Welcome to Loserville

[Roogsy]

Unforunately, this only feeds the trolls on this board about the situation in Toronto with it's sports franchises, but really the evidence is overwhelming.

And considering 3 of the 6 major professional franchises in question are owned by Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, it is becoming increasingly evident that they are part of the problem, and not in the way that is normally argued by uninformed people on this and other boards. MLSE spends money like it's going out of style, that has never been the problem...the problem is that they just don't know how to put together winning franchises and as long as they are involved in our favourite teams here in Toronto, we will continue to underperform and support teams that fail to bring silverware to this city.

We need fresh blood running teams here.



http://www.torontosun.com/sports/col...94956-sun.html

[bimmer]

Correlation does not imply causation.

It's WAY TOO flippant IMO to simply say "These teams suck, These teams are owned by MLSE, thus MLSE is the problem."

[billyfly]

Here's another one:

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=23881

[Shakes McQueen]

"They don't know how to put winning franchises together" is such a broad statement though.

The Leafs, as of five years ago, were a winning team. The Raptors have made the playoffs 2 of the 3 years Colangelo has been in charge. The Argos won a Grey Cup a few seasons ago, and were the class of the league at that point.

The only team that has really been an unmitigated disaster for a long, long time now, is the Blue Jays. TFC is still too young to make such a sweeping declaration. And I'm pretty sure the Rock are a good lacrosse team, no?

When people call Toronto "Loserville", I think what they mean is we haven't won an actual championship in a while. But when you change your metric for "success" to simply winning a trophy, and start to look around North America, you realize there are TONS of cities in the same boat as us - many of which have diverse ownership of their sports teams.

With that in mind, I'm actually encouraged by MLSE's recent moves with their teams. They've finally brought in someone independent and respected to run their hockey team, and have finally started to lay the foundation for a top-class scouting department. They hired a respected basketball guy to run their basketball team, and given him autonomy to do whatever he wants to do with the roster. Regardless of the lack of on-field success, the MLSE Borg hive-mind at least seems to have understood how important investing in a grass surface was to the fans, and the future on-field success of the team.

I don't think things are as dreary as people make it sound, but Torontonians seem to have this innate need to be self-deprecating when it comes to sports.

- Scott

[Suds]

Correlation does not imply causation.

It's WAY TOO flippant IMO to simply say "These teams suck, These teams are owned by MLSE, thus MLSE is the problem."

True, but one thing we do know is we can't say "These teams are great, These teams are owned by MLSE, thus MLSE is the reason"

[Shakes McQueen]

True, but one thing we do know is we can't say "These teams are great, These teams are owned by MLSE, thus MLSE is the reason"

Right. I think his point is that giving credit/ire to the ownership for the product on the ice/pitch/court is probably implying causation where there is none.

- Scott

[dclaro]

leafs: they put in a hockey guy with full control lets see if things change after his contract is up, although the really slow start is surprising

raptors: in a slump right now, but they should at least squeak in, and they should be on the rise for the next few years

jays:see yankees and red sox

argos: i think the problem might be with ownership, but i dont follow them enough, although with so many teams to compete against in toronto, their viewed as second tier since we put the american leagues that other teams are in on a higher level than an all canadian league

TFC: maybe we should get a better scouting system, if we have one at all right now, i think mojo is our only scout as he's busy enough with other matters

Toronto rock: they had their dynasty, things change but they'll be back

my quick anaylsis

[wzhxvy]

I am a critic of MLSE but I do not think the solution is looking or seeking new ownership. I think MLSE to their credit, have invested significantly in infrastructre and their sports properties. The fact that we are in Canada and the three associated strikes with playing in Canada: 1. ie it is more difficult for Canadian based teams to attract sports talent when we compete against larger media markets in the US primarily, 2. we compete against nice weather markets in the US, 3. taxes are lower in the US.

If I ignore the above three important factors, I would agree (and I talked about this before) that MLSE is a problem because of how they value success and how they are rewarded. For MLSE, its all about year over year growth in revenues and profits, its not about winning. Of course they want to win, but they are not willing to apply all their resources and take risks to win...they want to win but only within the parameters above.

I think a solution here would be for new leadership at the top within MLSE, because I think this is a problem with leadership all the way to Richard Peddie and the board. They need to change how they value success, and instead of a bean counter like Peddie, they need leadership that is compensated based on actually winning. They need someone running this who evaluates success, not in pure year over year dollar growth, but in terms of franchise valuation, future TV/marketing contract value...someone who can put a story together. I think MLSE leadership is the problem, and unfortunately that leadership has put similar minded leadership within its properties ie Anselmi for TFC.

[Roogsy]

"They don't know how to put winning franchises together" is such a broad statement though.

