PDA

View Full Version : Miami Marlins



cinreds21
07-12-2011, 10:39 PM
Ok, this really made me mad. Joe Buck mentioned about the Marlins name change from Florida to Miami. Ok, it started trending on Twitter. Most of the people did not know of this change; a change that has been announced for at least three years now. I just can't believe how bad some fans are and don't know anything other than "their" team. Well, some don't even know that.

So, my question is, did you know about the change, and do you agree with my frustration?

George Anderson
07-12-2011, 10:45 PM
.

So, my question is, did you know about the change, and do you agree with my frustration?

no and no

oneupper
07-12-2011, 10:55 PM
yes and don't understand.
You're frustrated about the name change? Or because people didn't know about it?

thatcoolguy_22
07-12-2011, 11:00 PM
The only time I pay attention to the Marlins is the week before the trade deadline.

cinreds21
07-12-2011, 11:01 PM
yes and don't understand.
You're frustrated about the name change? Or because people didn't know about it?

The latter. I'm frustrated because so many people are oblivious to something that has been announced for over two years now.

And Edbabbs, it takes place next year.

edabbs44
07-12-2011, 11:01 PM
Huh? This is from their website

The Official Site of the Florida Marlins

edabbs44
07-12-2011, 11:02 PM
Oh future change...got it

RBA
07-12-2011, 11:03 PM
There new stadium is going to be Capacity: 37,000?

Maybe they will get a couple sellouts a year?

RBA
07-12-2011, 11:05 PM
How about the Los Angeles Marlins of Miami?

dougdirt
07-12-2011, 11:09 PM
How about the Los Angeles Marlins of Miami?

I hate facebook because I am upset that I can't "like" this. :laugh:

KronoRed
07-12-2011, 11:12 PM
I knew about it, I think it's a silly change and it doesn't surprise that people didn't know, it doesn't revolve around the Red Sox or yankees.

savafan
07-12-2011, 11:18 PM
There new stadium is going to be Capacity: 37,000?

Maybe they will get a couple sellouts a year?

I wouldn't bet on it. They've only averaged 17,000 a game this year and have closed the upper deck for the rest of the season.

Loria is kind of a cancer to MLB organizations.

Brutus
07-12-2011, 11:20 PM
I knew about it the day the ballpark plans were announced as approved.

I kind of thought it was well known, but I see that it wasn't :D

cinreds21
07-12-2011, 11:27 PM
I knew about it the day the ballpark plans were announced as approved.

I kind of thought it was well known, but I see that it wasn't :D

Same here. Guess not. What "troubles" me more is the false perception most people have on the Marlins. As soon as the Marlins trade one player fans mock them, calling it a fire sale. That, or people continuously knock them by saying something to the effect of "oh, well they'll just trade him in a year or two."

oneupper
07-12-2011, 11:30 PM
Don't understand why this upsets you, 21.
Being a Fan isn't a profession. You don't have to be GOOD at it.
Or in the know. Or even up to date.
That's the nice thing. Fans get to choose how much time and effort they put into their "fandom".

Brutus
07-12-2011, 11:30 PM
Same here. Guess not. What "troubles" me more is the false perception most people have on the Marlins. As soon as the Marlins trade one player fans mock them, calling it a fire sale. That, or people continuously knock them by saying something to the effect of "oh, well they'll just trade him in a year or two."

They probably deserved that reputation previously. But the terms of the new ballpark lease are so extraordinarily better than the one they had under Huzienga that financially they'll be much more flexible with payroll. They anticipate having the ability to close the roof and have a better base to draw from as far as fans that they'll draw significantly better. That remains to be seen, but I read that the new park alone will free up an additional $20-25 million a year in payroll flex thanks to concessions, parking and other monies they were losing due to their lease.

KronoRed
07-12-2011, 11:33 PM
Same here. Guess not. What "troubles" me more is the false perception most people have on the Marlins. As soon as the Marlins trade one player fans mock them, calling it a fire sale. That, or people continuously knock them by saying something to the effect of "oh, well they'll just trade him in a year or two."

I wish my favorite team had two shiny world series trophies in the last 14 years to go along with fire sale accusations.:D

mth123
07-12-2011, 11:33 PM
Now that you mention it, I remember hearing some talk about it a while back, but wasn't aware that it was official. So why are you upset that people don't know? I don't remember this being more than a footnote and recall it mostly as a procedural thing as a part of the deal to get the new ballpark. I certainly don't remember an anouncement amid a bunch of fanfare. I can't really imagine that fans of the team give a darn about the name or whether people in the midwest are all that conscious of something that really hasn't even happened yet.

So, no I didn't know for sure and no I don't care about it.

cinreds21
07-12-2011, 11:36 PM
They probably deserved that reputation previously. But the terms of the new ballpark lease are so extraordinarily better than the one they had under Huzienga that financially they'll be much more flexible with payroll. They anticipate having the ability to close the roof and have a better base to draw from as far as fans that they'll draw significantly better. That remains to be seen, but I read that the new park alone will free up an additional $20-25 million a year in payroll flex thanks to concessions, parking and other monies they were losing due to their lease.

Right. And I understand why fans have that stigma against the Marlins. However, if they paid any bit of attention, they would 1) understand why the Marlins have done what they've done in the past. And 2) Know that things are changing. Hence the long-term deals to Hanley Ramirez, Ricky Nolasco and possibly Anibal Sanchez in the off-season. People's ignorance is what gets me the most. It's hard to defend them because people just don't care nor believe me and continue on obliviously.

