Texsox

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 15, 2009 -> 09:30 AM) They are making a huge deal out of Pontiac and Motorola leaving, and I guarantee you they were giving the White Sox nowhere near $20 million. It would be interesting to know which teams are the most dependent on these types of sponsorships. The revenue streams to teams are so varied, I'll bet some teams are much better positioned to weather this downturn. Perhaps we may see some of the smaller market teams actually in better shape if the large market teams with large corporate deals have to cut back. That would be good for baseball.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2009 -> 09:27 AM) Thank you. With that I bid this thread adios. Interesting, money is so important to the success, yet no one wants to discuss the factors that go into where the money comes from. It seems there is a direct connection from success on the field to attendance to payroll to future teams. A slow start, and tough year, could have a far reaching impact. Poor weather. Poor scheduling. Lots of stuff there.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 15, 2009 -> 09:12 AM) Please stop. Tex, no one is saying that its important whether or not the team makes money, in a vacuum. They are saying that salary has to be part of the picture because they don't have an unlimited budget. Why is this so hard for you to even acknowledge? I acknowledge it. My entire point is I acknowledge it. Imagine if in a major market it is impossible to win a WS without making a profit. That would spell doom to baseball. It seems in 2005 we achieved a nice balance of salaries and performance. I wish I could find a better way of phrasing it. If you need to lose money to have a reasonable chance at winning a WS, and that holds true for any team, baseball has a problem. So how will the teams performance to date affect spending for next year? Seems like a reasonable discussion for fans that are concerned about this, but instead the discussion devolved into attacking Tex.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2009 -> 08:48 AM) I'd be more pissed at being mocked for bringing up a valid point when it comes to building a team. Money is critical to building a team. The Sox are not positioned in a market where they can toss the asinine money at some players, and they should not have to. The important thing this season and perhaps next season is to save money. Seems reasonable to me. There is a balance between building a winning team and spending too much money. Without strong fiscal responsibility, we'd wind up like the Yankees. As I have stated before, it would really suck to find out the team lost money in 2005.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2009 -> 08:23 AM) Because how much money a team makes has no affect on the product on the field at all, does it? Who cares. I care a lot, and it's time we started looking at that. Obviously there are a lot of factors we can look at, schedule, when are the best draws coming to town? Weekends? Weekdays? Long term weather patterns? Hell, it beats discussing Fields and CF. The team with the most money manages to stay competitive longer.We need something to happen in CF, but if I thought the team would lose money by bringing in someone who could make an impact, I'd be pissed.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 14, 2009 -> 10:09 PM) I love the Angels for swooping in and getting Hunter and saving us 18 million dollars, which could easily be 25% of our payroll next year. And that is something we do not talk about enough. Will this team make money this year? This slow start could hurt ticket sales. Wins and loses are one thing, perhaps we may not compete this season, but wouldn't it be grand if we could make more money than any team in the central?

Volumes have been written on this subject, and of course I will toss my .02 in, but in a different direction that has not been addressed. Before you do any of this STOP! You are an attorney, not a web designer, etc. Before you take off in this direction, and I know you want to get started on this immediately, you need to plan. Sit down and write the business plan for your firm. Included in this document should be the answer to a simple question, where will my clients come from? And eventually, how will the web site be used? A website as an advertisement to get customers to your door is one thing, a website to allow you to effectively communicate with your existing customers is another. You may find that your initial advertising and marketing dollars should be spent in other areas. For example, yellow page ads are expensive, but people still use directories. A little market research is helpful, a lot of research is even better. What area of law are you planning on practicing? Where do those clients go to find an attorney? Once you have your plan in place, and these is a whole lot more to this than above, you will see where you need to spend your time to maximize your return and where you need to sub out the work. You may find you do not need a fully custom web site initially and can make do with a prepackaged web presence. Hint: If your entire marketing plan at this point is create a web site and the customers/clients will come rolling in, you are probably fooling yourself. Bottom Line: A web site is part of your over all business strategy, do not get too tunnel focused on it and remember you are an attorney and ultimately you will earn more money for your firm by practicing law than designing a web site.

