Florida Marlins statement regarding today's announcement by the University of Miami

 

"The Florida Marlins remain focused on building a retractable-roof baseball-only facility in South Florida. We will continue to work diligently with both Miami-Dade County and the City of Miami on this partnership. The urgency of this situation has been further crystallized by today's decision by the University of Miami."

:pray

:pray

:pray :pray :pray :pray :pray

 

:wave :wave :wave :wave :wave :wave :wave

 

:gofisht :gofishb :gofish :gofishb :gofisht

 

:marlins

Big F'in deal. Stop stroking me.

Non-news.

 

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

 

MLB's going to have to do something, with that wonderful "in the best interests of baseball" clause. I can think of several courses of action, all of which would be precedent setting, none of which would be tremendously opposed by any of the revenue sharing donating owners.

Non-news.

 

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

 

MLB's going to have to do something, with that wonderful "in the best interests of baseball" clause. I can think of several courses of action, all of which would be precedent setting, none of which would be tremendously opposed by any of the revenue sharing donating owners.

 

Would he have the balls to do it, though? This is a club/fraternity, and that sort of thing usually isn't done.

Yes, It's non-news, but it's nice to know The Marlins are kinda on top of things. We'll see how this plays out, hopefully for the best.

Non-news.

 

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

 

MLB's going to have to do something, with that wonderful "in the best interests of baseball" clause. I can think of several courses of action, all of which would be precedent setting, none of which would be tremendously opposed by any of the revenue sharing donating owners.

 

Would he have the balls to do it, though? This is a club/fraternity, and that sort of thing usually isn't done.

 

I don't think you'd even necessarily need to do what you're implying (as in, force Loria out).

 

What I'd think could be done is this:

 

Let's say the Marlins receive $41 million annually from MLB revenue sharing. If the Marlins are in Pro Player indefinitely it's reasonable to assume that with the lease untenable, the revenue sharing would then continue indefinitely. So, let's just throw out a safe figure of 2015. 8 more seasons of revenue sharing until the Marlins end up saying enough is absolutely enough and move to Raleigh or where ever the new metropolitan population relocates (it'd almost have to be North Carolina with the way property values are there, but that's beside the point).

 

So, 8 seasons at around $41 million a season gives the Marlins a "MLB cost" of $328 million. That is, owners are going to have to subsidize the Marlins $328 million over the next 8 seasons. Let's then assume that regardless of what happens tomorrow, the new facility cannot be opened until 2011. That means the Marlins would still be owed 3 seasons of revenue sharing meaning regardless of whether or not a new stadium is opened, the Marlins will cost MLB $123 million over the next 3 seasons.

 

Here's my proposal, if the Marlins are in a new ballpark by 2011 and in a lucrative situation in a market that should by all means support a team, MLB can "save" itself $205 million by getting the Marlins in the ballpark. If the Marlins and the state are $60 million apart "ITBIOB" it and make a special one time loan to a charity case like the Marlins. Make the loan interest fee, but repayable in full by no later than April 5 2015 (or whenever MLB starts their fiscal clock ticking). Even by making the loan, they still save $145 million.

 

It does a few thing, it forces the Marlins, MLB and Miami to say that they have to make it work in Miami. They have to make it lucrative in Miami, and it saves the league and other owners money by getting the Marlins a ballpark. Eventually, if Miami is the panacea that it's meant to be, this is a no lose situation for the Marlins. They get into the cash making mode quicker, so they win, the team starts paying into the system rather than taking from the system, so MLB wins, and Miami has a "downtown revitalization" (even if I think that's a bunch of hooey, the powers that be believe it) so Miami wins.

 

It's a no lose, and all it takes is "in the best interests of baseball."

Non-news.

 

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

 

MLB's going to have to do something, with that wonderful "in the best interests of baseball" clause. I can think of several courses of action, all of which would be precedent setting, none of which would be tremendously opposed by any of the revenue sharing donating owners.

