Jump to content

Mac the Knife

Members
  • Posts

    12,776
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Mac the Knife

  1. Uhh, what's wrong with University of Michigan? Everyone I know who has a degree from there landed awesome, high-paying jobs right out of school and are doing extremely well for themselves.

    Well, provided the pizza chain let's them keep their tips *and* reimburses them for the gas they use on deliveries? I suppose to some that could be considered high-paying...

  2. The Chicago White Sox and San Francisco Giants each were tentatively sold to buyers who would have moved them to Tampa, but in each case MLB stepped in to prevent it.

    That's not true relating to the White Sox. The current ownership group purchased the team from Bill Veeck in 1981, and they were threatening to move to Tampa before Illinois built them a new park. They never intended on selling.

    An interesting fact - the city of Seattle sued the American League when it allowed to Pilots to leave after one season. The owner of the White Sox was broke and needed to sell the team in 1975. To settle the suit, the AL was pushing to sell the White Sox to Seattle ownership and let the team move. Denver ownership was among the bidders, I believe, but the only bidder willing to keep the team in Chicago was Bill Veeck, who had previously owned the team and sold is to the then-owners 13 years earlier. Despite most of the AL owners disliking Veeck, they approved the sale to allow the team to stay in Chicago. Seattle got the expansion Mariners two years later.

    Maybe more interestingly, if the White Sox would have moved to Seattle, Charlie Finley was planning on moving the Athletics into Comiskey Park.

    Indeed, I stand corrected about the 'Sox. I knew a move to Tampa was allegedly a done deal at one point, but thought it was tied to the Veeck-Reinsdorf sale. The latter story is one I've also heard, only in a more odd version in which the White Sox would've went to Seattle only to be replaced by Charlie Finley's Oakland A's, who would've went to Chicago. Another version I've heard would've had Bud Selig guaranteeing 30 of his 81 Milwaukee Brewers home dates to Chicago, and yet another would've had the San Francisco Giants play an equal number of dates in both San Francisco and Oakland as the "Bay Area Giants."

  3. During his career, Nolan Ryan recorded exactly 5,000 more strikeouts than Babe Ruth hit home runs (5,714 / 714).

    The originally intended name for the Dallas Cowboys was the Texas Rangers.

    The Chicago White Sox and San Francisco Giants each were tentatively sold to buyers who would have moved them to Tampa, but in each case MLB stepped in to prevent it.

    At one point in the early history of the NBA, the city of Chicago (six - Cubs, White Sox, Bears, Cardinals, Black Hawks, Zephyrs) was home to more "big four" professional sports franchises than any other city, equalled only by New York (Dodgers, Giants, Yankees, Giants, Knickerbockers, Rangers).

    Philadelphia is the only city (I think - I'm writing this at 5am while half-asleep so I could be wrong about this one) to have lost both professional baseball (A's) and basketball (Warriors) franchises, yet which has both professional baseball (Phillies) and basketball (76ers) franchises today.

    By the time they had taken the court as an expansion team, the Miami Heat had already signed a player to a contract whose total value exceeded its expansion fee (Rony Seikaly - sp?)

    New York metropolian area technicality has nine teams now (Yankees, Mets, Giants, Jets, Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Islanders, and Devils).

    Thus the qualifier "At one point in the early history of the NBA..."

  4. During his career, Nolan Ryan recorded exactly 5,000 more strikeouts than Babe Ruth hit home runs (5,714 / 714).

    The originally intended name for the Dallas Cowboys was the Texas Rangers.

    The Chicago White Sox and San Francisco Giants each were tentatively sold to buyers who would have moved them to Tampa, but in each case MLB stepped in to prevent it.

    At one point in the early history of the NBA, the city of Chicago (six - Cubs, White Sox, Bears, Cardinals, Black Hawks, Zephyrs) was home to more "big four" professional sports franchises than any other city, equalled only by New York (Dodgers, Giants, Yankees, Giants, Knickerbockers, Rangers).

    Philadelphia is the only city (I think - I'm writing this at 5am while half-asleep so I could be wrong about this one) to have lost both professional baseball (A's) and basketball (Warriors) franchises, yet which has both professional baseball (Phillies) and basketball (76ers) franchises today.

    By the time they had taken the court as an expansion team, the Miami Heat had already signed a player to a contract whose total value exceeded its expansion fee (Rony Seikaly - sp?)

  5. So what's the most hilarious possible outcome? Vegas and Quebec are the only bidders, and one of them has to take the Coyotes instead a la the Kansas City Scouts' move to Denver in 1976?

    No no no... the most hilarious possible outcome would be Vegas, Quebec, Hamilton and Houston applying, and deep into the process the financials for both the Quebec and Vegas groups don't meet NHL muster, forcing the league to expand into Hamilton and Houston.

  6. One thing I learned in reading all that jazz: the NHL schedule's supposed to be out June 25th... :)

    If I'm in the NHL leadership, I'm frantically trying to work out a way to take as many Glendale dates out of that schedule as possible for 2015-16: Phoenix, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Kansas City, Seattle, Quebec... anywhere viable. Take the Coyotes on a San Juan Expos-like season.

