Friday roundup: Moreno re-ups Angels lease, plus sports leaders mumbling incoherently

So this happened:

That’s it, I’m done, I can’t top that. RIP comedy (???? – 2025 AD), reality has finally become too absurd even to laugh at.

If anyone still cares about the rest of the news, here’s some:

Other Recent Posts:

Share this post:

16 comments on “Friday roundup: Moreno re-ups Angels lease, plus sports leaders mumbling incoherently

  1. I thought maybe they’d be able to pull it out once Manfred finally retires, but it seems that Deep Space Nine’s prophecy of professional baseball collapsing in the 21st century is still in the cards.

    1. Wouldn’t be over the collapse of regional sports networks. Wouldn’t even be due to the ever-insatiable desire for taxpayer-financed sportsball palaces.
      It’d be the endless spending by the L.A. Dodgers that’s spurred calls for a salary cap — which could lead to a lockout of the MLBPA when the union contract expires after the 2026 World Series.

  2. Telling that Manfred would declare keeping the Rays in Tampa Bay to be *his* goal, rather than the goal of the guy who actually owns the team. As much as I dislike the cliche of “saying the quiet part out loud,” he might have essentially confirmed that Stu Sternberg doesn’t give a f— where his little baseball plaything ultimately ends up in.

    And just to go off on a tangent: this kinda goes to the flipside of the whole snowbird industry and aesthetic of Florida. This isn’t a state that produces even moderately wealthy people, let alone people with enough clout to purchase entire pro sports franchises; it’s only capable of attracting that cohort once they’ve attained their riches. Whether it’s Stu Sternberg in St Pete, Shad Khan in Jacksonville, or the deVos family in Orlando, pro sports franchises in Florida have drawn the type of owners who see their teams as little more than another source of passive income, and who otherwise have little to no engagement with their team’s home markets (afaik, only Sternberg has a home anywhere in the region that his team is based in).

    By and large, long-time residents of Orlando, Jax, and St Pete yearn to be connected to something bigger than themselves — and pro sports is the easiest outlet for that connection. When they see that the owners of the local teams don’t share that same sentiment, they’re bound to respond accordingly.

    1. Agree with what you said, but there is one person that is the exception.

      Jeff Vinik of the Tampa Bay Lightning. They are one of, if not the best run sports franchise in America and it starts at the top. Admired by fans and players, he turned a fledging organization into what it is today. Record streak of consecutive sellouts, a great facility (he put tens of millions of his own money to fix it up when he took over) and the overall atmosphere is electric. His philanthropy work in the area cannot be overlooked.

      He’s from Boston and even owns a small share of the Red Sox.

      1. Vinik is great (though he recently sold a majority stake and will only keep control for the next couple of years).

        But the Lightning weren’t so much a fledgling organization when he bought them (they’d been around for 18 years) as just a bad one.

    2. Yeah, true of the owners of the marlins, panthers (who surprisingly won the cup last year go figure!), and especially the dolphins.

      The owner of the heat is a rare exception since he was involved with carnival cruise lines in Miami and seems to take pride in the team.

    3. Excellent observation, and something so simple to see but something that I ignore. Absentee owners who really do not have a stake in their communities are at best mere interlopers and at worst trying to undermine their current surroundings.

  3. Did you mean for the link about the Rays jacking up ticket prices to go to a San Francisco Chronicle story about the A’s? (It’s behind a paywall so I can’t get to enough of it to see if it references the Rays at all.)

    1. Ugh, no, sorry, that was supposed to go to here:

      https://bsky.app/profile/draysbay.bsky.social/post/3lhls3mfqek2n

  4. Surprised no mention of Bears majority owner Virginia McCaskey passing. I know it is too soon perhaps but how does this change the stadium calculation for the Bears? The McCaskey Family is one of the last of the old time owners — rich because they own a team, they did not own a team because they are rich.

    Depending on what the estate plan looks like might this mean the family might sell some of their share in the team? There was discussion in Chicago a year or so ago that some local rich persons might be interested in buying a minority share of the team with the funds used for a stadium. But the family and our “progressive pro-worker” mayor wants to city funded stadium for the team.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Personal attacks on other commenters are not allowed and will be removed.