Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Indy 500: 'Greatest Spectacle In Racing' Set For Sunday

Transfer of Padres from Moores to Moorad may NOT get approved

The ownership sale of the #Padres to Jeff Moorad hit unforeseen snag and is Not expected to be approved at #MLB owners meetings today.
Jan 12 via Twitter for iPadFavoriteRetweetReply

Twitter says that there are a lot of bummed out looking people outside the meetings. How does this not get approved? I guess the conspiracy theorists were right... about something or another... I kinda forget what it was they were complaining about.

If you're late to the game, Moorad surprised many when it was announced that he would be fronting the final amount of money needed to own the Padres outright. Several people thought that Moores may have been involved with the Padres for years to come as the transfer was rumored to need at least 5 years to be completed.

I don't know that there is a significant snag in #Padres deal, but approval entails a vote as well as money. Stay tuned.
Jan 12 via Twitter for BlackBerry®FavoriteRetweetReply

MLB.com

Major League Baseball rules stipulate that the new majority ownership must be approved. He needs 75 percent of the 29 other owners or their representatives.

[UPDATE 10:05AM] Hacksaw saying that the owners are suspicious of the idea that the money from the TV deal may be getting used to pay for the purchase as opposed to being used for operations. The Conspiracy Theorists have gotten to the other owners! omg.

The idea that there might be trouble with financial obligation is a little weird considering that the money to buy out the team was supposed to have been sitting in escrow all of this time. I'm not sure how they could formally prove that the Padres would use TV deal money to pay out owners. That seems pretty bold and could be akin to requiring an MLB team to operate at a loss.

[UPDATE 10:52AM] It appears to be a technical snag. From the ever diligent Tim Sullivan, Moorad says:

"In the rush to finalize the completion of the sale, earlier than scheduled, some technical questions, late into the process, arose that need to be answered/addressed..."

No word on cake hazing.

[UPDATE 1:21PM] Hacksaw says that Jerry Reinsdorf, owner of the White Sox and the owners of the Diamondbacks are the ones who are raising the big issues with Moorad's financing plans.

We must've won the Carlos Quentin trade, eh?

Comment 149 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Around SB Nation

Meet GM Candidate Rick Hahn

Oct 2010 from Amazin' Avenue - 120 comments

Comments

Display:

Darren Smith spilled the beans on this the other day...

He thought the deal was basically done, so he felt free to disclose information that he had been keeping off the air for a while. He said that there were a bunch of “people” (presumably including some other owners) who wanted to see Moorad fail. They assumed his ownership group wouldn’t be able to come up with all of the money to purchase the team and they don’t want an ownership group that’s just barely scraping by on funds.

He said the people (owners) that are against the Moorad group basically fall into two groups: (1) people who are gun-shy about letting a group own a team without significant financial backing because of what just happened to the Dodges and (2) people who don’t like Moorad for various reasons — he may have burned some of these other owners as an agent and they may be carrying a personal vendetta against him.

The other owners really like John Moores and it was presumed that if Moorad could come up with (a) the full amount of money and (b) an endorsement from Moores, that the transfer would be approved. Moorad had both as of Monday. It’s looking like even an endorsement from Moores isn’t enough to convince everyone.

My mustachioed sperm donor is dead to me and I’m dead to the dumpster he sprayed his gravy in. - TTG

by theodore donald kerabatsos on Jan 12, 2012 9:47 AM PST reply actions  

Owners must have been suspicious because they were paying with money from their greasy pockets

Moorad must have tried a few of those burger places and didn’t grab napkins.

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Jan 12, 2012 9:48 AM PST reply actions  

If MLB doesn't approve they would have to provide a reason.

I guess that they do approve. But if they don’t it seems detrimental to baseball overall. Why force an owner who wants out to stay around when he approves of a new owner that has the money?

Padres Fan.

by MrDanielX on Jan 12, 2012 9:51 AM PST reply actions  

Moorad isn't a Selig crony, is he.

That’s why he’s not invited to “The Club”

by bcline760 on Jan 12, 2012 9:52 AM PST reply actions  

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? ◔ヮ◔
Uncommon Sportsman :: Absurdity in play

by Axion on Jan 12, 2012 10:01 AM PST reply actions  

I've read that Moorad is still part owner of the D-Backs

Could be a problem, though, you’d think they’d have said it would be a problem a few years ago unless they were sure he wouldn’t complete a deal.

