OnlyBucs

Since MLB will do nothing about the Pirates ownership problem it’s time for the City of Pittsburgh to exert the pressure.

When PNC Park was built, it was built on the premise that it would allow the Pirates to be competitive and be able at a minimum to keep their own stars.

McClatchy initially held up his end of the bargain by signing Jason Kendall to a market value of $60M 22 years ago. The Pirates also signed good free agent in Kenny Lofton, Reggie Sanders, etc.

Although McClatchy was very visible, and made himself available to fans, he unfortunately did not have the personal financial resources to have owned the team and he had to make a deal with the devil (Nutting). Nutting has the money but has proven time and time again that he will not support an average ML payroll.



The PNC Park lease with the Pirates runs to 2030. There is no specific language in the lease about the requirements of a ML payroll. However there is plenty of video and news stories documenting the assumptions that if the SEA, City, State invested in the building of PNC that it would allow the Pirates to be competitive and keep them in Pittsburgh.



The City should take measures into their own hands and attempt to break the lease of PNC with the Pirates unless Nutting agreed to fund a competitive team or fund an average ML payroll. This would obviously be battled out in the courts but maybe the threat would put pressure on Nutting. What is he going to do if the City puts padlocks on PNC? He could claim that the City broke the lease and he could then move the team. At that point I think MLB would step in.

I’m so fed up with Nutting that I could accept the team moving provided MLB does what the NFL did when the Cleveland Browns moved. That is the Pirates name and colors remain with theCity of Pittsburgh and the city will be granted a new team with responsible ownership.

You make many strong points about the Pirates and the lease at PNC Park. It seems like with our owner, and the financial disparity with MLB, the fans of the Pirates have 2 strikes against them. The recent signing of some of the high end players this offseason doesn’t give me hope that the Pirates can keep any of their star players. The Nimmo contract which the Mets gave him is probably the standard that Reynolds will want. Pittsburgh will never pay that salary.Teams like the Pirates, Rays, and others in small markets cannot compete with the Big Boys.

I am not against free agency for the players, but somehow all teams should be able to bid on the high end players, not just the Yankees, Mets, and Dodgers.My biggest concern with the Pirates franchise is that in 2030 when the lease will expire at PNC ,Nutting or whoever will move the team to a bigger market. Pittsburgh will still have baseball, but it will be a minor league team for one of the MLB franchises. I am probably one of the older posters to this site, and I may not be around if this happens, but if it does, that will surely be a very sad day for one of the oldest franchises in MLB history.

You will recall, back in the day MLB wanted to contract Pittsburgh and Minneapolis out of the league. I suspect if the city broke the lease, the most MLB would do would be to move the team to the Carolinas, or Nashville, or somewhere with a big enough area to support a team. Nutting would still be the owner but he wouldn't be *Pittsburgh's* owner anymore. But I really can't see MLB putting another franchise into the city. Maybe the Carolina Pirates AAA franchise.

The Royals lease expires in 2031, and they've already started talking about a new stadium and development. The Pirates should start talking, although I guess they'll just be asking for a major renovation. My guess is they figure the record's bound to improve soon, and they'll start lobbying then.

566579787B734578637F6463727E79170 wrote: The Royals lease expires in 2031, and they've already started talking about a new stadium and development. The Pirates should start talking, although I guess they'll just be asking for a major renovation. My guess is they figure the record's bound to improve soon, and they'll start lobbying then.
The Pirates are getting an updated scoreboard for the 2023 season. I am sure if they proposed a new stadium the local taxpayers would have a hissy fit. Hopefully PNC Park was built well enough that it can last several years past the time when the lease expires in 2030.

I really doubt that MLB would abandon Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh has proven that it can support a ML baseball team. They averaged over 30K a game when PNC opened and when they had a competitive team from 2013-2015

In 30 years the Pirates have only had 4 winning seasons.

No team is going to draw well with that tract record.

One of the amazing things that has happened in the last couple of years is the San Diego Padres, a team that is a small market with less Corporate clout than Pittsburgh, has been spending money as if they were the Dodgers. Not saying Pittsburgh should follow suit, but an average ML payroll which is now approximately 150M should be expected

I hold an unpopular opinion.



Somebody else is always 'the person' who does things. The city, the state, the commissioner, some politician(s), "MLB" (whatever that means. It must mean the other 29 owners.)



I'm not sure that any of them can force BOB or any other owner to do something different unless it's found that they're in violation of some law or contract.



Is there a law against being cheap?



Is there a law against focusing the core of your business plan on hiring less-experienced, thus lower-compensated talent?



I don't mean to be "smart," but that's what the BOB Issue tends to get down to.



We might not like it, but franchise values continue to increase regardless of whether stands are full or empty. That's just the way things are.



I say, let the market dictate. Fan boycotts have failed more than once in The Burgh.



BOB has an incentive to offer a better team. The higher the attendance, the higher the team's profits. It's in his best interest to field a competitive roster.



No owner wants to see empty seats. No owner wants to see lower Nielsen ratings or Google clicks.



I'm not really sure what can be done to "force" BOB to make significant changes. The players union has unsuccessfully challenged the Pirates and other teams. The owners have accepted what the Pirates submit to them.



Wish I had an answer, but I don't.



