As we get to the point in the year when money is everything, I'm wondering which is more important to Sox fans, the team making money or winning another championship.

Tex, I do believe you've gone off your rocker.

 

As a fan, winning is far superior.

I'd rather win than make money anyday, although making money usually leads to winning, if you are smart on how you spend it.

I hope this isn't a serious question.

Tex, I do believe you've gone off your rocker.

 

As a fan, winning is far superior.

 

Yet, I read posters claiming they don't want this player at X dollars, not anything about his on field play. If we write, I'd take player X at $5 mil but not $7 then aren't we concerned about the team profits?

Not necessarily. When a fan looks at those numbers, he doesn't see a profit--he sees how much can be spent while staying maintaining the budget. So, the fan is looking to see how they can improve the team, and thus help them win more.

 

They are using numbers set aside by the management, who have deduced that number with profits in mind.

Not necessarily.  When a fan looks at those numbers, he doesn't see a profit--he sees how much can be spent while staying maintaining the budget.  So, the fan is looking to see how they can improve the team, and thus help them win more.

 

They are using numbers set aside by the management, who have deduced that number with profits in mind.

 

Should fans just assume that the team budget is correct? If the team has $25 mil in profit built in, isn't trying to stay within the team's budget pulling for the profit?

I'd rather win than make money anyday, although making money usually leads to winning, if you are smart on how you spend it.

 

Actually, winning usually leads to making money...but I get what you're saying.

If we do well in 2006 we will make alot of profit. If they scrub it up ( not winning the division at the very least) we will still make money but nothing compared to a playoff berth and farther. Doing well early on in the season sets the standard for attendence... so that if and when we faulter later in the season ( 6,7,8 game losing streak) the fans will still likely show up in good bunches ( dependant on the opponent). All the merchandise we are selling from now until the start of the season will vastly decline if we get off to a s*** start. We wills till be up their ( we always are) but no where near the numbers currently.

 

All that i know is a good first two weeks to a month will way to determine how much we bring in. Winning= profity so i really do not understand this poll.

Actually, winning usually leads to making money...but I get what you're saying. 

Er.. yea. If you win, your team will be making more money, so you will have more money to spend on quality players, and have a greater chance at winning more

Winning= profity so i really do not understand this poll.

 

It is all the discussions regarding contracts and player values. It seems as if Sox fans would rather the team keep within some pre-defined spending limit than over spend for a player who would help the team. And it isn't always within the context of a team's budget. A typical response will be "I'd take him for $6 mil but not $7". So if your team makes a million less next season that would bother you?

if im the owner i have to make money first....thats why i invest in a team....as a fan i dotn see any of that 25 mil...so obviously winning....but if im an owner i try to win and make a profit because as was stated winning makes more profit...

if im the owner i have to make money first....thats why i invest in a team....as a fan i dotn see any of that 25 mil...so obviously winning....but if im an owner i try to win and make a profit because as was stated winning makes more profit...

 

If you were truly interested in profits, you wouldn't be investing in a pro sports team. Most have underperformed the market. Most owners went into it as a very expensive hobby after amassing a fortune in their "first career".

It is all the discussions regarding contracts and player values. It seems as if Sox fans would rather the team keep within some pre-defined spending limit than over spend for a player who would help the team. And it isn't always within the context of a team's budget. A typical response will be "I'd take him for $6 mil but not $7". So if your team makes a million less next season that would bother you?

 

i to my amazement agree with what qwerty had to write and i see where you are going with this. so let me ask you this.

 

would you be like georgie of the yanks and overspend to get players who you think can help???

i to my amazement agree with what qwerty had to write and i see where you are going with this. so let me ask you this.

 

would you be like georgie of the yanks and overspend to get players who you think can help???

 

I think there is a difference between being a fan and being an owner.

 

In almost every instance that a free agent signs, the winning team overpaid. It's just like an auction, the highest bidder, the person who values the item/player the most, wins. So over paying isn't really an issue. I am certain Philly shopped Thome. The Sox won. Why? Because the Sox offered more. So they paid more than anyone else was willing to pay. In this case they overpaid within a reasonable amount. I guess what is unreasonable is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Getting back to George. The more he throws away money, the more he makes. If you were a Yankee fan, would you be cheering for George to spend less and make more? Last I saw, the Yankees were #1 or #2 in profits, so how could anyone say they are over spending?

How many owners are into MLB for making profits?

I think there is a difference between being a fan and being an owner.