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Jan 12, 2012 10:01 AM PST reply actions  

I thought I read

He sold all his remaining interest in the D-Bags awhile back.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 10:18 AM PST up reply actions  

Seems like everything I see says he would have to sell it

But, I don’t see anything that says he did.

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Jan 12, 2012 10:21 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Actually, I did

And it never gave me this link

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Jan 12, 2012 10:24 AM PST up reply actions  

Think about this from the perspective of the other owners...

Say you’re the Steinbrenners or John Henry. Over the past three seasons the Padres group has put almost nothing into their on-field product. Meanwhile, they’re collecting tens of millions of dollars in revenue sharing. This ownership group is scraping together every last dime they have in order to pay for the team. Also consider that once they assume ownership of the team, it comes with something like 100 or 200 million dollars in stadium debt. Does it seem like payroll will be jumping up any time soon? No, they’ll probably be collecting revenue sharing dollars for the foreseeable future.

I can absolutely understand why other owners would be hesitant about this. Especially when you look at the mess that was just created by the Dodgers.

On the one hand, the owners don’t want someone like Mark Cuban who will spend like crazy in order to win, but on the other hand they don’t want to create a financially unstable franchise that will struggle to pay its bills and earn money for the league.

My mustachioed sperm donor is dead to me and I’m dead to the dumpster he sprayed his gravy in. - TTG

by theodore donald kerabatsos on Jan 12, 2012 10:04 AM PST reply actions   4 recs

San Diego will always be a revenue sharing team

it financially doesn’t make sense for them to be one of baseballs top spenders, regardless of who their owner is

by iheartyourfart on Jan 12, 2012 11:27 AM PST via Android app up reply actions  

Theodore,

I think you nailed it.

On the very next play Venable soiled the sheets again

by strummer on Jan 12, 2012 1:21 PM PST up reply actions  

They cannot force Moores to keep the team forever

What happens if they kill the deal and the next guy offers Moores less for the team? That could get ugly.

by field39 on Jan 12, 2012 10:06 AM PST reply actions  

Does it then turn into a Texas Rangers situation

where its sold through the courts or something like that?

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 10:20 AM PST up reply actions  

Possibley

If they don’t let Moores sell the team, the divorce may push him into bankruptcy.

by field39 on Jan 12, 2012 10:22 AM PST up reply actions  

I support this

if it means The Gwynn ends up owning the team.

Bolts from the Blue - Destroying your opinions with facts.

by John Gennaro on Jan 12, 2012 10:23 AM PST up reply actions  

All the retired Padres numbers come together to own the Padres

Well, almost all of them.

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Jan 12, 2012 10:29 AM PST up reply actions  

The owners shot down a multi-billionaire with cash (Cuban)

but allowed a debt-ridden multimillionaire to buy the Dodgers. The Padres and their “layaway” consortium are NOW making them nervous? It’s a bell that cannot be unrung, so why not let the sale go through?

by EvilSammy on Jan 12, 2012 10:19 AM PST reply actions  

Can we blame the Dodgers for this?

I don’t know if we can technically, but I really really want to.

25 years as a baseball fan and I'm still confused by the infield fly rule

by SolanaFan on Jan 12, 2012 11:56 AM PST up reply actions  

Just because there's no approval doesn't mean there's no owner.

John Moores is technically still the owner. I’m sure he wouldn’t allow the team to go into the season without a TV deal.

My mustachioed sperm donor is dead to me and I’m dead to the dumpster he sprayed his gravy in. - TTG

by theodore donald kerabatsos on Jan 12, 2012 10:22 AM PST up reply actions  

I always loved that guy.

My mustachioed sperm donor is dead to me and I’m dead to the dumpster he sprayed his gravy in. - TTG

by theodore donald kerabatsos on Jan 12, 2012 10:26 AM PST up reply actions  

I would be more than happy with Moore's owning the team again

I know its a pipe dream, but that guy owned the team because he loved baseball, as opposed to our new owner who seems to only be looking at it from an investment standpoint… I know, I know… not that there’s anything wrong with that.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 10:28 AM PST up reply actions  

I think your memories of the John Moores era may be a little hazy.

