What, if anything - would it take for your to forgive Peter Angelos

[Mad Mark]

The thing we miss as we sit here and complain about Angelos, is how few good baseball owners there are. The Orioles haven't had one since the 1970s! (Eli Jacobs might have become one, had other things not gotten in the way.) Angelos can be blamed for not arresting the rot in the farm system, but it didn't start under his watch. He certainly can't be blamed for baseball's archaic, topsy-turvy Rube-Goldberg mess of a revenue distribution system.

Yes, in the past, he hired (and/or fired) the wrong people, and he (and his wife and sons) have meddled where he had no business meddling. But what's done is done, and it appears that he's backed away (at least somewhat), and is letting MacPhail do his job.

If Peter Angelos finally gets it, I'll say "great"! It's too bad it took him so long (it seems like 10 years is the normal owner learning curve), but at least he finally got there. If he can stay there, perhaps his ultimate legacy will be positive.

BTW, it's important to point out that the Orioles weren't going anywhere in 1993, no matter who bought the team. With Camden Yards one season old? What are you smoking, people???

[SilentJames]

I disagree. A WS erases everything. Sure, the negative Nellies will still harp on those losing seasons, but all anyone can say is "yeah, but he won a WS".

Even then it won't be ANGELOS' WS. We will have gotten there because of the moves that MacPhail made, even if we allow Angelos the credit of bringing AM in and getting out of the way.

Odds are he won't be around long enough to make up for the decade+ of losing. But if he goes in the next three seasons we will have to ask if he has left the Orioles in a better position to compete than they were in 1993? Maybe they will be better off, but ultimately his legacy would be the decade of losing.

[Orioles West]

Even then it won't be ANGELOS' WS. We will have gotten there because of the moves that MacPhail made, even if we allow Angelos the credit of bringing AM in and getting out of the way.

Odds are he won't be around long enough to make up for the decade+ of losing. But if he goes in the next three seasons we will have to ask if he has left the Orioles in a better position to compete than they were in 1993? Maybe they will be better off, but ultimately his legacy would be the decade of losing.

I think a World Series win heals a lot. And if we're willing to place all the blame for losing, than some credit has to be given when we start winning.

-Don

[BaltimoreTerp]

The thing we miss as we sit here and complain about Angelos, is how few good baseball owners there are. The Orioles haven't had one since the 1970s! (Eli Jacobs might have become one, had other things not gotten in the way.) Angelos can be blamed for not arresting the rot in the farm system, but it didn't start under his watch. He certainly can't be blamed for baseball's archaic, topsy-turvy Rube-Goldberg mess of a revenue distribution system.

Yes, in the past, he hired (and/or fired) the wrong people, and he (and his wife and sons) have meddled where he had no business meddling. But what's done is done, and it appears that he's backed away (at least somewhat), and is letting MacPhail do his job.

If Peter Angelos finally gets it, I'll say "great"! It's too bad it took him so long (it seems like 10 years is the normal owner learning curve), but at least he finally got there. If he can stay there, perhaps his ultimate legacy will be positive.

BTW, it's important to point out that the Orioles weren't going anywhere in 1993, no matter who bought the team. With Camden Yards one season old? What are you smoking, people???

As I said in the Preakness thread, anyone that thinks the Orioles, if they wanted, couldn't find their way out of their lease is fooling themselves. Just looking at sports over the past couple years should tell us that.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Even then it won't be ANGELOS' WS. We will have gotten there because of the moves that MacPhail made, even if we allow Angelos the credit of bringing AM in and getting out of the way.

Odds are he won't be around long enough to make up for the decade+ of losing. But if he goes in the next three seasons we will have to ask if he has left the Orioles in a better position to compete than they were in 1993? Maybe they will be better off, but ultimately his legacy would be the decade of losing.

I think that you are correct that a World Series championship wouldn't bring about forgiveness. However, it could be seen as redemption: he bought the team to win a championship for the city he loved, things didn't work out as planned, but after all of the time and mistakes he and the city finally gets their wish.

[SilentJames]

I think a World Series win heals a lot. And if we're willing to place all the blame for losing, than some credit has to be given when we start winning.

-Don

That is true, but when the history of his era gets written it will be the decade of losing he is remembered for.

The first thing that comes to mind when you think of Nixon? Watergate. Not opening up Communist China. Not the deft use of Real Politick to ease Soviet/ US tensions after Vietnam - it is Watergate.

The decade of losing and mismanagement is how Angelos will be remembered, he will not be around long enough to build a body of work to undo all of that.

And it is sad. Not just because of the losing, but because here is a guy who gets unfairly portrayed as some sort of cartoon super-villain. A real-life Snidely Whiplash or Simon Legree tying our hopes to the train tracks while he twirls his mustache laughing maniacally.

Yes, Angelos has made many mistakes, and yes he has been a poor owner and yes an unlikely miracle World Series win would go a long way to heal those wounds. But even with that his chapter in Orioles history has pretty much been written.

[Mad Mark]

As I said in the Preakness thread, anyone that thinks the Orioles, if they wanted, couldn't find their way out of their lease is fooling themselves. Just looking at sports over the past couple years should tell us that.

