caulfield12

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Apr 9, 2013 -> 06:42 PM) Us. Little attendance=no energy/effort Well, one thing's for certain. We really need to come home at .500 if we want the fans to BEGIN to invest in this team again. Detroit's start has been decent this year. And their bullpen hasn't blown 2-3 games in the first week.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Apr 9, 2013 -> 06:40 PM) Kepp has been horrid in the 2 spot. He is not doing any of the little things he was signed for. Not so TORRID 2/24 start...a crisp .083.

So what do we attribute the poor overall quality of play (despite the record)? It used to be we could blame Ozzie and his coaching staff, but what's the excuse this time for our suddenly porous defense and brain cramps across the spectrum? Normally, the White Sox were pretty well prepared to play last season, with the exception of Tigers/Royals games.

We're continuing where we left off down the stretch with RISP. Yikes. Luckily, the homers have balanced it out so far, but that type of trend is hard to reverse once it becomes entrenched. They were very good last year, though, until crunch time. On the plus side, we're even with the best team in baseball on their home field halfway through. On the negative side, we should be leading 3-4-5 to 1.

Looks like Peavy's season is starting off in similar fashion to 2012. He was great for us the first four, four and one-half months...then wore down. Didn't realize LaRoche had 33 homers last year. Along with Morse, they had some serious firepower when everyone was healthy...and Desmond/Espinosa were PESKY in the Rays/Twins tradition. Wish we could have put together a package for Justin (not B.J.) Upton. Sigh. We need a superstar.

Why is Beckham out of the game again?

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Apr 9, 2013 -> 06:13 PM) Protip: don't first ball hunt Gonzalez when he has this many pitches. Simple. Forget about the curve. If he gets it over, you're done. Sit on the fastball. If he aces you with 3, good night.

QUOTE (flavum @ Apr 9, 2013 -> 06:09 PM) The thing with Viciedo that's frustrating, is that he hasn't shown that he's a good baseball player. He's got bat speed and incredible power, but he has no process at the plate. What is Gordon Beckham's process? Or Tyler Flowers? Or Alexei's? He is still struggling with fastballs/cutters inside, and trying to get out and around them instead of taking them up the middle. Will that be a long-term trend that's not correctable? We'll see.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Apr 9, 2013 -> 02:53 PM) Wow, the Tribune did a great job of brainwashing Sox fans over the years to make them think they're 2nd class fans. Maybe you can buy a newspaper chain with your high net worth and convince them of the error in their ways. It's a lot more complicated than the Cubs being favored by the Tribune.

Marty, let me ask you this. If you were the CEO of any corporation, and your company was profitable on a yearly basis, wouldn't you feel that you as well as the shareholders should be rewarded for your performance? If the value of your company increased by multiples in 30 years? Would you plug ALL of that money right back into the company, into R&D, infrastructure, equipment, supplies, materials....or would you hold some of that in reserve for a rainy day? For the last 3-4-5 years, American companies have been sitting on $3+ trillion dollars in reserves, and yet I don't see you on message boards cajoling them to hire more new employees (like Sox fans ask for money to be spent on international free agents and the draft in the past). Such companies and CEO's used the excuse they were waiting on clarity in terms of tax/government/fiscal policy, etc., but if you want the White Sox to be like a regular company, why should they always spend exactly what they earn, with their only appreciation being the rise in the value of the team and/or ComCast share appreciation? And if you want to follow this business analogy that the Sox are equal to any Forbes/Fortune 500 company, how would you excuse every public and private company in the world that doesn't spend all of its operating revenue and never takes a profit or rewards shareholders? Aren't you free, with all your success, to put together a group and buy the team (like the Iowa lawyer/s who purchased the Dodgers and are now spending billions) and spend as freely as you'd like? Have you ever really considered how risky it would be to sign Josh Hamilton and Z. Greinke to long-term deals that might just as easily turn into albatross contracts? Would you pull out your own checkbook if the Board of Directors disagreed and pay those guy with your own personal net worth?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 8, 2013 -> 03:36 PM) I don't see how that would make sense. I mean, it isn't as if other groups of people are being charged higher because they don't know some discount code - the prices are public for those games. And who they are marketing to for Sundays, I am pretty sure, is primarily families (especially those with kids). Look at the promotions they are running, they are kid-oriented. And families with little kids drive at a higher % than young adults will. Honestly, I think they just haven't invested enough in advertising it. Sox marketing is just getting it wrong, IMO, thinking people will find out by social media or word of mouth. They need to get out there with this pricing info via more traditional methods - TV spots, billboards, website and newspaper ads, coupled marketing with local businesses who get families, etc. I've always thought it was crazy not to have a toll-free number for ticket sales. Growing up in Iowa, they always had that 312 number displayed on the backstop and advertising, but most MLB teams at that time and now had more user-friendly ways of buying tickets....of course, now with cell phones and no longer out of state/long distance calling, it's not as much of an issue, but it definitely enters your mind that the team really doesn't want your business if you have to pay to make a call to buy tickets. It couldn't have cost that much money all those years.