People hated that guy when he finally decided to sell. Everyone thought he had basically ripped off the city and fans by getting a new park and axing spending on the team. All you heard was about how he didn’t give a crap about baseball and just wanted to make money.

My mustachioed sperm donor is dead to me and I’m dead to the dumpster he sprayed his gravy in. - TTG

by theodore donald kerabatsos on Jan 12, 2012 10:42 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

he only axed spending

to pay for the divorce
The payroll was $70 mil before that

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 10:55 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Exactly

Anyone who’s been through a divorce knows there’s a lot of collateral damage that you really can’t help. And while I was angry at the time just like everyone else, in hindsight I am really now able to enjoy the stuff that he did as owner of the Padres.
I know that you guys love… and I mean LOVE the idea of not spending money. I mean, there are dudes here who are more than apologists for the current regime… they actually seem like they would be annoyed if we ever ended up anywhere out of the bottom end of spending in the MLB….
But I like how Moores would sometimes write a check that definitely wasn’t covered by team proft. It made you have hope that a big name free agent could actually come here…. And sometimes, they did. And one time, it made for a freaking amazing WS run.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 11:05 AM PST up reply actions   2 recs

I liked Moores for that too

But guys like that are few and far between.

by Dex on Jan 12, 2012 11:10 AM PST up reply actions  

If he'd only kept it in his pants

He’d still be cutting the occasional check for us.

by athletics68 on Jan 12, 2012 11:13 AM PST up reply actions  

I just like the spending of money WISELY

Getting into bad contracts isn’t spending money wisely.

Padres Fan.

by MrDanielX on Jan 12, 2012 11:21 AM PST up reply actions  

I won'

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 11:23 AM PST up reply actions  

Bro... in a case where I'm citing evidence about a specific event then yes I'll cite evidence with links and what not

But I’m not going to call people out. Calm down buddy. Talking about payroll on a last place team is no reason to start cursing at people.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 11:45 AM PST up reply actions   2 recs

Hey listen, Boss

Keep the jets cool, Chief. Gotta keep things on the level, sport.

I love “yobro” talk.

by Dex on Jan 12, 2012 1:25 PM PST up reply actions  

Sorry, Bub.

Thanks for the reminder, friend. For the record, my jets are cool as a cucumber, pal. Just using the English language to its best ends to illustrate a point, homie.

www.FriarsOnCardboard.blogspot.com
"jbox does not drink coffee, as it makes him clean house big time." ~Kev

by TheThinGwynn on Jan 12, 2012 1:29 PM PST up reply actions  

'preciate it, Dawg.

www.FriarsOnCardboard.blogspot.com
"jbox does not drink coffee, as it makes him clean house big time." ~Kev

by TheThinGwynn on Jan 12, 2012 1:50 PM PST up reply actions  

way to tell them...sport

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 13, 2012 11:48 PM PST up reply actions  

I may be one you are thinking of

but its not that I am oppose to spending money. I just belive most FA contracts are bad (the big name ones).

"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"

by Ron Mexico on Jan 12, 2012 11:29 AM PST up reply actions  

I am against this unless its smart.

Most worthwhile free agents we cannot afford because they want bad contracts. NAME ME!

Padres Fan.

by MrDanielX on Jan 12, 2012 11:36 AM PST up reply actions  

we signed big name free agents?

are you thinking of john mabry or Wally Joyner

by iheartyourfart on Jan 12, 2012 11:30 AM PST via Android app up reply actions  

Or... assumed high salaries of valuable players via trade

with some mistakes (see Chan Ho Park) But regardless. It was fun for me. I enjoyed it. If I’m wrong for enjoying a time when we had an owner who wrote unwise checks or took on salary then fine, I’ll be a mindless fan.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 11:49 AM PST up reply actions  

All I took from that:
I’ll be a mindless fan.

www.FriarsOnCardboard.blogspot.com
"jbox does not drink coffee, as it makes him clean house big time." ~Kev

by TheThinGwynn on Jan 12, 2012 1:24 PM PST up reply actions  

His name is Cub Buster.

IF all he thinks about is the Cubs all he knows about baseball finances is getting into long term, terrible, backloaded deals.

So mindless is a good description.