Sad, but that throws flags up nowadays. It really sucks that fans can become so jaded now.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ May 14, 2009 -> 10:14 AM) 8/10. I missed number of ways to reach first base, and I did not answer #9 because I didn't think any answers were correct. I still don't think the answer they gave is right. How can you tag a runner out when he is standing on a base? He is forced out.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ May 14, 2009 -> 03:28 PM) Even in that case I think the Sox would be better off to negotiate a deal with him and by all means I wouldn't be opposed to bringing Dye back on a 2yr 12-14M deal with incentives as our DH (key word being as our DH). He could ocassionally play in the field but primarily would be the DH. I'd like to see Dye sticking around for a few more seasons as DH. I'm starting to like the transition that is being set up here. Obviously Fields is a (current and perhaps temporary) disappointment, and there are, and always will be, questions on the back of the rotation, but overall a rebuilding may be at hand without enduring a 90 loss season.

QUOTE (Steff @ May 14, 2009 -> 03:30 PM) Bri's been going since she was 5 months old and not being able to get around on her own was a big plus. Getting her into the routine that young has also helped now that she can get around. Now she just sits or stands on my lap clapping and yelling "White Soxxxxx". We've started potty training so sometimes she wants to go try, but as long as I have enough snacks and her juice she's great. Awesome

Kyyle23 = blow up doll

QUOTE (SleepyWhiteSox @ May 14, 2009 -> 02:52 PM) Maybe replacing greg walker? /waits for Dick to come to Walker's defense I kid because I care™

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 14, 2009 -> 02:05 PM) Ok, induldge me on this. If the law is so "unclear", why don't they clear it up and pass a very black and white law outlawing some of these EIM's? Why is it so "unclear" in the first place? Why is it that "liberals" (and I'm not trying to paint you... I'm being serious with this line of questioning) are so quick on the trigger to say "WAR CRIMESSS"... and "they broke the law", when in fact there are several respected constitutional lawyers (who you may disagree with, yet they are well respected, so let's not go down that path) that say no laws were broken? Which then leads me back to my original question, why don't they clear the law up right here and now? (I have an answer, I just want to see what yours is). Because if you build a better mousetrap, a better mouse will come along. Each president wants the flexibility for themselves.

Discussing the development of a player who is/was expected to anchor 3B for a number of years seems like an important conversation to have. The fact we have posters of many opinions and whose baseball knowledge is varied, means almost any conversation will feature extremes. And even among the truly knowledgeable baseball people, there will be intelligent disagreement. Some will say an out is an out and whether by a line drive to the shortstop or a called third, ultimately it is still an out and there are only 27 you get.

Actually paying for government is no longer why we pay taxes, we only pay taxes to influence the economy.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:41 PM) No offense, but if Brian Anderson is our "savior", we're ready to be in fourth place all year. And I like Anderson. ^^^^ About what I was thinking.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 14, 2009 -> 12:49 PM) And the government is MUCH bigger then in the 1980's. Numbers can mean anything you want them to mean, Balta. I like how you cherry pick numbers to what you want to comment on. And yes, that goes both ways. So it seems as we grow the government we grow the GNP!

http://www.aip.org/isns/reports/2009/05130...alillusion.html

QUOTE (striker62704 @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:12 PM) Why are you centering out Fields? This whole team looks like sh@$ at the plate. We got shutdown by Mark f4cking Eaton. Two points It is a Josh Fields thread Do not attempt to avoid the swear filter, let it do its job.

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ May 14, 2009 -> 09:56 AM) Most of the times that a player or manager bumps an umpire, its clearly an accident with no intent. However, they are still suspended. If the ump heard Ozzie "toot" in his direction or noticed the odor of a "silent but deadly" bomb, I gotta believe that they would file a report with the league office and pursue a suspension. Not the same thing at all. We are talking about an involuntary, at times, bodily function. It would be like pursuing a suspension because he was sweating.

Not one of these Not one of these either (I know what you are thinking, no need to post pic, find your own porn)

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ May 14, 2009 -> 09:42 AM) Crede's haters are pretty predictable. You can say that again

It is not just they employ pilots with less experience, the economics cause them to employ pilots that can't live near their base, sleep in lounges instead of a hotel room, moonlight to pay the rent, etc. Even the least experienced pilot for a commercial airline has a fair amount of experience.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 14, 2009 -> 07:16 AM) I'm being sarcastic, but I think way too many people here think the correct hitting coach can make everyone a .330 hitter. I think way too many players think the hitting coach can show them how to hit 30 HRs a season.