The Leafs, as of five years ago, were a winning team. The Raptors have made the playoffs 2 of the 3 years Colangelo has been in charge. The Argos won a Grey Cup a few seasons ago, and were the class of the league at that point.

I suppose this falls under what your definition of a "winning franchise" would be.

A record of .501 could be considered "winning" and under that unimpressive scenario (or close to it) I would classify most of the seasons you describe.

The Raptors have never qualified higher than 5th for the playoffs and that was only once, the other times they qualified 6th through 8th. Their best winning percentage has been .573, nothing spectacular. They've made the playoffs 5 times and only made it out of the first round once. This is a capable team, not a contending one. I would not classify it as "winning".

The Argos are a team that I refuse to use for comparison purposes. They play in a league of 8 teams. You have to really screw up not to make the playoffs.

When people refer to "winners" they aren't referring to winning 50% +1. They are referring to teams that continuously show contention, that regularly post winning seasons on a percentage basis, and that regularly win championships. What team in Toronto qualifies when applying that less generous application of the term "winning"?

To "know" how to put a winning franchise together is to have a trackrecord that people can look to and say "they know what they are doing, they have a winning formula". I don't see that at MLSE. At no point has it ever appeared that they have had a plan in place. I can't agree with you Scott, I stand by my statement.

I don't think things are as dreary as people make it sound, but Torontonians seem to have this innate need to be self-deprecating when it comes to sports.

This is not about being self-depricating...at some point you have to stop looking at intangibles and start looking at what is factually in front of you. Regardless if they are even about to embark on the greated sporting decade in this city's history (riiiiight)...there is nothing in our past to support any other conclusion and so far, there is nothing in our current position to indicate that is actually going to happen, and that is all we have in our hands when called to give our opinion about the state of sports in Toronto. That being the case, you then look at the factors and pass judgement. I don't see how MLSE can possibly have a passing grade in anyone's eyes.

I'd like to point out that I have always been one of the people on this board that has stood up for MLSE with regards to giving them credit for bringing TFC to Toronto. But this is no longer about giving credit for identifying opportunities...this is about recognizing whether any particular ownership has shown any ability to put together a winning franchise that it's fanbase can be proud of. Is there any evidence to that effect?

[dclaro]

I am a critic of MLSE but I do not think the solution is looking or seeking new ownership. I think MLSE to their credit, have invested significantly in infrastructre and their sports properties. The fact that we are in Canada and the three associated strikes with playing in Canada: 1. ie it is more difficult for Canadian based teams to attract sports talent when we compete against larger media markets in the US primarily, 2. we compete against nice weather markets in the US, 3. taxes are lower in the US.

If I ignore the above three important factors, I would agree (and I talked about this before) that MLSE is a problem because of how they value success and how they are rewarded. For MLSE, its all about year over year growth in revenues and profits, its not about winning. Of course they want to win, but they are not willing to apply all their resources and take risks to win...they want to win but only within the parameters above.

I think a solution here would be for new leadership at the top within MLSE, because I think this is a problem with leadership all the way to Richard Peddie and the board. They need to change how they value success, and instead of a bean counter like Peddie, they need leadership that is compensated based on actually winning. They need someone running this who evaluates success, not in pure year over year dollar growth, but in terms of franchise valuation, future TV/marketing contract value...someone who can put a story together. I think MLSE leadership is the problem, and unfortunately that leadership has put similar minded leadership within its properties ie Anselmi for TFC.

i just don't like the pension owning a controlling stake in mlse, as for tanenbaum, i dont know what o think of him seeing as he's not a media whore and rarely hear him, and TD bank the money they make off mlse is pocket change compared to what they make with their banking operations

[Beach_Red]

I think a solution here would be for new leadership at the top within MLSE, because I think this is a problem with leadership all the way to Richard Peddie and the board.

I think you're right - once it moves to the level of a faceless board, that's a problem. Most successful teams have a name attatched to the top decision-maker.

And there's really no point in wishing for new ownership because that isn't going to happan, but MLSE does respond to fans' demands - we've seen it with Leafs often enough.

So it's important for the fans to make the right demands. Right now demanding an experienced coach with a winning track record will get results. I think we've already seen it, I think this talk that the next coach has to have MLS experience is the board responding to fans' demands.

[billyfly]

This topic consumes most of my free thinking time. How is it that EVERY team is sucking donkey ballz so bad?

People are starting to notice it more and more even though it was the same this time last year. There have been a couple of other threads on the same topic.

What did this city do to incur the wrath of the sports gods??

[Carts]

In professional sports, success should be judged in championships...

Yes, every year "goals" will change based on the current state of the team, but winning your league's championship is what makes a 'franchise' successful or not...

In my opinion, MLSE sees profit as success. They run their teams as businesses, and the goal of a business is to make money...