Padres Fan.

by MrDanielX on Jan 12, 2012 1:35 PM PST up reply actions  

Don't be a jerk about someone you disagree with

On the very next play Venable soiled the sheets again

by strummer on Jan 12, 2012 1:39 PM PST up reply actions   3 recs

Speaking of which, you never answered me.

Have you ever been to Cincinnati?

www.FriarsOnCardboard.blogspot.com
"jbox does not drink coffee, as it makes him clean house big time." ~Kev

by TheThinGwynn on Jan 12, 2012 1:59 PM PST up reply actions  

One more time....

Yes I have.

Got any other brilliant conspiracy theories……

On the very next play Venable soiled the sheets again

by strummer on Jan 12, 2012 2:17 PM PST up reply actions  

Don't worry about it Strummer....

Looks like TTG must have gotten some bad news from the latest Beckett about his rookie George Arias card or something. Baseball cards were awesome…. I loved them when I was about 10 or so.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 2:24 PM PST up reply actions  

whoa there

"I suggest more bike" ~KSK

"The Red Sox and Yankees are playing as I type but I don't know who's winning because I don't watch Arena League baseball." - the genius TTG

Destroying your facts with opinions

by justdave on Jan 12, 2012 2:34 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

One more time?

Show your work.
Also, do you even know what a conspiracy theory is?

www.FriarsOnCardboard.blogspot.com
"jbox does not drink coffee, as it makes him clean house big time." ~Kev

by TheThinGwynn on Jan 12, 2012 2:26 PM PST up reply actions  

Because the Name Cubbuster

Is of Course a reference to my love for the Cubs organization?

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 1:47 PM PST up reply actions  

He didn't say it was love.

Nice try.

(Not really; it was a terrible try)

www.FriarsOnCardboard.blogspot.com
"jbox does not drink coffee, as it makes him clean house big time." ~Kev

by TheThinGwynn on Jan 12, 2012 1:52 PM PST up reply actions  

Oh just kiss him already

well that's the reason why they're fans, they can't play, they can't play at this level, some have tried and got cut at the HS level or whatever. -Orlando Hudson

by Ketchup on Jan 13, 2012 4:51 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't kiss dudes.

I only bang ’em.

www.FriarsOnCardboard.blogspot.com
"jbox does not drink coffee, as it makes him clean house big time." ~Kev

by TheThinGwynn on Jan 13, 2012 5:18 PM PST up reply actions  

I've seen some conflicting reports

as to if the TV deal was dependant on the ownership change

by kevintheoman on Jan 12, 2012 10:23 AM PST up reply actions  

Being a Part of the Club of Elites that have the Money to own a Sports Franchise

Is maybe something that the rest of the group of owners see as being a bit out of Moorad’s league. Sure…. he made a few million as an agent, but there’s a big difference between him and, say, Jerry Jones, Mark Cuban, or John Moores. Maybe this is a case of a fraternity not necessarily wanting to let a guy in who doesn’t necessarily belong rubbing elbows with guys that are miles beyond him, class-wise. I’m not saying it’s nice of them… but I’d understand.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 10:22 AM PST reply actions  

almost feel sad for the multi-millionaire.

"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"

by Ron Mexico on Jan 12, 2012 10:39 AM PST up reply actions  

What really makes this deal stink...

is that a question of approval by the other owners was never brought up previous to this…I smell a rat.

"The Internet?! Is that thing still around?"

by Jsn L on Jan 12, 2012 10:52 AM PST reply actions  

not really

if MLB would not let Frank McCourt pay down his debt with the upfront payment from Fox
then they are being consistent by not letting the Moorad group pay off the team with the upfront payment from Fox
MLB finally gets it. The want to see the money on the field, not in the owners pockets – especially since they are subsidizing the Padres with $35 mil every year.

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 10:59 AM PST up reply actions  

I think this is BS

If that’s the issue, then the problem is in how they decided to make things “fair” through revenue sharing. Like I said above, it’s not a requirement to operate a baseball team at a loss.

by Dex on Jan 12, 2012 11:02 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I don't think revenue sharing is the problem

if Moorad is taking the $150 mil (a made up number) upfront payment from Fox and using that to payoff the remaining amount to Moores – that is the problem.
With a payroll of $50 mil a year ($35 mil coming from MLB) – other owners don’t see much of this money being used to improve the team.

