Why The Hatred Of Team Glazer’s Kickball Team?
April 18th, 2011
Periodically while Joe is at one of his favorite watering holes nursing a cold beer and taking ample time to gawk at Courtney the Bartender, Joe wonders why Bucs fans always have a knee-jerk reaction to Team Glazer’s English kickball team.
Bucs fans often wake up their significant other in the wee hours of the morning, screaming in the middle of the night at Team Glazer and their kickball team. It seems that whenever anything wrong happens to the Bucs, somehow, someway, angry Bucs fans begin cursing about the Team Glazer’s interest in a team that participates in a glorified Easter egg hunt.
Too predictably, when word leaked via Chicago radio that the Bucs would host the Bears in London this season (if there is a season), Bucs fans not only pointed the finger at the kickball team in question, but Bucs fans began surmising that the Bucs soon would call London home, and not One Buc Palace off of MLK Blvd. in Tampa.
Joe often wonders — when not distracted by Courtney the Bartender’s, um, features — why these same standards are not applied to Stan Kroenke?
The Rams owner, like Team Glazer, also owns an English kickball team. And Kroenke owns the Colorado Avalanche along with several minor league teams of insignificance. Joe has yet to read or hear one word that Kroenke is siphoning off funds or lacking attention to detail on the Rams because of his many other interests.
For reasons unknown, many Bucs fans believe an owner should never have any other outside business interests which is preposterous. When has a Redskins fan ever whined about Danny Snyder’s other business interests like Six Flags, which interestingly was run into the ground and into a bankruptcy court by the same derelict who ruined ESPN, Mark Shapiro.
Well, it seems not everyone is missing the boat on the unfair barbs thrown at Team Glazer. Bernie Miklasz of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, who has been friends with Joe for some 25 years, brought up this very subject recently.
The central question seems to be this: Will he spend money to acquire the elite pieces deemed necessary to put Arsenal back atop of the EPL table?
It’s roughly the same question Rams fans have about Kroenke as he begins his second season as the team’s majority owner.
With the NFL’s free-agent market shut down because of the labor dispute between the owners and players, it’s impossible to get an answer. But in a recent interview with Jim Thomas of the Post-Dispatch, Kroenke didn’t eliminate free-agent signings as a way to improve the roster but strongly reaffirmed his belief in the philosophy of building through the draft.
Well, well, well. Where have we heard this before?
Further, if there is any NFL team that would move to London, the Rams would be far, far more likely to move than the Bucs. Joe has yet to hear of or read a legitimate reason why Team Glazer would move the Bucs to London.
Also a funny thing is, along with Joe Robbie Stadium in south Florida and the Georgia Dome in Atlanta, whatever-the-hell the dome in St. Louis is called isn’t that much older than The CITS. The dome in St. Louis opened in 1995. The CITS opened in 1998.
The lease for the Rams in the dome expires in 2015 and it opens the door for the Rams to leave, per a 2008 Associated Press article.
To lure the Rams, civic leaders agreed to a deal requiring that the dome remains among the top quarter of all NFL stadiums. The next measuring date is 2015.
Starting in 2012, both the Rams and the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission can begin exchanging proposals on getting the dome to that elite status. If no deal is reached by 2015, the Rams have the option of ending the lease — and potentially moving.
Many observers believe the St. Louis dome ranks closer to the bottom of NFL stadiums. It has no expansive outdoor parking lot for tailgating, lacks a retractable roof and has been criticized for its sound system, lighting and for what some perceive as a sterile atmosphere.
Some have even written that the dome in St. Louis is already outdated.
So when people mock Joe for suggesting that, given the state of stadiums not much older than The CITS including Joe Robbie, the Georgia Dome and the dome in St. Louis which cannot get Super Bowls (the St. Louis dome is just three years older than The CITS), Joe is confident that sooner rather than later, NFL warden commissioner Roger Goodell will start squeezing the Tampa Sports Authority for an upgrade to The CITS or no more Super Bowls in Tampa.
In the meantime, when Joe hears about some Bucs fans screaming at Team Glazer for owning a kickball team, he wonders why Team Glazer is being singled out?
April 18th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
Joe, cmon seriously.
The bucs under dungy and mckay went from top of the league in payroll to 32nd right after manu was acquired. This isnt the case in st louis. The glazers didnt have the cash to buy manu, kroenke did. The glazer empire is being compromised by manu debt, this also isnt the case for kroenke. At this point a comparison cant be made.