Look at Mike Illich and the Red Wings. He purchased the team for $8-million, but did not start running it as a "for profit" business. The Red Wings were spending 2-3 times more money than they were generating in the first few years of his ownership. He told investors the team was building the foundation to be a successfull franchise (which he always states is winning championships). Now they are not only a title threat every year, they make money hand over fist...

Winning championships should come first - if you do that, the money will follow...

In Toronto, its seems like money comes first - if it didn't, the board at MLSE would have been turfed years ago as their teams don't win. But they're kept, because their first goal is attained, making money...

Carts...

[Roogsy]

In professional sports, success should be judged in championships...

Period. End of story.

This is the ultimate (and in many ways ONLY) way to judge a sport franchise/ownership.

[bimmer]

Period. End of story.

This is the ultimate (and in many ways ONLY) way to judge a sport franchise/ownership.

Other than the Leafs, it's unfair to judge the "success" of MLSE's franchises, as TFC is barely 3 years old and the Raps a mere 15. The level of play in the MLS has grown considerably since the days of expansion teams making the finals in their first year and there are NBA teams far older than the Raptors that have never won a championship.

[Beach_Red]

Other than the Leafs, it's unfair to judge the "success" of MLSE's franchises, as TFC is barely 3 years old and the Raps a mere 15. The level of play in the MLS has grown considerably since the days of expansion teams making the finals in their first year and there are NBA teams far older than the Raptors that have never won a championship.

Except they often have the same problems. Someone on here made a joke that the Leafs had the Muskoka 5 and TFC has the Scarborough 5. The players often run the teams because the fan pick them as favourites (it may be a little different with the Raptors) and the ownership give them big contracts and when it doesn;t work out they just replace the management.

We are starting to see some of the Leaf problems showing up in the way TFC is run. It's really just management responding to fans' demands. So, Danny Dichio get a guaranteed coaching position without ever having coached a game. Let's hope he's good.

[billyfly]

Period. End of story.

This is the ultimate (and in many ways ONLY) way to judge a sport franchise/ownership.

I agree but think of how many footy teams have gone 100 years or more with zilch.

[wzhxvy]

Except they often have the same problems. Someone on here made a joke that the Leafs had the Muskoka 5 and TFC has the Scarborough 5. The players often run the teams because the fan pick them as favourites (it may be a little different with the Raptors) and the ownership give them big contracts and when it doesn;t work out they just replace the management.

We are starting to see some of the Leaf problems showing up in the way TFC is run. It's really just management responding to fans' demands. So, Danny Dichio get a guaranteed coaching position without ever having coached a game. Let's hope he's good.

In all fairness though...if they didnt so totally screw up how they handled DD's last year, they would not have had to do that. They mismanaged a situation, it leaked to the media and supporters (from DD sources, I am not stupid enough to think the leak just happened), and they corrected course by over-reacting. If they had just treated him well, had a proper send off at the end of the season, then they would be perfectly entitled to hire him or not based on his merits for the following season.

[Roogsy]

I agree but think of how many footy teams have gone 100 years or more with zilch.

It is unfortunate. And in no way would I mean this in any disrespectful way...but in what way shape or form would they be considered "winning" franchises?

This isn't about staying loyal to your team win or lose, this is about recognizing the championship quality of a franchise. If you support a small team that has rarely or never won anything, that's fine and you should be proud. But in the final accounting, they are not a "winning" team. Winning isn't something that can be subjective, it's a condition that is or isn't.

[bimmer]

It is unfortunate. And in no way would I mean this in any disrespectful way...but in what way shape or form would they be considered "winning" franchises?

This isn't about staying loyal to your team win or lose, this is about recognizing the championship quality of a franchise. If you support a small team that has rarely or never won anything, that's fine and you should be proud. But in the final accounting, they are not a "winning" team. Winning isn't something that can be subjective, it's a condition that is or isn't.

Like I said, other than the Leafs, it's way too early to call MLSE's teams 'losing' franchises based on your standards.

[Roogsy]

Other than the Leafs, it's unfair to judge the "success" of MLSE's franchises, as TFC is barely 3 years old and the Raps a mere 15. The level of play in the MLS has grown considerably since the days of expansion teams making the finals in their first year and there are NBA teams far older than the Raptors that have never won a championship.

This isn't about every franchise in MLSE needing to win, this is about the evidence that is piling on that ownership as to how it manages it's teams. When you only own one team, the chances of winning are obviously slim. But when you own 3 major professional teams, and a fourth team that plays in the 2nd division, and NONE win anything, then you have to start looking at the ownership. That kind of participation requires some level of success at some point just because of the odds. When even the odds are in your favour and you STILL can't find success...then the problem isn't the degree of difficulty of winning something, the problem is that you are underachieving.