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 11:16 AM PST up reply actions  

But if the money is sitting in escrow

Then how can they prove that the money is being used that way? Obviously before the TV deal is approved, then don’t have the TV money, so Moorad’s group still got together $200 million. I’m not saying that it wouldn’t be a shady way of buying the team, but that it would be REALLY tough to prove that it was the case.

by Dex on Jan 12, 2012 11:18 AM PST up reply actions  

the other owners are not stupid

they know that the money is fungible and see the game that the Moorad group is playing

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 11:28 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

What could they be worried about though?

Are they worried that the Padres will literally NOT field a team in 2013? If the Padres field a team with all guys who are under team control and eligible to only be paid league minimum, can the owners complain that they aren’t “trying”?

by Dex on Jan 12, 2012 11:30 AM PST up reply actions  

I know it makes no sense

but maybe they want to see good baseball in San Diego

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 11:31 AM PST up reply actions  

We won 90 games 2 years ago.

We have never lost 54 games like the “tanking” DBag’s did in 2002.

WHY DON’T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT PADRES BASEBALL IS GOOD BASEBALL!

Average? Yes. But its not terrible bad “not good” baseball. Sometimes we are really good.

Sorry I am upset that people still, after all sorts of evidence provided, still think that Padres baseball is somehow… “not good”.

Padres Fan.

by MrDanielX on Jan 12, 2012 11:39 AM PST up reply actions  

Why are you so inclined to champion for our owner to make a profit on Padres Baseball?

I mean, I’m as fiscally conservative as the next guy and think people should be allowed some freedom with their money. But this is a provately run orgranization of entertainment. Maybe this group of owners doesn’t want to see their expensive teams/toys stucks having to risk injury by playing 3-12 games a year against an inferior product while shelling out millions a year in luxury tax to them. I get that, and I get Selig trying to hold it up while making false excuses to do so.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 12, 2012 11:17 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Sports Business

It’s my schooling. I’m all for cheaper beer, $5 tickets and free parking too.

And practically speaking, if that’s really what the owners were worried about, they’d rework the media markets and institute a salary cap.

by Dex on Jan 12, 2012 11:27 AM PST up reply actions  

now

that is crazy talk

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 11:29 AM PST up reply actions  

can we all just agree that Moorad's face in that picture is priceless?

"I suggest more bike" ~KSK

"The Red Sox and Yankees are playing as I type but I don't know who's winning because I don't watch Arena League baseball." - the genius TTG

Destroying your facts with opinions

by justdave on Jan 12, 2012 11:16 AM PST reply actions   1 recs

Moorad

always reminds me of City of Tiny Lights
“City of tiny lites
Maybe you should know
That it’s over there
In the tiny dirt somewhere
You can see it any time
When you get the squints
From your downers and your wine…”
FZ

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 11:22 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Maybe that's the problem!

There’s no value attached to his face. Somebody get a $20 and some masking tape!

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Jan 12, 2012 4:15 PM PST up reply actions  

Technical problems?

Is it plugged in?

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? ◔ヮ◔
Uncommon Sportsman :: Absurdity in play

by Axion on Jan 12, 2012 11:27 AM PST reply actions   2 recs

shoot this may take awhile

who knows how many hours have been wasted on hold waiting for technical support

i bet they have crappy hold music too.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 11:31 AM PST up reply actions  

my experience with technical support

if you yell louder…they will understand you

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 11:33 AM PST up reply actions  

Rumor: Sale may be held off until April

Which may mean that the owners wanted to see the Fox money first……

THEY’RE ALL IN THIS THING TOGETHER!!!!

by Dex on Jan 12, 2012 11:58 AM PST reply actions   1 recs

hmmm

could it have to do with the Dodger sale? As in they may be some technicallity in the agreement that they don’t want the McCourts to use against them?

Or it could just be that “Bob” in MLB Approvals in the MLB Front office is on a Alaskan fishing trip and won’t be back to lat March. And Bob is the only one with the approval stamp (an actual stamp that he puts down on the paper after the vote…no stamp and the vote seems lifeless, and they don’t want a lifeless vote.)

"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"

by Ron Mexico on Jan 12, 2012 12:09 PM PST up reply actions  

and yet we criticize

each other on here for being cynical

Go figure!