April 18th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
Thomas 2.2:
Strange.
http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.com/article/20101223/CRED0701/101229947/nfl-team-exec-pays-highest-price-yet-at-elysian#axzz18wuqhuhB
April 18th, 2011 at 4:40 pm
1. I don’t think there will be a team in Europe anytime within the next decade.
2. I don’t care about the kickball team and, personally, don’t think their money issues has anything to do with the Bucs. I think the Bucs “frugalness” is because the Glazers lost their assss in the real estate market and decided it was a fine time to rebuild through the draft….. coincidentally of course.
Whatever, doesn’t matter. The rebuilding through the draft is paying off and working and in their history I have seen nothing that shows they have not been good owners.
Some would argue the low payroll for 5 years. I get that, but also think much of it is in fact a lack of top end draft picks worth resigning and the fact that the best players at that time were old (Galloway, Brooks, etc….). I am not making excuses for them, I just buy into their reasoning from a business standpoint more than the average fan.
I really think they should go after a DE in free agency this year because there are some good young ones.
April 18th, 2011 at 4:46 pm
I know that you know that 8 million is literally a drop in the bucket when you are dealing with billion dollar entities, and hundreds of million dollars of interest on the debt.
Your response is like saying that the average joe must be doing fine bc he can put gas in his car. I know that you feel it important to defend the glazers, but joe to act like they were not badly treating this market by lobbying for a foreign game and trying to conceal it from the public, then pressure the Times to remove the sentence about the glazers not wanting the community to know what they are doing is more of their deception. I hate deception and feel like they have epitomized deception since manu was acquired. The money dedicated to talent here has dried up, they also sold the worlds best soccer player, rinaldo, for cash. Things are tighter joe, buying condos isnt proof of anything.
April 18th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
I know you saw this from last summer:
http://www.football.co.uk/manchester_united/glazers__debt_more_than__1billion_312212.shtml
April 18th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
And dave:
If the glazers can make it work better financially, meaning get a better stadium deal and break their current lease, they will move this team to the moon on you.
They leveraged this communities love for this franchise to get a new stadium and a once-in-a-lifetime deal for revenues even in non-buc events. That is why they consent to USF games being played on their field leaving portions of the USF logo on the field for Sunday which looks horrible – they are scraping every penny. Yes, it is their right but I would like to see them apply it to talent.
All this build through the draft stuff is crap. Thye drafted a very bright young qb which makes all of the difference – the rest is no different from anyone els. When you strip the team of vets, and you remove the competition at positions between the rooks and vets, the vets make it on the field more quickly.
Save Freeman, what was their to brag about from 09 draft. Moore, MIller, Fulton, Biggers??? Last year, Williams, GRimm and Bliunt were good but Grimm was a 7th and blount a UFA.
April 18th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
I meant:
. . . the rooks make it
April 18th, 2011 at 6:23 pm
Good question… what’s to brag about from the 09 draft. Obviously start with the first round and Freeman, that’s a good start. Second round, the draft choice was traded for TE Kellen Winslow, which I think was a pretty good value for a 2nd round pick. We also have a serviceable starter in Miller (3rd), and a decent slot WR in Stroughter (7th), and pretty good nickel CB in Biggers (7th). We didn’t hit on Kyle Moore (although he’s still with the team, and has started some, even if not very effective) and Xavier Fulton. Looks like we hit on more than we missed. Our first two picks produced top talent, we did ok on one mid round pick (missed on 2), and got good value in the 7th round.
To add to the 09 season, you could also say we failed in free agency badly. Derrick Ward and Michael Clayton being the biggest signs of that. We did, however, get Tim Crowder and Michael Bennett during the season. Both have seen decent playing time, although both could be upgraded. Nothing was lost bringing them in, it cost the team nothing more than minor contracts. Ryan Purvis has made the most impact as an URFA from 09, and Huggins was also in that class, but hasn’t done much of anything.
Looks like the draft was much better than free agency that year. The moves during the season were better than the moves in the off-season.
April 18th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
thomas 2.2:
Oh, another Andy Green article. A trusted objective source.
April 18th, 2011 at 7:24 pm
Thomas 2.2:
Joe is not defending Team Glazer. Joe is just tired of the hypocrisy. Ever thing negative about the Bucs, it just has to do with that damned kickball team yet the same standards are rarely if ever applied to other NFL teams, as if no other NFL owner has outside business interests.
On no, the Bucs won 10 games last year, just how in the world can that be blamed on the friggin soccer team? There must be a way!
Hell, if Team Glazer owned only a lemonade stand and Donald Penn missed a block Joe’s convinced Bucs fans would blame the lemonade stand.
April 18th, 2011 at 7:35 pm
Just got this email from the bucs addressed to the season ticket holders
NFL’S INTERNATIONAL SERIES PARTICIPANTS ANNOUNCED
The Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Chicago Bears have been selected to take part in the NFL’s fifth annual International Series game, scheduled to be played on Sunday, October 23, in London’s Wembley Stadium at 1:00 p.m. ET (6:00 p.m. UK time). FOX will provide live television coverage in the United States.
