Throwdown wrote:You said no need to revisit them until they're relevant again, it ain't gonna happen.
425HawkSpark wrote:Don't even start you bums. I know it's hard to be a mariners fan but for the die hards we will always hope the big turn is just around the next corner. As any of us would be for the hawks if they sucked.
Throwdown wrote:425HawkSpark wrote:Don't even start you bums. I know it's hard to be a mariners fan but for the die hards we will always hope the big turn is just around the next corner. As any of us would be for the hawks if they sucked.
Hawks never stood in the way of the Sports Scene taking 8 steps forward after falling 5 steps back a few years ago. Hawks deserve the love they have earned, M's? Not so much.
Largent80 wrote:Be a winner and talk Dodgers.
CALIHAWK1 wrote:Ownership is the biggest difference. PA doesn't like losing and does everything in his power to prevent it.
jkitsune wrote:CALIHAWK1 wrote:Ownership is the biggest difference. PA doesn't like losing and does everything in his power to prevent it.
Because Behring was so committed to winning.
-The Glove- wrote:They tried to sabotage my Sonics so screw them until Lincoln and Co. is gone. I'll always silently root for the team but the FO gets nothing from me.
Trrrroy wrote:The whole "the M's ownership doesn't care about winning" argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Up until the end of the Bavasi years they made sure the M's were consistently top 10 in payroll. You don't invest that much money into a team if you don't care about winning. Sure, they care about profits but winning equals profits. They know that, everyone knows that. They aren't dumb, they want to field a winning team if only to increase the teams profitability.
Sports Hernia wrote:That's debateable. They want to win at THEIR price and THEIR terms period, and not a penny more. Where was that "winning attitude" when Lou wanted another bat, when Seattle was on the cusp of going to the World Series in 2001, not to be found as the m's wallet was slammed shut right in their managers face.
Do you think the M's past 10 years of general suck was just dumb luck?????
Nope, it was inept ownership and an inept upper front office, see Chuck Armstrong and Howard Lincoln in particular! To believe otherwise is naive at best!
Trrrroy wrote:The whole "the M's ownership doesn't care about winning" argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Up until the end of the Bavasi years they made sure the M's were consistently top 10 in payroll. You don't invest that much money into a team if you don't care about winning. Sure, they care about profits but winning equals profits. They know that, everyone knows that. They aren't dumb, they want to field a winning team if only to increase the teams profitability.
425HawkSpark wrote:Don't even start you bums. I know it's hard to be a mariners fan but for the die hards we will always hope the big turn is just around the next corner. As any of us would be for the hawks if they sucked.
m0ng0 wrote:take a look at Paxtons and Walkers stats since they were called up, the mariners have a nice rotation next year!
It is currently Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:57 am