On the very next play Venable soiled the sheets again

by strummer on Jan 12, 2012 1:27 PM PST up reply actions  

wow..I had almost joked that about the padres not voting for Buds extension

turns out it wouldn’t have been a <a href=joke" target="new">

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 12:59 PM PST reply actions  

I don't like the sound of this:

JonHeymanCBS Jon Heyman
moores hoped to have $ from pads sale now. but owners want more info on moorad. a few arent fans (i.e. reinsdorf, kendrick)

On the very next play Venable soiled the sheets again

by strummer on Jan 12, 2012 1:42 PM PST reply actions  

not surprising on Kendrick at all

its no secret in the league that Kendrick hates Moorad and how things went with him leaving AZ to SD and the way the deal was made.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 2:02 PM PST up reply actions  

you're right

Good point

On the very next play Venable soiled the sheets again

by strummer on Jan 12, 2012 2:32 PM PST up reply actions  

Darren just said

the vote to extend Bud’s contract was 29-1 with the only no vote being Moores…dayum

by SanDiegan247 on Jan 12, 2012 2:02 PM PST reply actions  

Good for him

They didn’t want him gone yet then good on him causing trouble. Good news is the approval seems certain if just delayed until March.

by athletics68 on Jan 12, 2012 2:06 PM PST up reply actions  

i guess the certain part depends

on how you read it. Moorad is spinning that its technical issues, Selig states there are economic concerns. The Sullivan article that Hormel linked to below does indicate it will still likely be approved, but it was also thought to be likely approved today, so you never know.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 2:39 PM PST up reply actions  

I hope this rumor is true

two reasons 1. it’s awesome to stick it to bud for delaying the ownership transfer. 2. Bud Selig sucks and it would be awesome to be fans of a team that acknowledges it.

by kevintheoman on Jan 12, 2012 2:46 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

good

article

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 2:03 PM PST reply actions  

Since they are on hold

Will they allow The Padres to conduct business and complete the television deal, or is that frozen until everything is resolved.

by field39 on Jan 12, 2012 2:10 PM PST reply actions  

That's what I was wondering

I would imagine we might have an idea tomorrow, since that was when the TV Deal was supposed to have been announced.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 2:40 PM PST up reply actions  

NO PADRES BASEBALL in 2012

season cancelled…we can all go back to complaining about the Chargers

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 3:02 PM PST up reply actions  

This is all so wierd.

Best case scenario: we get rid of Creepy Beardo and Moores sells to 1 person rather a consortium of hard-up millionaires.

Its obvious the other owners thought Moorad and co had gotten a loan of some sort which they could pay back with money they slowly suck out tv contracts and revenue sharing for the next few years. It would suck to have people who cannot afford it own the team for so many reasons.

Its not an unattainable dream to get some rich guy to run the team while putting some money in in the right situations as he knows his asset will appreciate. You don’t buy a team to run like a normal profit making business, as apparently the other owners aren’t cool with that anymore.

by lasers pew pew pew! on Jan 12, 2012 2:49 PM PST reply actions  

Given that Moorad and his group are already 49% invested

not counting their attempts here, what I see most likely is that He still stays in, and has to add to his group.

While its not an unattainable dream, it still is, most likely , a dream. Consider that many franchises now are owned by multiple people or a corporation or investment group, particularly newly purchased franchises, to dream of the philanthropic owner at this point, really is a dream.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 3:10 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Ok not ab owner who doesn't care how much he spends.

How about an owner (rather like Moores) who will answer a cash call when the team need it. Moorad wont even give out incentive laden contracts in case something goes RIGHT and a player actually performs. He can’t afford this team unless he sticks to this absurd business model where they are the cheapest team in the league.
The asset appreciates. Its a closed loop, there are 30 teams, its always going to rise in value, therefore you should be able to put money in. Also you get to OWN the San Diego Padres, I’d quite like that…

by lasers pew pew pew! on Jan 12, 2012 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

when your payroll is <50m

it makes sense to have some degree of cost certainty. I don’t think moorad is going to forego incentive based dead forever and without exception but I see his reasoning

by iheartyourfart on Jan 12, 2012 4:37 PM PST via Android app up reply actions  

From the article on The Padres page
This is the second time in the past three owners’ meetings that the sale of an MLB club has been pulled from the agenda prior to it moving forward for approval. In August at Cooperstown, N.Y., Jim Crane’s proposed purchase of the Astros from Drayton McLane was tabled so that MLB could gather more information about the group Crane assembled to execute the deal. It was placed back on the agenda and passed unanimously in November in Milwaukee after Crane agreed to move the Astros from the National League Central to the American League West effective with the 2013 season.

