of authority accountable for performance… "trying" to make the ballpark a fun experience? I think they've accomplished that.. If they want to run the franchise like Great America and cater to a date night, family crowd.. that's fine… that's how it's been and they have their 26th out of 30 in MLB attendance and seem to be OK with that… An elite, powerhouse of a ball club, that strikes fear into the hearts of the opponent, and is fitting for a major market city? JR has people in power that have been "trying" to do that and have failed.. it's time to give someone else a "try" The effort is there. If you think they need a new crew making decisions, I can't argue with you there. If you say you have no desire to attend any more games the rest of the season, I can't argue with you there. That's fine. All I am saying is the effort to win is there, the effort to make going to the game enjoyable whether the team wins or not is there, whether it's executed to everyone's preferred level is up to each individual. I guess what I am getting at is you can't expect the Sox to do what the Cubs do. Their fanbase, by showing up no matter what, allows them to do what the Sox will not be allowed to do unless their ownership is willing to eat a huge loss or suddenly people change and start coming to games no matter what. I don't blame people for not coming, but not coming means tougher times. If JR replaces KW and RH, I wouldn't shed any tears, but from the sounds of it, that isn't happening, so we have to hope that this is the offseason where their plans actually work. The White Sox do a good job catering to families. Ricketts was quoted a year or so ago saying the Cubs really need to get better at that. So who knows, maybe while it doesn't show much now, maybe down the road it pays off.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 01:32 PM) 2006 followed a great year in 2005. Valuation jumped by $53 million. 2007 was a disaster and first losing season since 1999. So 2008 valuation jumped by $62 million. When a team continues to make money, some owners (sports or business) are very content to let it sail along. However, there are also owners that continually strive to improve the business. I live in Tampa part of the season and see a franchise that is constantly milking the situation and cutting costs rather than invest in the team. Then I spend part of the year in Boston. Unfortunately they aggressively try to improve the product. They make trades and fire coaches, managers, and front office when the product on the field is not meeting a high standard. I think JR is more a Tampa type owner than a Boston one. In fairness, his age may be the main reason he is content to put up with mediocrity. I disagree. He has been criticized for going for it. Obviously, he doesn't pull an Illich and try to win no matter the cost, but he's usually bottom 5 in attendance, how often are they bottom 5 in payroll?

Springsteen just played a 35 song 3 hour and 52 minute show.

QUOTE (flavum @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 01:21 PM) I'll just be referring to it as "at home" or "the park". It's a terrible name with no easy nickname. Take the money, and let that be the end of it. I think it will eventually be the Rate or GRate. One I thought was good was the G spot.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 08:07 AM) The AP tried really hard to find a scandal in the Clinton Foundation documents but there's really just nothing there. Yeah, a lot of noise from the extremely loud anti-Clinton chorus, but there's no actual evidence of anything they are implying. The worst thing anyone found was that she met with some donors (not a scandal. this is routine politician stuff). Some got access for various reasons, some were turned down. Trump is a donor to the Clinton Foundation. Considering his donation history or lack of, I wonder if he was pay to play.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 11:18 AM) Marc "Scrabble" traded to the Nationals. How the hell did he pass through waivers? Great nickname.

QUOTE (captain54 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 01:03 PM) Man, you nailed it.. with the glow of 2005 completely faded and a fan base on a serious decline, consistently mainly of the diehards.. I think going nowhere would be about right… a sports franchise is about image and perception (is this the cool place to be?)… in addition to an exciting product on the field. . read some interviews with Andrew Berlin, one of the Sox investors and potential new owner… these are almost his exact words, verbatim.. I think the vast majority of people who attend Sox games have a lot of fun. The name change isn't going to do anything to harm that. It may actually provide funds or new amenities to make it even better. As to the product on the field, it hasn't been up to par, everyone knows that. They are trying. No one is giving them a pass except for maybe the people who think Rick Hahn is somehow not responsible for anything. Things do have to change. The ironic thing is many fans complaining about the team not being competitive don't want them to even try to be competitive. They want them to trade all of their good players away, thinking that it will somehow guarantee a good 7 or 8 year run in 2 or 3 years. Which is based on models like the Cubs who are able to take proceeds from 3 million fans coming to the park during 95 loss seasons and spending wildly internationally and in the free agent market.