“We are honored to be selected to participate in the NFL International Series for a second time,” said Buccaneers co-chairman Bryan Glazer. “We are looking forward to promoting Tampa Bay’s emerging young team on the world stage. We have the longest running fan club of any NFL team in the UK and look forward to seeing so many familiar faces from the Bucs UK fan club at the game.”
“Our past four games in London have demonstrated the tremendous passion for NFL football that exists in the UK,” said NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. “We hope by staging another extraordinary game at Wembley that we can continue to grow our existing fan base and attract even more new fans.”
With the Buccaneers-Bears game scheduled for London, any Buccaneers season ticket account that has paid-in-full will be refunded for the amount paid toward that game. Depending on the original payment method, such refunds will come in the form of a check for accounts paid by check or cash, and in the form of a refund to the credit card that made the payment for credit card charges. Any accounts currently using payment plans will have remaining payments adjusted to reflect the cost of 9 games instead of 10.
April 18th, 2011 at 8:15 pm
Good job team Glazer. It would have been a travesty otherwise… without the refund.
April 18th, 2011 at 8:41 pm
Joe here,
@Thomas 2.2 First, arguing with you is futile and the equivalent of trying to teach a 2-year-old Gruden’s playbook. But Joe will play along here again.
You wrote: “…but joe to act like they were not badly treating this market by lobbying for a foreign game and trying to conceal it from the public, then pressure the Times to remove the sentence about the glazers not wanting the community to know what they are doing is more of their deception”
First, Joe can’t imagine the Bucs burning up the St. Pete Times phone lines to change one word in a story that claimed the Bucs launched a campaign to the league for the England game. For such petty stuff, those phone calls aren’t made, unless Vince Naimoli is the owner. …Plus ,Mark Dominik himself on 620 WDAE on Saturday, and others in the organization off the record, were candid about the team’s eagerness to bring another game to England in the name of marketing the club on a bigger stage for the long term growth of the business and publicity for the young stars. So the “deception” you’re talking about is nuts.
Joe thought long and hard about the Bucs moving the game, including the fact that they play in the “Community INvestment Tax Stadium,” which could lead some to believe the Bucs have an obligation to play all its games here for the sake of the tax revenue the taxpayers were counting on.
However, the England game drives the Tampa Bay brand into the European market, which fuels a hell of a lot of tourism around here, and just on that alone, it’s probably a wash with the eventual economic impact in the region.
And wake up. EVERY professional sports team leverages a community’s love for its team to get a stadium. That’s how it rolls. IT’s not the Glazer’s fault that the politicians approved such an incredible lease that made the stadium unattractive to other events. …Those politicians got voted out, for hte most part, and Bill Poe was given a community award for shelling out a pile of money to fight the lease.
Regardless, that stadium has gotten 2 Super Bowls and a third is surely on the way. It was well worth the money, especially considering it was a tiny percentage of the 1/2 cent tax and tourists paid a nice pile of that share.
April 18th, 2011 at 9:20 pm
Also, nobody has mentioned this, but imagine the Buccaneer merchandising advantage in. Europe by establishing name recognition again and again over there.
It actually makes New York Yankee sense to get a foothold on the UK market with the Bucs name brand. Think of the added merchandising revenue.
And besides, its not like the Tampa fans living in their blue collar Tampa Port authority ship yard even matters in regards to the Glazers decision making. Tampa doesn’t have a market big enough to even get a vote.
April 18th, 2011 at 10:36 pm
Come one Joe- the Rams won’t be playing their 2nd meaningful game in another country in three years or alittle less than 10% of meaningful football spent overseas.
April 18th, 2011 at 10:52 pm
fanofkit:
You raise a valid point and Joe understands why fans would be angry at this move. The Bucs playing in London was not the focus of this post.
April 19th, 2011 at 12:37 am
thomas 2.2
That would be Ronaldo, not ‘rinaldo’. And in football – unlike ‘throwball’ – pretty much all player transactions are ‘for cash’.
As far as Man Utd’s financial health is concerned, despite Andy Green’s anguished protestations they are not, and never have been, in any financial difficulties. Their operating cashflow exceeds $150 million (revenues will exceed $450 million this year) which comfortably covers the $70 million interest on the outstanding debt. At the end of December the team had about $200 million in the bank. Last November the Glazers paid down $330 million in personal payment-in-kind debt associated with the purchase – about the same time Bryan was buying the condo – wow, where does the money come from, aren’t they broke?
