We are cheap, proven

[brianod]

Edward Bennett Williams bought the team in 1979. The Orioles subsequently set what was then a record for attendance for them at 1.681 Million (largely helped by the great 102-57 record that they had that season), and then broke it again the following season in 1980 at 1.797 Million (again, aided by another excellent season of 100-62.) The "The Birds are for Baltimore" campaign was right at that same time (1979 and 1980.)

The Colts didn't move to Indianapolis until March of 1984.

Thanks for the correction. I'm going on a very imperfect memory. That being said, during that time frame, there was rumbling about the Colts moving, there was definitely fear that we would lose the O's. My overall point is that ownership should always be held accountable by the fans. This is a simple, imperfect metric. But it is a starting point and if it is defensible, ownership owes it to the fans to defend it.

[brianod]

No. Not it is not. Especially when you have the Cardinals and Giants at the bottom. Your data doesn't show anything meaningful. Please move on.

If you choose to nit pick on the outliers, so be it. When Tampa, Minnesota, KC and Milwaukee make less profit then we do and spend more on their players percentage wise, you can choose to ignore it if you so choose. To me, it upsets me.

[OFFNY]

o

When EBW bought this team, there was widespread fear that it would be moved to Washington, much like the Bullets. The fans rose up and supported this team and saved it from that fate. This was after the Colts moved to Indy, and before the Ravens came to town. Fan involvement certainly matters. Holding ownership accountable matters. I "wasted" my Friday evening because I care. I cared twenty years ago and I still care today

Edward Bennett Williams bought the team in 1979. The Orioles subsequently set what was then a record for attendance for them at 1.681 Million (largely helped by the great 102-57 record that they had that season), and then broke it again the following season in 1980 at 1.797 Million (again, aided by another excellent season of 100-62.) The "The Birds are for Baltimore" campaign was right at that same time (1979 and 1980.)

The Colts didn't move to Indianapolis until March of 1984.

Thanks for the correction. I'm going on a very imperfect memory. That being said, during that time frame, there was rumbling about the Colts moving, there was definitely fear that we would lose the O's. My overall point is that ownership should always be held accountable by the fans. This is a simple, imperfect metric. But it is a starting point and if it is defensible, ownership owes it to the fans to defend it.

You're welcome.

I remember it well because even though I lived in Brewster, NY, I remember my mommy coming home and telling me that the city of Baltimore had put up "The Birds are for Baltimore" billboard signs throughout the city in response to the fact that the Orioles' new owner went to Georgetown Law School, and had numerous very strong ties to Washington, D.C...... hence, there were very real fears that he would move the team to Washington.

Coincidentally, that was the same year (1979) that was my mommy's first as an Oriole fan. She had previously been a lifelong Yankee fan, and she switched allegiances because she saw me crying when the Yankees won another World Series in 1978, and she didn't want me to be the only Oriole fan in the family.

[Crazysilver03]

If you choose to nit pick on the outliers, so be it. When Tampa, Minnesota, KC and Milwaukee make less profit then we do and spend more on their players percentage wise, you can choose to ignore it if you so choose. To me, it upsets me.

Hah. Thankfully I was on the toilet when I read this or else I would have soiled myself laughing.

You are upset about the team moving on from Miller and Cruz. Who had career years. Which are by definition outliers. So then, your argument about keeping them shouldn't be based on their outlier seasons.

[brianod]

Hah. Thankfully I was on the toilet when I read this or else I would have soiled myself laughing.

You are upset about the team moving on from Miller and Cruz. Who had career years. Which are by definition outliers. So then, your argument about keeping them shouldn't be based on their outlier seasons.

Not true. I'm upset the DD and Buck have not been given a chance to do everything they could have done to make this team as good as it could be. They were hamstrung by a budget that demands more profit then most.

[24fps]

Well then that is not sports talk. Let's start a revolution to change the main board to "Orioles Faith". Then we can all post about how much we love the O's, rainbows and butterflies too.

Unicorns. Not butterflies, unicorns... Rainbows and Unicorns.

It can't be sports talk if it has butterflies.

[VeveJones007]

All of this angst for a roster that's going to win the division. Relax.

[Crazysilver03]

Not true. I'm upset the DD and Buck have not been given a chance to do everything they could have done to make this team as good as it could be. They were hamstrung by a budget that demands more profit then most.

So you think they wanted Miller and Cruz back at the deals they signed. It isn't possible they didn't value them at what they got?

[brianod]

So you think they wanted Miller and Cruz back at the deals they signed. It isn't possible they didn't value them at what they got?

I have no idea. What I do know is that we would be better if we had 20 million more to spend and gave DD a better budget. I trust DD and Buck to spend wisely.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I have no idea. What I do know is that we would be better if we had 20 million more to spend and gave DD a better budget. I trust DD and Buck to spend wisely.

I doubt anybody would disagree with that. What now?

[Crazysilver03]

I have no idea. What I do know is that we would be better if we had 20 million more to spend and gave DD a better budget. I trust DD and Buck to spend wisely.

DD could have found the money to pay for Miller or Cruz or both if he really wanted to. So I assume he didn't want to bring them back at what they cost. Or else they probably would have been back.

[MurphDogg]

The idea that Forbes or anyone has any idea of what the Orioles profits are is laughable. The Orioles don't know what their profits are due to the still pending MASN lawsuit.

[Frobby]

The idea that Forbes or anyone has any idea of what the Orioles profits are is laughable. The Orioles don't know what their profits are due to the still pending MASN lawsuit.

This is a good point. Interestingly, if the RSDC decision is upheld, I think using Forbes' methodology the Orioles' profits on their face go up (because their rights fees have to be equal to the Nats'), while de facto their profits are going down (because Forbes doesn't include the team-owned RSN's profits in their numbers, to my understanding). Also, everything Forbes does is just their estimate, it's not like they see the teams' books.

That's one of the reasons I don't think brianod's number illuminate anything. And I guess I care about actually winning by spending intelligently more than I care about trying to win by spending a lot more in an unintelligent manner.

[EagleOriole]

It is the middle of May and our team is right where it needs to be to compete while sustaining massive injuries and players underperforming (Tillman, Pearce). Why must we continue to harp on this off-season? DD has a long term plan that is working, Showalter takes that plan and makes it happen. Be happy we are not being run by Jim Duquette or the other twits that ran our organization in the past.

[DrungoHazewood]

I doubt anybody would disagree with that. What now?

Just like we did in the sixties, we're takin' it to the streets! I know I'm willing to set aside my daily life and chain myself to some prominent structure in Baltimore until Angelos pledges to flatline Forbes' estimate of his profits and uses that to sign free agents.