They did get right around 25K last year for the same Sunday home game, but it was against the Tigers, so hard to compare. Since 25% is the max or limit usually for a mortgage payment, and 10%+ for tithing, I'm hoping he was being facetious. If not, it's an argument with no rationality behind it. We might as well be arguing that people should be required to donate XXX amount of money to Sox Charities for attending games as well, since the food banks and places like Harvesters have been so hard hit since 2008. Marty asked a business where the customer isn't always right...the White Sox are treated just as much like churches and non-profits by local governments than they are a non-profit organization. That's why there are thousands of protesters and numerous statistical analyses attempting to prove how much of a waste of taxpayer funding that most stadium projects are... So I can't think of any for profit businesses that are so profitable which are also so supported/subsidized by the government besides the oil industry...but that's an argument for another day and forum. Not to mention their anti-trust exemption, which clearly demarcates them as a different type of business than any other in American cultural/historical tradition.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Apr 8, 2013 -> 12:42 AM) It's only appropriate that Rios hit that HR. After all Duran Duran and Rio was very popular in 1983. His name is Rios and he dances on the sand. Rios is Sand Dancer. Don't get Farmio and DJ started.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Apr 7, 2013 -> 10:38 PM) It really is too bad that this piece of s*** gets rewarded for being an incredibly mediocre coach by making an absurd amount of money and moving up in his profession. We'll see what happens if Neal can get the UNM head job...how good Alford does recruiting without his right-hand man, although the UCLA brand name still sells itself.

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Apr 8, 2013 -> 06:56 AM) My ticket was for upper tank,first base side and I got the heck out of there. Way colder than 3rd base side. You said Tanks. "Your what hurts?" sayeth Whimperoo.