 

Would he have the balls to do it, though? This is a club/fraternity, and that sort of thing usually isn't done.

 

I don't think you'd even necessarily need to do what you're implying (as in, force Loria out).

 

What I'd think could be done is this:

 

Let's say the Marlins receive $41 million annually from MLB revenue sharing. If the Marlins are in Pro Player indefinitely it's reasonable to assume that with the lease untenable, the revenue sharing would then continue indefinitely. So, let's just throw out a safe figure of 2015. 8 more seasons of revenue sharing until the Marlins end up saying enough is absolutely enough and move to Raleigh or where ever the new metropolitan population relocates (it'd almost have to be North Carolina with the way property values are there, but that's beside the point).

 

So, 8 seasons at around $41 million a season gives the Marlins a "MLB cost" of $328 million. That is, owners are going to have to subsidize the Marlins $328 million over the next 8 seasons. Let's then assume that regardless of what happens tomorrow, the new facility cannot be opened until 2011. That means the Marlins would still be owed 3 seasons of revenue sharing meaning regardless of whether or not a new stadium is opened, the Marlins will cost MLB $123 million over the next 3 seasons.

 

Here's my proposal, if the Marlins are in a new ballpark by 2011 and in a lucrative situation in a market that should by all means support a team, MLB can "save" itself $205 million by getting the Marlins in the ballpark. If the Marlins and the state are $60 million apart "ITBIOB" it and make a special one time loan to a charity case like the Marlins. Make the loan interest fee, but repayable in full by no later than April 5 2015 (or whenever MLB starts their fiscal clock ticking). Even by making the loan, they still save $145 million.

 

It does a few thing, it forces the Marlins, MLB and Miami to say that they have to make it work in Miami. They have to make it lucrative in Miami, and it saves the league and other owners money by getting the Marlins a ballpark. Eventually, if Miami is the panacea that it's meant to be, this is a no lose situation for the Marlins. They get into the cash making mode quicker, so they win, the team starts paying into the system rather than taking from the system, so MLB wins, and Miami has a "downtown revitalization" (even if I think that's a bunch of hooey, the powers that be believe it) so Miami wins.

 

It's a no lose, and all it takes is "in the best interests of baseball."

Nice, but it can't work-why?-it makes too much sense, that's why.

Non-news.

 

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

 

MLB's going to have to do something, with that wonderful "in the best interests of baseball" clause. I can think of several courses of action, all of which would be precedent setting, none of which would be tremendously opposed by any of the revenue sharing donating owners.

 

Would he have the balls to do it, though? This is a club/fraternity, and that sort of thing usually isn't done.

 

I don't think you'd even necessarily need to do what you're implying (as in, force Loria out).

 

What I'd think could be done is this:

 

Let's say the Marlins receive $41 million annually from MLB revenue sharing. If the Marlins are in Pro Player indefinitely it's reasonable to assume that with the lease untenable, the revenue sharing would then continue indefinitely. So, let's just throw out a safe figure of 2015. 8 more seasons of revenue sharing until the Marlins end up saying enough is absolutely enough and move to Raleigh or where ever the new metropolitan population relocates (it'd almost have to be North Carolina with the way property values are there, but that's beside the point).

 

So, 8 seasons at around $41 million a season gives the Marlins a "MLB cost" of $328 million. That is, owners are going to have to subsidize the Marlins $328 million over the next 8 seasons. Let's then assume that regardless of what happens tomorrow, the new facility cannot be opened until 2011. That means the Marlins would still be owed 3 seasons of revenue sharing meaning regardless of whether or not a new stadium is opened, the Marlins will cost MLB $123 million over the next 3 seasons.

 

Here's my proposal, if the Marlins are in a new ballpark by 2011 and in a lucrative situation in a market that should by all means support a team, MLB can "save" itself $205 million by getting the Marlins in the ballpark. If the Marlins and the state are $60 million apart "ITBIOB" it and make a special one time loan to a charity case like the Marlins. Make the loan interest fee, but repayable in full by no later than April 5 2015 (or whenever MLB starts their fiscal clock ticking). Even by making the loan, they still save $145 million.

