The Case Against the Sun-Times' Case Against the Tribune Co.
>> Friday
The Chicago Sun-Times has put "Tribune Co. on trial" for "ruining the Cubs." While this is a popular belief in Chicago, and who knows, it might even be true, this is the evidence the Sun-Times actually offered, taken apart here in classic YCS bold/not bold format.
Even though I haven't passed the bar yet, I have watched every episode of Boston Legal this season, thereby making me qualified to represent and defend the Tribune Company in this case before...ahem...the court.
It's the trial of the century in the Court of Public Opinion. Case No. 1908, the People of Chicago vs. Tribune Co. The charge: gross negligence and neglect in its ownership of the Chicago Cubs.
It's a slow news day! We need something to sell papers! That's the only reason this made it to page one! Or perhaps it's a hit job on our crosstown rivals in the publishing industry! Let's kick them while they're down! Yea!
The Sun-Times, representing Cubs fans everywhere, is filing a class-action suit and offers as evidence 98 consecutive years without a World Series victory, the last 26 under Tribune stewardship.
Yea! Those motherfuckers in Tribune Tower were not only responsible for the last 26 years the Cubs haven't won a title, but also the 72 years that preceded their purchase of the team in 1981! Fuck you!
The Sun-Times wants the team sold -- immediately. Tribune Co. has been derelict in its duty as custodian of one of the most cherished teams in American sports. Fans are suffering from emotional abuse and mental anguish. Four meager playoff appearances in more than a quarter-century of Tribune ownership are offered as proof. The Cubs have the longest World Series drought in baseball.
No shit I'll bet they want them sold. They're more or less the only part of Tribune company making a profit these days. And four meager playoff appearances in 26 years? Why that's just as many as the Cubs made in the previous 52 (1932, 1935, 1938,1945). So the Tribune has actually doubled the frequency of playoff appearances since taking control.
Some blame the Curse of the Billy Goat. Don't believe it.
Anyone with a brain? Anyone without a closet full of voodoo dolls?
Owning a baseball team, especially one as beloved as the Cubs, is a public trust. Current ownership has broken that trust. The only goat in this scenario, our complaint alleges, is Tribune Co.
Owning a baseball team apparently IS NOT a difficult business. Ignore that 12 other teams; some just as storied as the Cubs, have failed to win a World Series since Tribune took over (Tampa Bay, Cleveland, Texas, Seattle, Montreal/Washington, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Houston, Milwaukee, San Francisco, Colorado, San Diego) Of the 30 teams in Major League Baseball, only 7 teams have won multiple titles since Tribune purchased the Cubs.
Cubs fans are among the most loyal fans in any sport. They deserve better than a team synonymous with losing.
Objection! Speculation. While possibly true, there's no way to confirm that.
The Red Sox hadn't won a World Series since 1918 when they broke through in 2004. Long-suffering White Sox fans celebrated in 2005.
The Sox have made the playoffs just as many times ('83, '93, '00, '05) in the last 26 years as the Cubs ('84, '89, '98, '03). I'd like to cite precedence in the case of No one v. Jerry Reinsdorf (2007). Reinsdorf bought the White Sox in 1981, the same year as my client bought the Cubs. I don't see the Sun-Times arguing that Reinsdorf should sell the White Sox. Do 5 postseason victories really make the difference here? Or is being your cross-town rival in the newspaper business what really matters here?
The stars seemingly had aligned for the Cubs in 2006. It was their turn, and how did they respond? With a National League-worst 66 victories.
At this time, I'd like to enter defendant's Exhibit A-2006. A page from the Chicago Sun-Times 2006 Baseball Preview "The Cubs have no chance of winning that division. Injury-prone players don't suddenly become stable, and without Wood or Prior, that staff is below average. The division belongs to St. Louis, and Houston again will be strong." For once the Sun-Times is right.
The Cubs must be rescued from their own tortured history. Being a Cubs fan means bitter memories of the 1969 collapse, when the team was in first place for 155 days before falling apart down the stretch. At that time, the Cubs were owned by the Wrigley family.
Objection! Relevance. If the Cubs "Tortured History" happened under the Wrigley family, it's irrelevant to the current proceedings against Tribune Co.
Fans thought corporate ownership might be the answer after the franchise and ballpark had deteriorated the Wrigleys' rule. But it was evident after witnessing the horrors of the 1984 NL Championship Series that nothing had changed. The Cubs blew a 2-0 series lead, losing the final game when an easy ground ball inexplicably went through first baseman Leon Durham's legs.
It's the Tribune Company's fault that Leon Durham didn't field the ball?