Selig said he envisioned the Moorad purchase to be quickly concluded and approval could be accomplished via conference call rather than have it wait for the next owners’ meetings in May in New York.

by field39 on Jan 12, 2012 3:31 PM PST reply actions  

oh god

he must want a dh

by iheartyourfart on Jan 12, 2012 4:38 PM PST via Android app up reply actions  

oh god

he’s holding out until the Padres get In-N-Out Burgers at Petco

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 12, 2012 5:30 PM PST up reply actions  

"oh God"

just bud selig talking to hinself

by iheartyourfart on Jan 12, 2012 9:29 PM PST via Android app up reply actions  

oH gOd

Bud Selig is a ho fo’ sho’

Ehhhh, I don't deserve a signature...

by sdchicken on Jan 12, 2012 10:23 PM PST up reply actions  

There is too much hate in this thread directed towards each other, when we should really be hating one person:

Jerry fcuking Reinsdorf and the D-Bag organization.

My balls, Jerry. You may suck them. Long and hard. You piece of $hit.

Guess what, D-Bags? I rubbed my taint on your coffee mugs. That’s what gives your morning cup of joe that “earthy aroma.”

Ehhhh, I don't deserve a signature...

by sdchicken on Jan 12, 2012 10:26 PM PST reply actions   2 recs

Your sentiment

makesme not want to point out that that is actually 2 people to be directing hate too! So I wont point that out. I am in complete agreement with you Chicken.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 12, 2012 10:51 PM PST up reply actions  

I say we hate three people

but I’ve hated Selig long before this incident

by kevintheoman on Jan 13, 2012 4:32 AM PST up reply actions  

I wouldn't let Jerry Suck my Balls

Sucking my balls is a privelage, that can only be granted to a select few.

"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"

by Ron Mexico on Jan 13, 2012 8:57 AM PST up reply actions  

The Morad Group doesn't improve the league

The Padres don’t need fan support. San Diego is flooded with opposing fans due to it being a military city with loads of transplants and a vacation destination. A familiar scenario occurs in Florida.

by DaMannua on Jan 13, 2012 8:39 AM PST reply actions  

You joined this Blog just to talk trash about the Padres?

I know I say a lot of mean things about my favorite team, but to just sign up real quick and make one sentence to talk crap. That’s kind of weak.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 13, 2012 10:22 AM PST up reply actions  

Are you talking to me now?

Cause I’ve been here for a while and I’m probably the biggest Padres fan in Belgium :)

by sixpakfrombelgium on Jan 13, 2012 10:47 AM PST up reply actions  

I cant definitively speak for Cubbuster

but I think he was talking to DaMannua.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 13, 2012 11:08 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I'm legitimately confused as to what DaMannua's point was

The last two sentences seem mostly unconnected with the first two. Is there an ownership group that would be a better for San Diego? What would be different about this hypothetical ownership group? What is meant by the padres not needing fan support? Do you believe effort be put into attracting more visiting fans?

by kevintheoman on Jan 13, 2012 12:31 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah , I don't get it either

the tone almost seems sarcastic about not needing fan support, but…that still doesn’t seem to have a point.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Jan 13, 2012 4:04 PM PST up reply actions  

that was definitely for Damannua

Sorry for the confusion

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Jan 13, 2012 4:54 PM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Yeah I thought so

just wanted to be sure. Just got to stay vigilant in representing Belgian Padres fan(s)

by sixpakfrombelgium on Jan 14, 2012 1:38 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Welcome!

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 13, 2012 11:50 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Excellent, Hormel!

Welcoming new commenters who can inject off-topic comments is the proper thing to do.

Going off on tangents is what we at GLB do best. We should always welcome new talent.

by wegotballsley on Jan 15, 2012 7:08 PM PST up reply actions  

you're welcome

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Jan 16, 2012 1:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Cognitively aware of the San Diego Padres since about 1980-1981... Fans since '76.
Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Kinghippo_small Dex

Untitled_small jbox

Faith Keeper

P1230002_small jodes0405