 

It does a few thing, it forces the Marlins, MLB and Miami to say that they have to make it work in Miami. They have to make it lucrative in Miami, and it saves the league and other owners money by getting the Marlins a ballpark. Eventually, if Miami is the panacea that it's meant to be, this is a no lose situation for the Marlins. They get into the cash making mode quicker, so they win, the team starts paying into the system rather than taking from the system, so MLB wins, and Miami has a "downtown revitalization" (even if I think that's a bunch of hooey, the powers that be believe it) so Miami wins.

 

It's a no lose, and all it takes is "in the best interests of baseball."

Nice, but it can't work-why?-it makes too much sense, that's why.

That proposal specifically really doesn't make sense. If it were only that simple. It's not. But the general thought that MLB will invoke the "best interest of baseball" clause is a sound one. In fact, IMO, it's our only hope, as long as we have the present ownership.

Non-news.

 

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

 

MLB's going to have to do something, with that wonderful "in the best interests of baseball" clause. I can think of several courses of action, all of which would be precedent setting, none of which would be tremendously opposed by any of the revenue sharing donating owners.

 

 

Nice comment, but where was he going to put the stadium??? The OB site is the first positive move towards a new ballpark...

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

I thought it was the politicians who have done the most damage....how far as the Marlins stadium deal gotten, only for the politicians to kill it? And if you're going to blame management, I'd blame Samson more than Loria.

 

And besides, John Henry couldn't get a stadium deal done either....isn't that why he left (or at least a major part of it)?

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

I thought it was the politicians who have done the most damage....how far as the Marlins stadium deal gotten, only for the politicians to kill it? And if you're going to blame management, I'd blame Samson more than Loria.

 

And besides, John Henry couldn't get a stadium deal done either....isn't that why he left (or at least a major part of it)?

Henry was offered the opportunity to buy the Red Sox as well. Own the Marlins....or Own the Red Sox? Gee, what a difficult decision!

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

I thought it was the politicians who have done the most damage....how far as the Marlins stadium deal gotten, only for the politicians to kill it? And if you're going to blame management, I'd blame Samson more than Loria.

 

And besides, John Henry couldn't get a stadium deal done either....isn't that why he left (or at least a major part of it)?

Henry was offered the opportunity to buy the Red Sox as well. Own the Marlins....or Own the Red Sox? Gee, what a difficult decision!

Specifically the state politicians. State money has died in the Legislature the past two consecutive years.

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

I thought it was the politicians who have done the most damage....how far as the Marlins stadium deal gotten, only for the politicians to kill it? And if you're going to blame management, I'd blame Samson more than Loria.

 

And besides, John Henry couldn't get a stadium deal done either....isn't that why he left (or at least a major part of it)?

Henry was offered the opportunity to buy the Red Sox as well. Own the Marlins....or Own the Red Sox? Gee, what a difficult decision!

Specifically the state politicians. State money has died in the Legislature the past two consecutive years.

 

 

try like the last six years or so maybe even more

Deal would have been done years ago if Loria negotiated in good faith.

I thought it was the politicians who have done the most damage....how far as the Marlins stadium deal gotten, only for the politicians to kill it? And if you're going to blame management, I'd blame Samson more than Loria.

 

And besides, John Henry couldn't get a stadium deal done either....isn't that why he left (or at least a major part of it)?

Henry was offered the opportunity to buy the Red Sox as well. Own the Marlins....or Own the Red Sox? Gee, what a difficult decision!

Specifically the state politicians. State money has died in the Legislature the past two consecutive years.

 

 

try like the last six years or so maybe even more

I'm referring to the last two specifically, since it passed in one chamber and died due to the session ending before it was taken up in the other. I remember those vividly.