Hank Steinbrenner, Another Bad Seed
Published February 25, 2008
It's always nice when the acorn doesn't fall too far from the tree.
If anyone thought that when Yankees owner and former Clevelander George Steinbrenner voluntarily stepped aside from the daily grind in favor of his two sons, Hank and Hal, baseball's flagship franchise might be ready to find a better way to balance its self interest with the overall good of the game, think again.
In the short time since he's become the de facto face of Yankees, Hank Steinbrenner is proving to be quite a successor to the rather large and boorish shoes of his more famous father.
When Alex Rodriguez initially refused to extend his contract and instead opted out, Hank blew the first of what's turning out to be many gaskets. He vowed not to negotiate any further with Rodriguez or his agent Scott Boras. A few days later, he was doing just that, ultimately signing Rodriguez to a new, equally ridiculous contract.
When the Minnesota Twins were busy trying to play the Yankees off the Boston Red Sox for the services of Johan Santana, Steinbrenner threw down an ultimatum, threatening to pull his offer off the table. The Twins didn't bite but the Yankees stayed in the talks. In fact, well after Steinbrenner's rant, the Yankees kept right on negotiating, up until the point that the New York Mets swept in and stole Santana from the Twins.
Maybe these were just examples of the neglected son finally getting the keys to the car he was ill-trained to handle. Maybe, except that these episodes did signal that Steinbrenner won't be much of an agent of change in stemming the tide of economic insanity that his father helped usher into this modern era of baseball. That hardly surprises.
But where Hank could do some real good is on the issue of steroids. Unfortunately, that's the real test he's failing right out of the gate.
Exhibit A occurred when he claimed to be irked that baseball was supposedly being singled out while football in general and the NFL in particular were supposedly getting a free pass with respect to steroids and performance enhancing drugs. Unintentionally hilarious, Steinbrenner told the Associated Press last week "everybody that knows sports knows football is tailor-made for performance-enhancing drugs. I don't know how they managed to skate by. It irritates me. Don't tell me it's not more prevalent. The number in football is at least twice as many. Look at the speed and size of those players."
- Hank Steinbrenner, Another Bad Seed
- Published: February 25, 2008
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Sports
- Filed Under: Sports: Baseball
- Writer: Gary D. Benz
- Gary D. Benz's BC Writer page
- Gary D. Benz's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
I have a few problems with your analysis here:
1. People do care less about steroids in the NFL. Shawn Merrian took them and was comeback player of the year. Not a peep was uttered about Rodney Harrison's use during this year's Superbowl. That doesn't even begin to touch on Romanowski, the allegations that the Steelers team from 70's was all roided up, ect. Where is the outrage?
His claims that nfl is tailored made for steroids, beyond the evidence of everyone that has used them (many admitting it from the 70's)the game is a strength on strength situation. You can get by being smaller in baseball is you can do certain things well. In football, if you're too small, or weaker then you're opponent, you are out of job.
2. The Yankees not blowing the bank on Santana is a major change. First you accuse the Yanks of spending like crazy and then they get no credit for not going over board on him.
3. This idea that the Yankees spending has ruined baseball is a total joke. Fans pay good money to go watch a baseball game and you're honestly going to complain about an owner putting his money, that he made off of the fans, back into the product on the field?
For years I watched as multi-millionaire Mike Illitch spent nothing on the Tigers and turned a once proud franchise into total garbage.
Then he realized his error and brought in Pudge, Magglio, and the others and now they had to cut off season ticket sales so the general fans still could get tickets.
Every owner of a major league team is either a multi millionaire or a major corporation. Them not spending on their teams is a direct insult to the fans. They want people to pay $50 for a ticket, spend $30 on concessions, buy a $120 jersey, and then they won't put any of that money back into the team? It's robbery.
Small market teams do it to themselves. When the Royals wanted to pay Brett, White, and the others they were good. When the Brewers paid Yount and Molitor they too were good.
It's all about whether the owner is willing to invest in their team. The Steinbrenners should be applauded for their commitment to their fans and their good business sense to generate the revenue to be able to pay out to put a good team on the field.
It's a basic business principle. You produce a good product, people come, and you make money. Very simple. You put a worthless product on the field, people don't come, and you do not make money. These rules apply in all facets of business.
Tony, hhhmmm... regarding steroids in the NFL. they work against you in the end result. Remember Brian Bosworth here in Seattle? Hurts his shoulder. Steroids remove your body's ability to heal. He became permanently broken and had to reire.
One of my high school football coaches (Jim Norton, UW Huskies, Washington Redskins) warned us about seroids back in the early 70s. He was right. Glad I listened. Well, anything that messes with the penis is automatically out of the question in my book...
Gary, I love your analogy about the neglected kid finally getting the keys to the car... what is this I hear about the new Yankee Stadium having $2500 seats? Well if they keep beer at $30 it balances out....hehe
Anyway, interesting points in your article.
DM
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/74257)
Boston Sucks