I feel that if we attend the fewest games possible a positive change will come. I think we should hit Loria where it hurts, his pockets. Can you imagine how terrible the front office will feel if they have a super low attendance on Opening Day
Login to Account Create an Account
Attendance for the 2013 season
#1
Posted December 23, 2012 - 07:17 PM
#2
Posted December 23, 2012 - 07:38 PM
#3
Posted December 23, 2012 - 07:45 PM
Low attendance is part of the reason for the slash in payroll. Fans didn't show up in droves when the Marlins had a high payroll anyway.
What he said...
#4
Posted December 23, 2012 - 07:46 PM
I feel that if we attend the fewest games possible a positive change will come. I think we should hit Loria where it hurts, his pockets. Can you imagine how terrible the front office will feel if they have a super low attendance on Opening Day
I'm guessing they probably wouldn't care.
#5
Posted December 23, 2012 - 07:55 PM
- EricWiener, cdy_0513, Fishes on the Pond and 1 other like this
#6
Posted December 23, 2012 - 07:58 PM
#7
Posted December 23, 2012 - 08:18 PM
I have a feeling people didn't show up because we stank like a box of dirty socks
This.
- cdy_0513 and Fishes on the Pond like this
#8
Posted December 23, 2012 - 08:48 PM
- Fishes on the Pond likes this
#9
Posted December 23, 2012 - 09:55 PM
Low attendance is part of the reason for the slash in payroll. Fans didn't show up in droves when the Marlins had a high payroll anyway.
You don't gut a team after 3 months and then whine that nobody showed up. The fans are just a convienient scapegoat in this situation for Loria and Samson.
I would also add that it doesn't matter what the attendance is. Loria is going to bring in something like $60 million even before gate receipts thanks to revenue sharing and the new MLB TV deal that all teams are getting a cut of.
- EricWiener, Puma, squall and 2 others like this
#10
Posted December 23, 2012 - 10:07 PM
#11
Posted December 23, 2012 - 10:12 PM
The fans weren't showing up in masses before the trades.It doesn't matter. The difference in attendance and max capacity wasn't significant, especially in the first 3 months. Its a bs excuse.
#12
Posted December 23, 2012 - 10:27 PM
The fans weren't showing up in masses before the trades.It doesn't matter. The difference in attendance and max capacity wasn't significant, especially in the first 3 months. Its a bs excuse.
I don't think that anybody is saying that the team was gutted mid-season because of attendance.
Anyway, by the end of May their record was 29-22. They were drawing like 30,000 or so on the weekends and 24,000 in the middle of the week. I'd say that difference is significant. The Marlins weren't drawing well when the team was doing well.
#13
Posted December 23, 2012 - 10:40 PM
Attendance was definitely not the reason for the mid-season deals. Trades were made because the front office (rightfully) decided that roster wasn't going to be playoff bound. Besides, holding onto Anibal Sanchez would've been a big mistake as we found out with his new contract terms.
#14
Posted December 24, 2012 - 02:51 PM
Attendance was definitely not the reason for the mid-season deals. Trades were made because the front office (rightfully) decided that roster wasn't going to be playoff bound. Besides, holding onto Anibal Sanchez would've been a big mistake as we found out with his new contract terms.
Well, they never has plans with Anibal involved. Even if the team was gutted, he was the only sure bet to be dealt in July. I actually feel attendance wont be too bad. Half the fans didnt go for the team anyway, they went for the cool ballpark with good food and fun bars and those people will likely be back since some tickets are $3 on stubhub...
#15
Posted December 24, 2012 - 02:57 PM
Attendance was definitely not the reason for the mid-season deals. Trades were made because the front office (rightfully) decided that roster wasn't going to be playoff bound. Besides, holding onto Anibal Sanchez would've been a big mistake as we found out with his new contract terms.
Well, they never has plans with Anibal involved. Even if the team was gutted, he was the only sure bet to be dealt in July. I actually feel attendance wont be too bad. Half the fans didnt go for the team anyway, they went for the cool ballpark with good food and fun bars and those people will likely be back since some tickets are $3 on stubhub...
