Along with an expiring labor agreement (at the end of 2011) and expanding instant replay, Buster Olney of ESPN.com puts the Dodgers' ownership fiasco right up there with baseball's biggest questions (link insider only):
6. The Dodgers' ownership situation. Presumably, Frank McCourt will either resolve his divorce case and move ahead as owner of the Dodgers, or else the financial conditions created by his split will force him to divest himself of a franchise that should be a crown jewel of the sport, rather than fodder for gossip pages. And McCourt presumably understands this hard reality by now: Not many of the other owners are prepared to lend a helping hand, as they did with the Rangers. They want McCourt separated from the boys of summer.
The Dodgers also get a passing mention, backhanded-compliment at #22 when the Angels' situation was discussed: "22. The Angels' crossroads. Two years ago, the Dodgers appeared to be in serious decline and the Angels appeared to be making major in-roads into becoming the dominant force of the L.A. area. But the Angels took a big step back in 2010, fired scouting director Eddie Bane, lost out on the Carl Crawford bidding and now owner Arte Moreno is expressing shock over the cost of free agents."
I wish we could have fewer question marks around the Dodgers--in absolute terms, not relative--and more exclamation points. Alas, 2011 looks to be more of a pain in my colon.
2 comments:
I'm tired of talking about Frank. When do pitchers and catchers report again?
>>
And McCourt presumably understands this hard reality by now: Not many of the other owners are prepared to lend a helping hand, as they did with the Rangers.
<<
Now, I'm no fan of Frank McCourt but what does Olney mean with that line? MLB wasn't a friend to the Rangers, they were a friend to Nolan Ryan and his ownership group, and that's why they stepped in to force the sale from Hicks, not to the highest bidder, but to their preferred bidder.
Post a Comment