  7. Suspension/termination would be death for franchise values. It's not an option.

    Nah. It'd kill the NHL in the Phoenix market, but it wouldn't impact franchise values overall by any stretch.

    I think any Phoenix-area related option is a band-aid on a massive open wound. And not a good band-aid. One of those ones that you can't open the package without ripping the band-aid. And then it barely sticks to you. And then you have to go to the store to get a proper band-aid, but you're dripping blood all over the place and people are staring at you...

    Yeah, I agree. Why Glendale made the deal they did stupefies me, and I can't say I blame them for killing it the first chance they had. How this plays out who knows, but the best thing for everyone involved would be for the team to head north.

  8. Was there an out clause for the city or is this just a case of buyers remorse?

    Glendale found a legal loophole and are using it to get out (buyer's remorse). They've had a few changes in the city council (probably in part due to the Coyotes deal), and the new council make-up apparently has been looking for an "out" since day one.

    I've spent the better part of 3 hours listening to the audio from this city council meeting, and the girl "hosting" the Fox10 News feed is about as impartial as Rush Limbaugh, in support of the team staying. They're talking about Glendale or potentially going to Phoenix.

    But here's the thing: as of last night, the team has no lease to play anywhere. The NHL could take any number of a really wide range of options, from taking temporary or permanent refuge in Phoenix to renegotiating with Glendale, from relocating to Quebec City, Las Vegas or another market, or even suspending/terminating the franchise. Personally I think Glendale's done no matter what.

  9. First: Sorry, guys... I don't follow hockey, let alone hockey threads on the CCSLC, deeply enough to have known this was the thread previously known as the Coyote relocation thread.

    Is it over? After 4 years and over 5600 posts, is it all going to come to an end?

    (Before we start heavily examining the Florida and Carolina situations, of course)

    There is no "Carolina situation," at least for three more years (when the least nears expiration). But I think even Karmanos realizes that any relocation threat would be quickly met with overwhelming laughter and a response of "Vaya con dios, Amigo."

  10. The Championship Rings From Super Bowl XIV

    Anyone want to comment about or talk about the design of these rings?

    In researching my latest blog story, I realized that compared to other NFC / AFC rings, the Rams ring was pretty bland compared to the other runner up rings designed before and around this time period.

    The Steelers ring design from Super Bowl XIV, was nothing to write home about either, despite their amazing accomplishment of 4 titles in 6 seasons.

    sb14c.jpg

    I've read in various places that the Steelers ring from 1979 was designed primarily by the Rooney family, with little to no input provided by the players. The reason was that the previous year's rings were seen as "knuckle busters" by the family, particularly by Art, who had hands like hams but with short finger joints. The '79 ring would wind up being the only one Art could wear every day, the others either being too large, too heavy, or digging into an adjacent finger.

  11. Cool ring, surprised the MLS teams can afford these rings. I know their on a shoe string budget.

    Yeah, MLS isn't on quite the shoestring some might think. But that ring is a bit skimpy, so to speak.

    From a design perspective it's kind of lame as well. I looked at those photos at least 5 times before realizing that "MLS Cup Champions" was wrapped around the team's logo... and once more (just now) to realize that "2014" is in there as well.

  12. I came across the images on this post earlier today and thought I'd put them up to show the designs for the three USFL championship rings. These particular rings were apparently sold at auction not long ago, fetching just $5,700 or so - grossly undervalued, IMHO, given their provenance and the league's history.

    6950h_lg.jpeg6950g_lg.jpeg6950f_lg.jpeg


    6950e_lg.jpeg6950d_lg.jpeg6950c_lg.jpeg


    6950b_lg.jpeg6950_lg.jpeg

    Really interesting that the 1985 Baltimore Stars ring features a design that references roman numerals ("II" and "III") that weren't ever used as a reference by the league itself for its championship games.

  13. Anyone want to talk about the design of these two rings?

    The ring on the left is the Oakland Raiders first winning Super Bowl Ring from their 1976 season. No team has made the effort the Raiders have to keep their championship ring theme the same over the decades since the Super Bowl started.

    sb11b.jpg

    Boy, it's quiet around here. A couple of my posts have been deleted by a moderator, so I have not been as active posting in the past.

    The Raiders ring from XI was the model for one of my old flag football league's championship rings... can't seem to find a pic though, damnit.

  14. Any thoughts or comments on the design of these two rings from 1974?

    My one thought is that the Steelers ring is heavier, yet appears to be smaller than the Vikings ring.

    I have been told that sometimes a ring company can hollow out a solid gold ring, making it look bigger than it really is.

    sb922.jpg

    I've always loved that Pittsburgh design. The beveled top was so distinctive in its time, with a simple onyx and diamond setting. It wouldn't be good enough to be a conference championship bauble by today's gaudy standard, but it's a beautiful piece of jewelery all the same.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.