Andy Green is a shill for Jim O’Neill, chief economist at Goldman Sachs and a United fan. Jim missed the opportunity to buy the club in 2005 and has been using Andy ever since in an attempt to damage the brand and engineer a bargain basement buyout. Unsuccessfully. Andy’s credibility at this point is close to zero. (Chief economist no longer, Jim was recently promoted – presumably a reward for his helping Goldmans sell those mortgage backed securities we’ve all become familiar with.)
April 19th, 2011 at 1:08 am
LOL
April 19th, 2011 at 8:24 am
You guys are so foolish. THe problem isnt that the bucs are playing in Londonm surely you are not this dense, it is that they lobbied for a second home game in three years after the deal was that it would be rotated around the league.
The Glazers are expecting more blackouts, wont cover any empty seats, and they wanted the $. THe cover-up was very telling, having Stroud remove some info from his article.
If you think that this about branding or marketing you are swallowing to much Glazeraide, this is about not being aboe to sell the stadium out because this market hasn’t bought into this team – and yes Joe despite 10 wins (from a record soft schedule).
April 19th, 2011 at 11:41 am
Thomas 2-2 is right- the Glazers are hedging their bets that the attendance will still be an issue. Lets be honest here- increasing our exposure to an overseas crowd that, lets face it, doesn’t like or care for football is a joke of a reason. Playing the game inLondon ensurres a nice influx of money for the Glazers and might serve as a peace offering for the Brits who we all know aren’t exactly lining up to join the Glazer Family fan club. The Tampa Bay areea has gotten a bad rap lately- an I believe undeservedly so. Attendance has been weak- yes. But lets look at the series of factors that led to this “perfect storm” of bad attendance-
#1 the economy- The entire nation has been gut punched but this area has been socked harded than just about every other. Unemployent has hovered at 12% or more for years now- and that stat is woefully under reported, as anyone who knows anything about the economy and how such stats are generated. And before anyone says “but other teams….” consider this- the New York Giants one of the most storried franchises in all of sports, in th richest market in all the world, opening a billion plus dollar stadium on national TV could not sell out their games thi year- even their home opener. Yes that is true- no they were not blacked out, because the unsld seats were club seats and do not count for blackout purposes.
#2 PSLs- As long as the PSLs were active there was a financial incentive to maintain the seats no matter how bad the product was. People can point to Detroit and say they sold out some or most of their games, but those people are still tied to the financial hitching post that NFL owners created.
# 3 The product- Let face it 3-13 stinks and that came on the heels of a monumental December collapse in 08. Besides which the star power had long ago began to dwindle. For some time now the team has been bland and uninspiring.
#4 The Media- Lets face it Cummings can wag his finger at the fans all he wants, but voices like his and Duemigs have bellyached for years now about the Glazers, about Gruden about the conspiracy charges of using the Bucs as an ATM to finance their English Kickball team. The local writers have never embraced the team warmly. Kaufman and Cumming in particular have had a field day questioning the motives of the Glazers, their character, even their personalities. In the St. Pete time Shelton and that other oaf make it a contest it seems to create the most inane insults to label the owners and coaches with. The writers are insulting hacks for the most part- in my hmble opinion. They use the shield of “impartiality” to attack and insult. These barrages of questions and charges take its toll on the psyche of the community. The complain about the empty seats but report only reasons to stay away.
April 19th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
Fanofkit: some salient points. Bottom line is there is no way to spin this as a positive for this community. The glazers are deceptive and shady. I hate the gestapo style business tactics.
April 19th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
Fanofkit is exactly right with all his points. The product quality issue is interesting. The Bucs have been through some pretty wild quality cycles even for sports teams – and sports teams cycles are wild the world over. Skipping over the downs and up of the earlier years, the six years before the Superbowl were a definite up: three 10+ win seasons, 4 playoff appearances, 10 games over .500. The Superbowl was the cherry on top. Now look at the six years after the Superbowl: one 10+ win season, two playoff appearances, 8 games under .500. Gruden oversaw a rapid degradation of the product after the Superbowl heights. It’s not surprising that, particularly with the lapsing of the PLS, fans voted with their feet. Hopefully the 3-13 season was – what’s the opposite of ‘a cherry on the top’? At least Raheem has had as many 10+ win seasons in his first two as Gruden had in his last six, so there may be light at the end of the tunnel.
April 19th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
thomas 2.2
“and yes Joe despite 10 wins (from a record soft schedule).”
You do realize that the Saints schedule was weaker than ours, don’t you. Because they played the 10-6 Bucs while we played the 11-5 Saints – the rest of the schedules were identical. Makes it hard to see how our schedule could be “record soft”. (And that’s saying nothing about the other 8 teams that Sagarin says had weaker schedules.)