That stunning series loss to the San Diego Padres set the tone for Tribune Co. ownership.
That and the renovation of the bleachers, increased capacity at Wrigley, the addition of lights and skyboxes, a revitalized North Side (largely due to people actually WANTING to go to Cubs games again), increased revenue streams and a level of popularity for the Cubs unseen in their history.
The biggest heartbreak of all came in 2003. The Cubs were five outs away from their first World Series appearance since 1945 when Steve Bartman reached to catch a foul ball in Game 6 of the NLCS and deflected it away from left fielder Moises Alou. The Cubs went on to lose their best chance to bring a title home to Wrigleyville.
It's Tribune Company's fault that Steve Bartman has long arms?
If that's not cruel and unusual punishment, what is?
Having to read this column? Oh wait...this isn't a column...THIS RAN ON THE FRONT PAGE!!!!!
The people have suffered enough. That's why this case will be tried in these pages over the coming days and weeks. We will present the case for the prosecution and the case for the defense, and then the Court of Public Opinion will render a verdict. Court is adjourned for a brief recess.
Indeed. They have. Recess? Good. Never come back, or at least never write again.
Posts
4 comments:
For being in court, you sure used a lot of profanity to make your case. What do they call that? Contempt of court? It's been a while since I've seen My Cousin Vinny.
"Mr. Simpson, don't you worry. I watched Matlock in a bar last night. The sound wasn't on, but I think I got the gist of it."
I'll take any opportunity to throw in Lionel Hutz quotes "Mr. Simpson the state bar prohibits me from promising you a big cash settlement, but just between you and me, I promise you a big cash settlement."
On to the point, I agree with you that Tribune Co's stewardship hasn't been that bad...for Tribune Co. Other than giving Cubs fans that idiotic "we're better because we have higher attendance" argument I don't see how the Cubs succeeding as a business is beneficial to Cubs fans. As long as the franchise is doing well enough to not shut down or go to another city is all the fans care about.
The only real problem I see with the Cubs' ownership(at least with regard to this issue, they're also awful awful people) is that I see them choosing attendance over victories. Take this offseason. The moves the Cubs made were a reaction to the empty park they faced in August and September. Rather than doing the right thing(blowing up this pack of losers and starting over) Tribune did the profitable thing. Cubs fans are dumb enough to think that big free agent signings will push the Cubs into contention, which is just stupid. The Cubs had the 15th best offense in the NL and the 15th best defense in the NL, they have so many problems that they're probably 5-7 impact players away from the playoffs. In other words this isn't the Yankees looking for one signing to push them over the top. Rather than trading Lee, letting Ramirez and Wood go, and signing moderately priced free agents the Cubs decided they would rather just make headlines every single day. The Royals are another team that finished at the bottom of their league in both hitting and pitching, if I gave you 136 million to fix the Royals would you blow it all on a single player? The result though is that the Cubs are getting more hype and their silly fans actually think they have a good team. The result? Sold out season.
Compare this to Reinsdorf who you could tell was always burning for a title. When Reinsdorf was handed the trophy in 05 he wept openly for his first title since his 55 Dodgers shocked the world despite not being the most popular in their own city. Despite all the money Jordan brought him he said the Sox title meant more than all 6 Bulls titles together. I question a lot of Jerry's decisions, I never question whether his heart is in the same place as mine. Although the Cubs will never win a title, something tells me that if they did noone from Tribune would be crying as the trophy was handed over. They would be thinking of how much money they were going to make off of those ugly blue shirts that would now sell off the shelves.
Corcoran
I don't disagree with Hendry's decision to retain the legit studs(Ramirez, Lee), but on the whole, your point is well taken. This certainly wasn't a team one impact player away from a title, and anyone who thinks so is fooling themselves. Also keep in mind that the non-Ramirez/Soriano money was spent on sheer mediocrity/crap.
You make a good point on Reinsdorf. Part of showing he cares about his team is having faith in his GM and letting him deconstruct and reload, as he's let Kenny Williams do this offseason. That's impressed me. They could have very well turned into the Mets--that is, signing guys just to keep up with the headlines of their crosstown rival. But fotunately for Sox fans, Reinsdorf has always had more foresight than people give him credit for.
Sox fans may miss Freddy Garcia right now, or they may miss Thome if he gets traded this year, but they'll thank Reisdorf a few years from now. When he signed Albert Belle in '97, for instance, he had what seemed like an excellent team in tact, and Belle looked to be that one impact player to put them over the top. In hindsight, it didn't work out, but he was smart enough to admit failure and deconstruct. The Cubs will never do that unless they get a private, individual owner who sees the team as a more substantial investment.
Post a Comment