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 11:22 AM) A good fix for this would be if they changed the name of the company from Guaranteed Rate to something more desirable. Guaranteed Rate Field sounds like a minor league ballpark. So did US Cellular Field. Some would say it's appropriate.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 10:57 AM) Especially since the new Solider Field is a joke itself. And they sold naming rights as well. PNC Suites in Soldier Field. PNC Center at Halas Hall.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 09:43 AM) I'm in Rockford and still have US cellular service. We still have at least two stores in town, plus a couple of small kiosks in the mall. I had US Cellular service in Chicago until it was discontinued. I had 2 months left on my contract when I went to ATT and even though they got out of the area and told us we needed to switch carriers, they still tried to charge after we switched. It took about 10 phone calls and hours and hours to get it finally straightened out. They were great when I had the service.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 09:28 AM) Far worse than a name change. And if you want, go see what I had to say about him in 2012. If someone was OK with Brett Myers but embarrassed about this name change, they are screwed up IMO.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 09:08 AM) This post appears to aim that we should be thanking Jerry for saving the state for paying for his f'ing stadium's construction and maintenance by auctioning off the franchises dignity to a bunch of wrigleyville lending bros. Thanks Jerry. No. I actually am totally against publicly funded stadiums. I'm just showing that this deal is a positive for taxpayers of IL. That is what really matters. The state will get more money. I don't know if Guaranteed Rate is a good company or not, I would imagine they were vetted, but we can find lawsuits and huge fines with any large company. If JP Morgan Chase bought the rights would anyone complain? They have been fined billions of dollars.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 08:49 AM) The White Sox also have employed players (just named two) not unlike Aroldis Chapman who were abusive to their wives....but now we're outraged when the Cubs do the same thing? The point was the Cubs fans who are cheering on a wife beater are now making fun of a stadium name. Seems pretty ridiculous to me. If you have no problem cheering on total known to be assholes, a corporate name on a park shouldn't bother you at all, especially considering it was going to be some corporate name anyway and they took the best deal.

ISFA Chairman Manny Sanchez said that move could save the stadium authority as much as $25 million in facility upgrades over the course of the final years of the Sox's lease. "That's a huge piece of this from an ISFA perspective," Sanchez said. "This is something that is a really, really serendipitous godsend that we have encountered." Revenue and savings late during the next decade will be critical for ISFA, which uses hotel tax revenue and annual city and state subsidies to pay off the debt from the renovation of Soldier Field and the construction and maintenance of the Sox's park. That annual debt obligation will steadily balloon from $38.5 million for the year ending June 30, 2017 to $87 million in 2032.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 08:32 AM) Yeah, we've been there done that ourselves. Not all of us.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 08:30 AM) Of course they took the best deal. We don't know if John Deere, or any other well respected company, was interested in being associated with the White Sox at all. Probably not. Why would John Deere want to pay millions to name a park in Chicago? Why haven't they hooked up with any other team? Is it just the White Sox these companies don't want to be associated? I think the White Sox actually have a pretty good reputation in the business community.

QUOTE (shipps @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 08:28 AM) Due to the awfulness there are millions of more people that have now heard the name. This has been a national news story. No such thing as bad pub. There are people that are so up in arms about this name change, yet wouldn't mind if a wife beater was on the roster if it helped the team win. Let Cubs fans make fun of the name, and least we aren't cheering for wife beaters.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 08:21 AM) I chuckled and shook my head when I heard the news. Par for the course with this franchise. If that is all they could find, what can you do? And the G.R. guy said the White Sox sought them out, not the other way around. How about John Deere Field? Caterpillar Park? The CAT would sound pretty cool. Wallgreens? ADM? ConAgra? So you think Guaranteed Rate was the White Sox first and only call? Maybe these other companies don't see value in putting their name on a stadium. It probably would be very hard to determine what kind of business is generated just by purchasing naming rights. I'm sure they took the best deal. I really doubt they were thinking, let's pick these guys because it will really piss some people off. If the White Sox were in first place right now, people wouldn't care about this at all. It's just a case of trying to kick someone when they are down.

QUOTE (Middle Buffalo @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 08:09 AM) At this point, I'm just calling it Sox park because it's bound to change every 7-10 years. It's not a great name, but other than being named after a company I've never heard of and the name not rolling of the tongue, I don't see how it's different from Wrigley or Busch or whatever. Actually, I think it's more offensive for the Yankees to knock down Yankee stadium and build a new place and call it the same thing. Same with Comiskey. As far as corporate promotions go, I'm more offended when the Sox have a hat giveaway and the Pepsi logo is as big as the Sox logo. Those go straight to Goodwill. Yes, I agree. Yankee Stadium, Comiskey Park, I think Madison Square Garden is at their 3rd or 4th location. Those are gone. Name it something else.These people that hate the name, what would they think if the state got no money and they called it Reinsdorf Field? I'm pretty sure Thad Bosley would be in intensive care.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 08:04 AM) Again, one more time - the fans are NOT the INVESTORS. Jerry Reinsdorf and his partners are the INVESTORS. It is their job and their job only to invest in the product they are trying to sell to make it compelling enough for the fans, i.e., the CONSUMERS, to spend their money on the product. Economics 101. So wouldn't it make sense they get out of their $68 million 20 year contract with US Cellular , and enter into a new one for 13 years and $88 million with Guaranteed Rate? Economics 101 would seem to think that's a pretty good move.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 25, 2016 -> 07:59 AM) Obviously they could care less what anyone thinks...and I'm married anyway. But imagine going on your first date and your gf keeps the ticket stubs as a memory in her scrapbook and the first thing you read in big bold letters is Guaranteed Rate Field. It's bush league. OMG