If they felt we would contend all of 2012, they would not have dealt Anibal.
#16
Posted December 24, 2012 - 03:00 PM
Well, they never has plans with Anibal involved. Even if the team was gutted, he was the only sure bet to be dealt in July. I actually feel attendance wont be too bad. Half the fans didnt go for the team anyway, they went for the cool ballpark with good food and fun bars and those people will likely be back since some tickets are $3 on stubhub...Attendance was definitely not the reason for the mid-season deals. Trades were made because the front office (rightfully) decided that roster wasn't going to be playoff bound. Besides, holding onto Anibal Sanchez would've been a big mistake as we found out with his new contract terms.
If they felt we would contend all of 2012, they would not have dealt Anibal.
Yes, if we were seriously in the hunt I agree completely. But even then they had zero intention of signing him long term after the season...
#17
Posted December 24, 2012 - 03:02 PM
Well, they never has plans with Anibal involved. Even if the team was gutted, he was the only sure bet to be dealt in July. I actually feel attendance wont be too bad. Half the fans didnt go for the team anyway, they went for the cool ballpark with good food and fun bars and those people will likely be back since some tickets are $3 on stubhub...Attendance was definitely not the reason for the mid-season deals. Trades were made because the front office (rightfully) decided that roster wasn't going to be playoff bound. Besides, holding onto Anibal Sanchez would've been a big mistake as we found out with his new contract terms.
If they felt we would contend all of 2012, they would not have dealt Anibal.
Yes, if we were seriously in the hunt I agree completely. But even then they had zero intention of signing him long term after the season...
Right, of course not.
#18
Posted December 24, 2012 - 03:12 PM
So, then we agree.Right, of course not.Yes, if we were seriously in the hunt I agree completely. But even then they had zero intention of signing him long term after the season...If they felt we would contend all of 2012, they would not have dealt Anibal.
Well, they never has plans with Anibal involved. Even if the team was gutted, he was the only sure bet to be dealt in July. I actually feel attendance wont be too bad. Half the fans didnt go for the team anyway, they went for the cool ballpark with good food and fun bars and those people will likely be back since some tickets are $3 on stubhub...
Attendance was definitely not the reason for the mid-season deals. Trades were made because the front office (rightfully) decided that roster wasn't going to be playoff bound. Besides, holding onto Anibal Sanchez would've been a big mistake as we found out with his new contract terms.
People agreeing on MB.com!?
Must be Christmas.
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
#19
Posted December 24, 2012 - 04:06 PM
My theory is that fans got pissed off that Ozzie was still around after his pro Castro comments.
so they said the hell with you.
#20
Posted December 24, 2012 - 04:11 PM
My theory is that fans got pissed off that Ozzie was still around after his pro Castro comments.
so they said the hell with you.
But is it also safe to say that while they would have still been mad, the pain and anger from his comments would have been that much more soothed by a winning product on the field? Sorry I dont buy the arguement that since the team had 1 really fantyastic month that attendance should have gone up.
#21
Posted December 24, 2012 - 04:20 PM
#22
Posted December 24, 2012 - 04:51 PM
#23
Posted December 24, 2012 - 04:52 PM
Part Ozzie, part expensive tickets at first, but mostly Miami sports fans suck. Like 90%.
btw...I am actually finding myself liking squall more and more these days. Are you using a proxy service to post for you?
#24
Posted December 24, 2012 - 05:48 PM
Low attendance is part of the reason for the slash in payroll. Fans didn't show up in droves when the Marlins had a high payroll anyway.
Early on fans were showing-up but then attendance decreased because of the losing.
#25
Posted December 24, 2012 - 06:00 PM
Low attendance is part of the reason for the slash in payroll. Fans didn't show up in droves when the Marlins had a high payroll anyway.Early on fans were showing-up but then attendance decreased because of the losing.
They really weren't showing up as much as people think. Please see el penguino's post from earlier.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users




Sign In
Create Account
Back to top