Seems to me that it comes down to individual choices. Go to games, tune in, click if you like. Or, not if you don't.



If the day ever comes that he makes less money than he wants, that will be the time that he changes his current ways. Until then, we hope for the best like fans of all the other teams.

0D382F2F241D2F2F24232F4A0 wrote: I hold an unpopular opinion.



Somebody else is always 'the person' who does things.  The city, the state, the commissioner, some politician(s), "MLB" (whatever that means.  It must mean the other 29 owners.)



I'm not sure that any of them can force BOB or any other owner to do something different unless it's found that they're in violation of some law or contract. 



Is there a law against being cheap?



Is there a law against focusing the core of your business plan on hiring less-experienced, thus lower-compensated talent?



I don't mean to be "smart," but that's what the BOB Issue tends to get down to.



We might not like it, but franchise values continue to increase regardless of whether stands are full or empty.  That's just the way things are.



I say, let the market dictate.  Fan boycotts have failed more than once in The Burgh.



BOB has an incentive to offer a better team.  The higher the attendance, the higher the team's profits.  It's in his best interest to field a competitive roster.



No owner wants to see empty seats.  No owner wants to see lower Nielsen ratings or Google clicks. 



I'm not really sure what can be done to "force" BOB to make significant changes.  The players union has unsuccessfully challenged the Pirates and other teams.  The owners have accepted what the Pirates submit to them. 



Wish I had an answer, but I don't. 



Seems to me that it comes down to individual choices.  Go to games, tune in, click if you like.  Or, not if you don't.



If the day ever comes that he makes less money than he wants, that will be the time that he changes his current ways.  Until then, we hope for the best like fans of all the other teams.






What you propose is just accepting the status quo.

I have to believe by playing the PNC lease card it can put pressure on Nutting. Proving intent is important in litigation.

There is no doubt that by paying for PNC Park with taxpayer dollars it was with the “intent” that the Pirates would remain in Pittsburgh and that it would allow the franchise to be competitive and be able to keep their star players. This has not happened. Furthermore it is evident that Nutting has not only failed to meet an average payroll but he has never kept a home grown star player or even attempted to acquire star level free agents. He continues to reap additional profits by getting “welfare” payments from MLB and the major market luxury tax teams.

No! I do NOT propose that folks accept the status quo. We have to either accept reality, or create another reality.



What I wrote is- each person has to decide for himself, herself, whatever self whether to support the team or not.



Some will accept it. Some won't. Just like any other product or service.



If someone no longer enjoys the Pirates, they have other things that they can enjoy.



Here is the choice I have. I can either follow the Pirates....or I can stop following them. As mad as I've been, I follow them. I took a couple month break last year, and it felt good. I still follow them.



BOB's not changing because of me. He might change if there are 500,000 me's. Even if there are 500,000 me's, it's no sure thing.

12373434210A373F3D2A580 wrote: I hold an unpopular opinion.



Somebody else is always 'the person' who does things.  The city, the state, the commissioner, some politician(s), "MLB" (whatever that means.  It must mean the other 29 owners.)



I'm not sure that any of them can force BOB or any other owner to do something different unless it's found that they're in violation of some law or contract. 



Is there a law against being cheap?



Is there a law against focusing the core of your business plan on hiring less-experienced, thus lower-compensated talent?



I don't mean to be "smart," but that's what the BOB Issue tends to get down to.



We might not like it, but franchise values continue to increase regardless of whether stands are full or empty.  That's just the way things are.



I say, let the market dictate.  Fan boycotts have failed more than once in The Burgh.



BOB has an incentive to offer a better team.  The higher the attendance, the higher the team's profits.  It's in his best interest to field a competitive roster.



No owner wants to see empty seats.  No owner wants to see lower Nielsen ratings or Google clicks. 



I'm not really sure what can be done to "force" BOB to make significant changes.  The players union has unsuccessfully challenged the Pirates and other teams.  The owners have accepted what the Pirates submit to them. 



Wish I had an answer, but I don't. 



Seems to me that it comes down to individual choices.  Go to games, tune in, click if you like.  Or, not if you don't.



If the day ever comes that he makes less money than he wants, that will be the time that he changes his current ways.  Until then, we hope for the best like fans of all the other teams.






What you propose is just accepting the status quo.

I have to believe by playing the PNC lease card it can put pressure on Nutting. Proving intent is important in litigation.

There is no doubt that by paying for PNC Park with taxpayer dollars it was with the “intent” that the Pirates would remain in Pittsburgh and that it would allow the franchise to be competitive and be able to keep their star players. This has not happened. Furthermore it is evident that Nutting has not only failed to meet an average payroll but he has never kept a home grown star player or even attempted to acquire star level free agents. He continues to reap additional profits by getting “welfare” payments from MLB and the major market luxury tax teams.
You are so right the intent to build a new ballpark was to make the team more competitive, and to be able to retain their star players. Those early years the Pirates extended Kendall and Giles, and contracts were signed in later years by Cutch, Marte and Polanco. Yes, they signed Hayes this past April, but it appears that no extensions are on the horizon. Nutting has avoided speaking to the local media about the State of the Team for almost two years, that is not right. With him being silent it gives me the impression his next move is to approach another city, about moving the franchise.