In 2009? Maybe. In 1993? No chance. No way. No how.

[NewMarketSean]

Even then it won't be ANGELOS' WS. We will have gotten there because of the moves that MacPhail made, even if we allow Angelos the credit of bringing AM in and getting out of the way.

Odds are he won't be around long enough to make up for the decade+ of losing. But if he goes in the next three seasons we will have to ask if he has left the Orioles in a better position to compete than they were in 1993? Maybe they will be better off, but ultimately his legacy would be the decade of losing.

Did Steinbrenner not get credit for the 1996 and 1998 WS Champs when they were largely a homegrown team?

Angelos will get credit if he's the owner of a WS team. Especially when looking back to see what his team was, and what he did to change that, which would have been getting out of baseball operations completely.

But I agree. Angelos is probably gone within 5 years and we'll be lucky to have a winning record in that time. So his legacy is what it is.

[cindyluvsbrady]

At least he did not take the home town team away from its fans inthe middle of the night. Maybe Angelos is not the best owner of a sports team, but he is far from the worst.

Can you imagine?

I would die:old5fan:

[TonySoprano]

BTW, it's important to point out that the Orioles weren't going anywhere in 1993, no matter who bought the team. With Camden Yards one season old? What are you smoking, people???

Someone gets it.

[DallasOsFan]

But short of selling the team and moving with his sons to Canada - is there anything that he could do for you to forgive him?

In a word, NO.

OK, I don't care if moves to Canada or Antarctica or the moon, or if he stays in Baltimore.

But if you ask me, getting the Orioles out of his hands is the only acceptable answer.

[glorydays]

Did Steinbrenner not get credit for the 1996 and 1998 WS Champs when they were largely a homegrown team?

Angelos will get credit if he's the owner of a WS team. Especially when looking back to see what his team was, and what he did to change that, which would have been getting out of baseball operations completely.

But I agree. Angelos is probably gone within 5 years and we'll be lucky to have a winning record in that time. So his legacy is what it is.

I wonder how Arizona now feels about Bidwell now that they made it to the Super Bowl?

[TonySoprano]

As I said in the Preakness thread, anyone that thinks the Orioles, if they wanted, couldn't find their way out of their lease is fooling themselves. Just looking at sports over the past couple years should tell us that.

They would never get a majority of the league owners to go along with such a move, even today. On what grounds would the Orioles use to get out of the lease? Declining attendance? Good luck with that. For example, Angelos was bought off from making the argument about the impact of the Nationals by the deal MLB gave him with MASN. The stewardship of the team did more to drive down attendance than other factors.

[BaltimoreTerp]

In 2009? Maybe. In 1993? No chance. No way. No how.

You all are getting too hung up on "1993". Last time I checked, a team doesn't have to be moved immediately upon purchase; they can leave whenever all of the legal and financial issues are worked out.

[RShack]

As I said in another thread, PA followed the same pattern as other guys who were successful in a different business and, for some unknown reason, believed they knew what to do with a baseball franchise.

• Steinbrenner bought the MFY's in 1973, spent money, and soon had some brief success. But it took nearly 20 years for him to butt-out enough for the franchise to become consistently good again. Steinbrenner presided over the longest period of MFY non-success since before they got Babe Ruth. But nobody blames him for that anymore. I bet many MFY fans don't even realize it's true.
  
• Ted Turner bought the Braves in 1976, and the Braves had a brief window of success a few years later. But during Ted's tenure they finished in last place many, many times, and it was 15 years before he had butted-out long enough for them to become consistently good. But Braves fans don't blame Ted for that long period of failure anymore. Instead, they remember him for the sustained period of success that followed, and many wish he would buy the team again.
  
• PA bought the O's late in the '93 season. He spent some money and soon had brief success, but it took him 14 years to figure out he needed to give the keys to somebody else. That overdue decision has not yet had time to produce a winner.

PA bought the Orioles when the O's were being auctioned off in NYC and, in doing so, finally returned ownership of the team to Baltimore. What he bought was a pre-ruined franchise, just like Steinbrenner and Turner had done, albeit one with a new ballpark. The Oriole Way had been destroyed years before PA. He then proceeded to do the same knucklehead thing that they did: he deluded himself into thinking he was a baseball know-it-all who could fix everything with his checkbook and his brain. Like the others, it took considerably more than a decade before it dawned on him that he needed to mostly butt-out and let somebody who has a clue about baseball run things.

Unlike Steinbrenner and Turner, PA is not a very compelling media-figure. He's not a particularly attractive or charismatic man, and he's not in the headlines making splashes about one thing or another. In general, he pretty much stays out of the spotlight. Clearly, that's way different than both Steinbrenner and Ted. Both of them are now considered by many fans of their respective teams as having been excellent owners. The fans of both ATL and the MFY's simply don't remember the many years of mediocrity and failure that Steinbrenner and Turner presided over. Instead, they remember the years of sustained success that followed. Whether sustained success by the Orioles can do that for the legacy of PA is unknown. All we know so far is that he went through the same knucklehead period they did before handing the keys to somebody who knows what the hell he's doing. It may be that the degree of AM's success will have a large role in determining how PA is viewed in the end, but there's just no way to know that now.