 

In almost every instance that a free agent signs, the winning team overpaid. It's just like an auction, the highest bidder, the person who values the item/player the most, wins. So over paying isn't really an issue. I am certain Philly shopped Thome. The Sox won. Why? Because the Sox offered more. So they paid more than anyone else was willing to pay. In this case they overpaid within a reasonable amount. I guess what is unreasonable is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Getting back to George. The more he throws away money, the more he makes. If you were a Yankee fan, would you be cheering for George to spend less and make more? Last I saw, the Yankees were #1 or #2 in profits, so how could anyone say they are over spending?

 

i was talking purely on george and you make some very good points esp spending to make more and winning more series as the yanks under george won how many series???

 

so spending money at the right person and position, has always been my argument. rafael looks good now.

For what its worth, "Lower beer prices" would be my second choice.

 

How many owners are into MLB for making profits? 

and how many owners are in it just to lose money?

i was talking purely on george and you make some very good points esp spending to make more and winning more series as the yanks under george won how many series???

 

so spending money at the right person and position, has always been my argument. rafael looks good now.

 

The Yankees have won more than any other MLB team during his tenure.

 

Still, if the Sox went $5 mil over budget for next season, would anybody care? Should fans care? Should fans be demanding JR use the Championship dividend?

For what its worth, "Lower beer prices" would be my second choice.

 

any new numbers of the sales of season tickets

How much of the profit you getting........................Championships is what matters.

Yet, I read posters claiming they don't want this player at X dollars, not anything about his on field play. If we write, I'd take player X at $5 mil but not $7 then aren't we concerned about the team profits?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

tex, i have to ask, who is the guy with the glasses on the left side of your avatar?

the answer to this is obvious. if anyone votes anything but a WS repeat, shame on your motherf***in' ass.

tex, i have to ask, who is the guy with the glasses on the left side of your avatar?

 

Bill Veeck, White Sox owner during the South Side Hit Men and Rent a Player days.

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Jump to: navigation, search

 

William Louis Veeck Jr. (February 9, 1914 – January 2, 1986), sometimes nicknamed "Sport Shirt", was a native of Chicago who became a franchise owner and promoter in Major League Baseball. Known best for his flamboyant publicity stunts, and the innovations he brought to the major leagues during his ownership of the Cleveland Indians, St. Louis Browns, and Chicago White Sox, Veeck was the last owner to purchase a baseball franchise without an independent fortune, and is responsible for many significant contributions to baseball.

 

While Veeck (pronounced "veck") was growing up in Hinsdale, Illinois, his father, William Veeck, Sr., a sportswriter, became president of the Chicago Cubs. Growing up in the business, Bill Veeck worked as a vendor, ticket seller and junior groundskeeper. In 1933, when his father died, Veeck left Kenyon College, and eventually became club treasurer for the Cubs. In 1937, Veeck planted the ivy that is on the outfield wall at Wrigley Field. He married Eleanor Raymond in 1935.

 

In 1959, Veeck became head of a group that purchased a controlling interest in the Chicago White Sox, who went on to win their first pennant in 40 years, and broke a team attendance record for home games with 1.4 million, and in the next year broke the same record with 1.6 million visitors to Comiskey Park with the addition of the first "exploding scoreboard" in the major leagues - producing electrical and sound effects, and shooting fireworks whenever the White Sox hit a home run. In 1961, due to poor health, Veeck sold his share of the team, only to return in 1975 as the full owner.

 

Almost immediately after taking control of the Sox for a second time, Veeck unleashed another publicity stunt designed to irritate his fellow owners. He and general manager Roland Hemond conducted four trades in a hotel lobby, in full view of the public. Two weeks later, however, Peter Seitz ruled in favor of free agency, and Veeck's power as an owner began to wane in opposition to richer owners. Likely his most famous stunt with the White Sox, Veeck presented a Bicentennial-themed Spirit of '76 parade on opening day in 1976, casting himself as the peg-legged fifer bringing up the rear. The same year, he reactivated Minnie Miñoso for eight at-bats, in order to give Miñoso a claim towards playing in four decades; and he did so again in 1980, to expand the claim to five. In an attempt to adapt to free agency, his rent-a-player model, centering on the acquisition of other clubs' stars in their option years, was moderately successful: in 1977, the White Sox won 90 games, and finished third behind Oscar Gamble and Richie Zisk. During this last run, Veeck decided to have announcer Harry Caray sing "Take Me Out to the Ball Game" during the seventh-inning stretch. Finding himself no longer able to financially compete in the free agent era, Veeck sold the White Sox in January 1981. He retired to his home in St. Michaels, Maryland, where he had discovered White Sox star Harold Baines while Baines was in high school there.

 

Veeck died of cancer at age 71, and was elected five years later to the Baseball Hall of Fame.

Thanks for asking.