Brutus
07-12-2011, 11:39 PM
Right. And I understand why fans have that stigma against the Marlins. However, if they paid any bit of attention, they would 1) understand why the Marlins have done what they've done in the past. And 2) Know that things are changing. Hence the long-term deals to Hanley Ramirez, Ricky Nolasco and possibly Anibal Sanchez in the off-season. People's ignorance is what gets me the most. It's hard to defend them because people just don't care nor believe me and continue on obliviously.

I don't know if I go so far to justify it. They're taking in a killing in revenue sharing. Forbes has said on a few occasions that the Marlins have been one of the most profitable teams in baseball. So if that's even halfway true, they can't really justify for selling off the number of players they have (twice). I agree that the Marlins have changed their ways the last few years, but they've been bringing in a lot of revenue from the sharing agreements and investing very little back into payroll.

mth123
07-13-2011, 12:15 AM
I'm having a hard time seeing the connection between the name change and the bahavior of the Marlins front office. How does the fact that people aren't real conscious of a change in the Marlins name that hasn't taken place yet have anything to do with people accusing the Marlins of raking in profits and skimping on the team's roster (if that is what you are saying, the underlying basis of your frustration still isn't all that clear)?

By the way, didn't the Marlins. as recently as November, deal off their squarely in his prime second baseman who had an .877 OPS in 2010 with 33 HR and 105 RBI, is the franchise all time HR leader and is high on the list in most offensive categories to a Division rival for a utility infielder and a middle reliever because they didn't want to pay him? Seems more in line with the underlying issue that you are referring to than the name change.

cinreds21
07-13-2011, 12:21 AM
I'm having a hard time seeing the connection between the name change and the bahavior of the Marlins front office. How does the fact that people aren't real conscious of a change in the Marlins name that hasn't taken place yet have anything to do with people accusing the Marlins of raking in profits and skimping on the team's roster (if that is what you are saying, the underlying basis of your frustration still isn't all that clear)?

By the way, didn't the Marlins. as recently as November, deal off their squarely in his prime second baseman who had an .877 OPS in 2010 with 33 HR and 105 RBI, is the franchise all time HR leader, is high on the list in most offensive categories for a utility infielder and a middle reliever because they didn't want to pay him? Seems more in line with the underlying issue that you are referring to than the name change.

What my beef is that people don't know about a change that has been in place for multiple years now and they are just now realizing it. The front office and fans perspective is a separate thing with me. I initially made this thread with the intention of explaining how shocked I was that so many people did not know of this change. Then it turned into the other.

As for Uggla. They were going to keep him. They offered Dan a four-year deal but Uggla wanted a five-year deal. They went back and forth with both sides not budging. Once the Marlins knew for sure that Uggla wouldn't sign for anything less than the five-year, $62 he wanted, they thought the best move for them was to trade him. As for the return, not what I wanted nor expected. I didn't think Infante would replicate his 2010 season (and he has not) but he's played stellar defense. Dunn has had a lot of good points this season and has struggled at times too. It's not the best return the Marlins could have received for Uggla, but it's definitely not the worse.

REDREAD
07-13-2011, 12:36 AM
I guess you really can't expect a casual fan of baseball to remember something like that which was announced 3 years ago.

That's like expecting Marlin fans in 2001 to remember that we were going to name our new park the GAB. Until the name change actually happens, no one is really going to care (other than Marlin fans).

cumberlandreds
07-14-2011, 07:39 AM
I think I remember hearing about this. No matter what they call them I will always say the Florida Marlins. Just like I always refer to the Angels as the California Angels Old habits are hard to break.
They could be the Miami Marlins of South Florida. :)

Big Klu
07-15-2011, 03:45 AM
I think I remember hearing about this. No matter what they call them I will always say the Florida Marlins. Just like I always refer to the Angels as the California Angels Old habits are hard to break.
They could be the Miami Marlins of South Florida. :)

I still inadvertently slip a "Baltimore Colts" and "Los Angeles Rams" into the conversation now and then.

"Miami Marlins" will be easy to get used to, though. But they should bring back the teal caps as alternates. :D

cumberlandreds
07-15-2011, 08:00 AM
I still inadvertently slip a "Baltimore Colts" and "Los Angeles Rams" into the conversation now and then.

"Miami Marlins" will be easy to get used to, though. But they should bring back the teal caps as alternates. :D

Oh I do too. I still say the Oakland Raiders too. Whoops... they are back in Oakland, right? :)

The Voice of IH
07-15-2011, 01:21 PM
Ok, this really made me mad. Joe Buck mentioned about the Marlins name change from Florida to Miami. Ok, it started trending on Twitter. Most of the people did not know of this change; a change that has been announced for at least three years now. I just can't believe how bad some fans are and don't know anything other than "their" team. Well, some don't even know that.

So, my question is, did you know about the change, and do you agree with my frustration?

You must have a pretty awesome life if that is what you are worried about.

WebScorpion
07-16-2011, 02:47 AM
I think the real question is 'Do You Care?' and the answer is a resounding NO. I had heard about it, but your original post was worded so oddly that I thought it had already occurred which WOULD have surprised me. I also don't care whether other people knew about it or not...you must have some OCD in you somewhere. :eek: Yikes!

cincinnati chili
07-16-2011, 12:52 PM
I knew about it, and I'm not surprised that the City of Miami insisted on it given the money that it's putting toward the new park.

From the city's point of view, hopefully the city's lawyers dotted their Is and crossed their Ts so that the team can't change its mind back to "Florida" in a few years. I always thought that what Arte Moreno did to the City of Anaheim (changing the name to LA) was kinda sleazy, but apparently the agreement with the city wasn't clear enough, and the city was unable to legally prevent him from doing it.