QUOTE (Capn12 @ Apr 8, 2013 -> 03:31 AM) Sure, just create a travel portal that can take me from Upstate South Carolina, to 333 W. 35th Street, Chicago, IL, in less than the 12.5 hours it would take me to get there. Then, I'd be at 2-3 games a week. Done. Interstellar, the upcoming Christopher Nolan movie, about black holes and time warps, based on the book by Cal Tech professor Kip S. Thorne, Hawking foreward, etc., addresses this problem and more.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Apr 8, 2013 -> 01:02 AM) The Sox next promotion should be free tickets just to see if they can fill the park during crummy April weather.Just bring a non perishable food item that isn't past it's expiration date, Turn it into a food drive.Have it correspond with the National Food Drive the postal service does every year in May around Mother's Day. Actually not a bad idea if they fill the park with people paying for parking, food and souvenirs. Hand out brochures promoting all the different ticket packages. Try it once a month just for the hell of it. Create a demand and a frenzy for the free seats. Create a buzz. Imagine the press you would get. Do it for the worst drawing teams. When I started writing this post I was being facetious but by the end I was serious. The biggest danger with this is eroding your core product by devaluing it. For whatever reason/s, the White Sox have been content with their revenues over the past decade. Now, you can definitely make the argument that having that extra 5-7,500 in the fans per night would have meant more of a homefield advantage and arguably 2-3 more victories per season. I have no quantifiable way to prove this, just a gut feeling. That huge home park factor hasn't really worked in our favor since the 2008 campaign. At any rate, it's basic marketing 101. 80% of your ticket sales and revenues are from the same 20% of fans, mostly the season and split and partial year ticket plan buyers. The White Sox have always been more concerned with improving and augmenting their ballpark experience (such as controlling people from the upper levels from coming down) than they were concerned with filling up the upper deck. And you can go back to that argument that PERCEPTION of a filled stadium, being the "cool" or "in" thing to do...of looking like you're missing out on something when the game is on the tube and you see the beers and brats and hot dogs and atmosphere, well, you can never get that feeling when there's only 15-25,000 fans in the stands. You need to get upper 20's or low 30's for that. For a long time, the Sox just lived off marketing the fireworks promotion/s on the weekends and that worked to an extent...but even that has worn off over time. If you gave away tickets, even upper deck tickets, away for free is that you would really turn off and upset your paying customers. It's fine if it's for a specific target or niche, like perfect attendance or Boys & Girls Clubs or honor roll or whatever, that's building your future customer base of young fans and exposing them to your product. But to make it just a general giveaway, that's something more in line with how a minor league team operates...and you don't ever want that perception to exist that your team has to GIVE AWAY tickets. Once that idea sets in, it's even more difficult to attract paying customers. Think about how easy it was to get minor league tickets for free...maybe you didn't end up going because you thought, how good could something be that's being given away for nothing? Above and beyond that, numerous sports marketing surveys have verified that free nights don't end up with customers paying nearly what regular ticket buyers would in terms of concessions and souvenirs...it doesn't balance out like you'd think, in theory. Rightly or wrongly, the White Sox see their core fanbase as a pretty inelastic one that will support the team through thick and thin, and they're never going to go out of their way to beg for fans or run out promotions like you'd see so frequently during the Veeck Years. Things are more corporate/profit motivated and less family-oriented, and that's not just sports, it's true of every segment of society and culture. So, while the non-profit tie in is laudable, it's hard to think of a major league baseball team that makes more of an effort to promote its community relations and outreach programs, with arguably less reciprocal support than all but a few teams in baseball. That whole idea of "enlightened self-interest" and "corporate social responsibility" has been a hallmark of the Reinsdorf regime, but it hasn't paid off as well as it does in many other markets.

http://hawkcentral.com/2013/04/05/harty-di...lford-comments/ Former/current Iowa beat writer details how he had to be removed from covering Alford when his own niece was almost assaulted by Pierce. Interesting stuff.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Apr 7, 2013 -> 09:15 PM) From the OP's point of view 1)When I attend games, I would rather be at games with better crowd and better atmosphere, and you would want other Sox fans to cheer with you. Going to games on a Sunday afternoon with >50% capacity feels dead 2)Over the past several years (since attendance decline after 06-07 and economic crisis), I hear Sox fans every where, on the radio, some people I know, and even people on this board using price of attending the game as an excuse. The fans spoke, the organization heard, yet the fans are not showing any loyalty to the organization. 3)People on this board complains too much about an uneventful off season. If this continues, you can complain about it again next off season and the one after. Such as, they were too arrogant after the collapse of late 2006/2007 and should have responded much more proactively, instead of waiting another five years where they were basically coasting and resting on the laurels of the 2005 World Series championship. Well, they finally listened and did something about it...but the fans are still finding excuses. Next time they're home, at least the excuse won't be the fans were watching the Masters on CBS or NCAA BB Tourney or whatever.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Apr 7, 2013 -> 08:21 PM) Yeah, but how is that defined? I mean, it's self-evident that Sox fans don't consider this team to be good enough to watch, but there are many fanbases for whom a young, dominant true ace pitcher just coming into his own on one of the first nice afternoons of the season would be a big draw. That's not true here in Chicago. Then they're going to be waiting a long time for a dominant offense like 2000 or 2008 (before Quentin was injured) or 2005's dominant pitching, bullpen and timely hitting. We have an entertaining team right now, compared to say 2007, 2009 or 2011. The problem's simply that DET is perceived by most casual Sox fans as being too good to beat...part of that was proven by the last two months of the season (in their minds) and head-to-head match-ups, and also the fact that the Tigers reached the World Series (twice since we were last there) and are seemingly even stronger whereas we're basically viewed as treading water (because we let AJ go, IN THEIR MINDS, once again). The fact of the matter that running out Josh Hamilton as our starting CFer or Zach Greinke instead of Chris Sale wasn't going to sell an extra 5-10,000 seats in April. They would, however, contribute eventually to the idea that the team had the horses required to hold off the Tigers and advance deep into the playoffs.

