OAFC BBS - All Topics: Archive: Steve Stone
| By yc2578 on Friday, April 04, 2003 - 07:07 pm:|
Hey remember when this guy was part of a group to buy the A's and if I remember right the plan wasn't to keep the team in Oakland right? Well I have the Cubs game on WGN on and Steve is the color man for the Cubs and just now in the middle the game for no reason he brings up the A's attendance from yesterday and a mocking voice about the great fan support in Oakland. Well here's a hardy FUCK YOU STEVE...both of them.
Yeah...Steve Stone was part of Bud Selig's designated favorite group...the group NOT selected by Oakland...the group Bud petitioned Oakland to also submit...the group that Bud knew would be most willing to speedily move the team away. Are we suprised by his comment today? Not at all!
You're right on about Steve Stone. He was part of the trojan horse group sent by Selig to compete with the Dolich/Piccinini group.
Steve Stone had the nerve to give a statement that he would be the Owner/GM and the others in his group were Lazarus and Campbell (the deep pockets guy). The baseball and minority connection would have been Bob Watson.
I hate to even think what would have happened to our team with that idiot Stone as the GM.
| By milo on Saturday, April 05, 2003 - 12:40 pm:|
I've watched hundreds of Stone's broadcasts over the years -- going back to his days with Harry in the '80s -- and he is without a doubt one of the sharpest color men in the business. His knowledge of pitching is phenomenal, and he is very well liked in Chicago and elsewhere.
Everyone here is so damn sensitive about the fact that the A's don't draw well that they jump all over anyone who dares to mention it. Like it or not, it is notable that one of the best teams in the league only draws 7k in its first week of the season. Of course there are reasons, but it's still pretty sad...
Don't be so quick to shoot the messenger.
| By yc2578 on Saturday, April 05, 2003 - 01:15 pm:|
Him being a good color man has nothing to do with this and yes we can all be a bit sensitive to criticism. The fact of the matter he just ran mouth about it out of no where without knowing the reason why the attendance was low and considering his past when it comes to the A's as been posted in this topic you have to really question his motive for bringing that up. What does the A's attendance have to with a Cubs-Reds game?
| By chris_d on Saturday, April 05, 2003 - 02:20 pm:|
>Of course there are reasons, but it's still
Milo, those "reasons" that you mention in the sentence above are the very mitigating facts that make Thursday's attendance NOT "pretty sad" at all.
As mentioned earlier in a thread by someone, the mighty NY Yankees drew 8,000 fans in a game last year under very similar circumstances: make-up game on a date not even on the schedule, and in the A's game's case it wasn't even available to many season ticket holders, and the A's certainly didn't promote it.
And Stone isn't just some random "messenger". Rather, (as stated in an earlier post) he was part of an ownership group foisted on the city of Oakland by Selig at the 11th hour of the '99 attempted sale of the A's. (Which many allege was just a ruse by Schott to shorten the lease. He admitted as much in an interview last year.) Stone's ownership group was vocal about two things: 1) Not committing to Oakland, and that 2) Stone would be major player in the front office. Stone's group was rejected, and he gave a bitter, unprofessional interview about it afterwards. So when Stone points out the attendance with a snicker, he's delighting in Thursday's low figure for purely self-absorbed reasons, as if he's still saying himself, "I could have saved that franchise, but screw them now." When in reality, if he was sent by Selig, Stone and his group were probably sent to "Jeffrey Loria-ize" the franchise, i.e. run it into the ground.
THAT'S what Oakland fans here are upset about when they see Stone's words. He's not reporting in the true sense of the word. Rather, he's giving half-truths without context solely to gloat and indirectly promote himself.
It's all tied into the long-term security of the franchise. We've had 7 years of insecurity (are they staying or going?) since Schott bought the team. That's a long f#$%ing time for fans to worry about something they love. So, due to that insecurity, some fans have given up (to this group's chagrin) while many others are digging in and coming out verbally swinging with some admittedly heated words and -- oh yeah -- the small but crucial facts on their side.
Yes, it may be pretty sad to see 7,000 fans at a MLB game. But, it's not the city of Oakland's fault and it's not the East Bay fan base's fault. If Oakland fans are sensitive about the issue it's because they fear they're going to one day pay the ultimate punishment (by losing their team to another city) for damage done not by the fans but rather by Selig and Schott, who may laugh all the way to the bank (yet again!).
Now THAT scenario is more than pretty sad.
| By eyleenn on Saturday, April 05, 2003 - 02:58 pm:|
Eloquently put, Chris.
As I recall, taxpayers gave up about $20 million in concessions in return for what was supposed to be a good faith opportunity to secure new local owners. That opportunity, in hindsight, was a pure sham that could only have been engineered by Bud Selig because of baseball's anti-trust exemption. I don't think I'm overstating things here, really. Steve Stone probably didn't help engineer it, but he nonetheless became a part of that sham. I wouldn't dispute his talent as a sportscaster...but will forever more suspect his motives and judgement when it comes to Oakland.
| By cheese on Sunday, April 06, 2003 - 12:31 pm:|
Chris you are right. The Yankees drew only 8000 fans in game #76 in 2001.
Here is the link:
| By cheese on Sunday, April 06, 2003 - 12:32 pm:|
Oh shit, that might have been because of 9/11.
| By cheese on Sunday, April 06, 2003 - 12:49 pm:|
Here it is:
In 2002, the 71st game they only got 8000 fans.