There are, of course, two sides to the story. We're currently 19th out of 20th in attendance, considering 10 teams have yet to open. We're even behind the Rays, Astros and Pirates. OTOH, it's impossible to make comparisons because we opened with the Tigers on a weekend last year...then we had a miserably attended 4 game series at home, Monday through Thursday, against the AT THE TIME quite poorly-perceived Orioles. Those four games drew only 50,653 fans (average 12,663), and one of the games was close to under 10,000 in attendace. The only valid comparisons to be made are with the Wednesday and Thursday home games from that first week. 2013 WED vs. Royals 14,213 2012 WED vs. Orioles 13,818 2013 THUR vs. Royals 15,036 2012 THUR vs. Orioles 11,836 While it would be difficult to argue there's been a HUGE increase in season tickets sold, but one could make a reasonable guess it's up by about 5-10% or so from last year. That said, the attendance for the first Friday, Saturday and Sunday home games of the season against an improved/improving Mariners team was pretty disappointing. They are without Ichiro, though.

Glad I just got back to civilization in time to miss this one. Seemed like the type of game that always used to go in our favor at home against the M's. Noticed that Keppinger's hot spring was for naught, as predicted with ST stats. It is nice to see Ramirez and Beckham getting off decently... Quintana won't have as much rope as some might believe...unless Danks isn't ready to come back as soon as predicted or Axelrod implodes immediately. The organization has to realize Santiago has more upside as a starter than either Quintana or Axelrod, IF IF IF he can keep his pitch counts down (of course, it's not like Danks didn't have the same exact problem/s with only going 5+ innings since 2008).

QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Apr 2, 2013 -> 05:06 AM) I'm not sure if it was mentioned but what did everyone think of Reed's performance? He's still missing right over the middle of the plate for me too much. I do like his demeanor on the mound however and he seems to have the mentality of a closer, but he's going to have to locate his stuff better. He's still missing too much with his slider. Getting behind in the count at 93-94-95 MPH will get him killed eventually. Cain swung under one of his fastballs to K, but that pitch was also right out over the heart of the plate, just high. Got away with it....and then there was one pitch that should have been on the corner that ended up center cut and he totally fooled the hitter by accident.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-leag...eXBhZ2U-;_ylv=3 Blogger predicts Sale regression? Fourth place? C'mon! The Indians and Royals being picked as "sleeper" teams is getting WAY too trendy these days.

The juxtaposition of this hire with UCLA picking up Steve Alford over the weekend is intriguing. Alford plays a slower tempo, runs a more dour operation and arrives after 14 seasons at Iowa and New Mexico with zero Sweet 16 appearances at those schools, though he did coach Missouri State to the regional semifinals in 1999. He's safe and sound. You know what he's bringing to the table. Yet, he still has plenty to prove also. "I am looking forward to bringing an exciting, up-tempo style of play to USC," Enfield said in the release USC sent out announcing his hiring. FGCU averaged 73.5 points a game this season. Alford's New Mexico team went for 67.3. Don’t think that quote was in the release by accident. There is a ton of high school talent in Los Angeles, capable and eager to play Enfield's style. If he can mine that, this could be must-see wild. And in a city which doesn't apologize for valuing entertainment, at a program that must compete for ticket buyers with the Lakers and Clippers just a couple miles up the 110 Freeway, must-see wild might be a necessity.www.yahoo.com/sports