And just for the record, this isn't about TFC per say. But TFC's inadequacies does add into the case building against MLSE. Seattle is a fine example of the kind of success that a properly managed team can achieve in the league TFC plays in. If San Jose makes the playoffs next year and we don't...we will officially be the worst expansion franchise in MLS history. That this is even a possibility speaks to the inadequacies of MLSE. Especially as we are about to embark on more expansion in MLS and it gets harder and harder to get into the playoffs.

[Beach_Red]

In all fairness though...if they didnt so totally screw up how they handled DD's last year, they would not have had to do that. They mismanaged a situation, it leaked to the media and supporters (from DD sources, I am not stupid enough to think the leak just happened), and they corrected course by over-reacting. If they had just treated him well, had a proper send off at the end of the season, then they would be perfectly entitled to hire him or not based on his merits for the following season.

Well, we don't know if all he wanted was, "a proper send off." It does sound like the team encouraged him to pursue coaching - he has to do something to make money still - but it does appear bungled. Of course, MLSE like any other big organization is divided into factions and there are many agendas at work. Some of them are ex-players who made the move into management and some are bean-counters who are maybe better at navigating the corporate waters.

We'll never know what happened there, but that's just an example.

Over the years we have seen many, many examples of Leaf fans running good players out of town and over-valueing other players. Or, I should say, we have seen this ownership appease the fans time and time again.

Are we seeing it with TFC?

(honestly, I don't know enough about soccer to be able to tell if that's what's going on)

[Beach_Red]

And just for the record, this isn't about TFC per say. But TFC's inadequacies does add into the case building against MLSE.

Especially because we're starting to see a pattern develop with the teams. TFC had many problems this year that sound so familiar when talking about the Leafs - bad attitudes, cliques in the dressing room, lack of leadership and so on. Does ownership have anything to do with that?

[Roogsy]

Especially because we're starting to see a pattern develop with the teams. TFC had many problems this year that sound so familiar when talking about the Leafs - bad attitudes, cliques in the dressing room, lack of leadership and so on. Does ownership have anything to do with that?

I would say yes...because the strategies in place to bring in players sometimes emphasize issues that don't help on scoreboard.

Also, the issues that young teams like TFC and the Raptors suffer from no longer can be attributed to "expansion" problems. After a certain point, it falls on how the organization is being run.

So while it is unfair to demand "championships" from these teams, it is also unfair to ask fans to continuously support teams that fail to show progress, competitiveness or contention.

I tell you this...if TFC does not make the playoffs by it's fourth year, it will no longer be debateable if they are a failure, it will be an accomplished fact.

[bimmer]

This isn't about every franchise in MLSE needing to win, this is about the evidence that is piling on that ownership as to how it manages it's teams. When you only own one team, the chances of winning are obviously slim. But when you own 3 major professional teams, and a fourth team that plays in the 2nd division, and NONE win anything, then you have to start looking at the ownership. That kind of participation requires some level of success at some point just because of the odds. When even the odds are in your favour and you STILL can't find success...then the problem isn't the degree of difficulty of winning something, the problem is that you are underachieving.

And just for the record, this isn't about TFC per say. But TFC's inadequacies does add into the case building against MLSE. Seattle is a fine example of the kind of success that a properly managed team can achieve in the league TFC plays in. If San Jose makes the playoffs next year and we don't...we will officially be the worst expansion franchise in MLS history. That this is even a possibility speaks to the inadequacies of MLSE. Especially as we are about to embark on more expansion in MLS and it gets harder and harder to get into the playoffs.

I understand what you're saying, and for all we know, you could be right. However, I still maintain that it is unfair to blame MLSE simply because they own the clubs, without having any REAL evidence to back it up.

Look at cities like Philadelphia, Seattle, Cleveland and Washington whose professional teams are run/owned exclusive of one another... yet they have gone through far longer championship droughts than we have. I don't think we should simply lay the blame on the one common denominator between our teams. We should look at them as separate entities.

[Roogsy]

I find that argument a little lacking.

Most of those cities do not have the size, money or support that Toronto gives it's teams.

While we should be contending with cities like Chicago, Boston, Houston and New York, we intentionally put ourselves in the same category as smaller cities like Cleveland, Washington and Seattle? That's like comparing London against Cardiff.

Philly is the only city I would say Toronto SHOULD compare itself to, but this is where the argument falls off the tracks. While the Eagles continuously fall short of actually winning championships, they are constantly contenders, and regularly make the playoffs.

Same with the 76ers.

And lest you forget who is in the World Series this year? And who won it last year?

This is the ultimate point...either we are a world class city or we are not. We continuously underachieve when compared against cities we SHOULD be similar to and instead accept mediocrity and allow the inadequacies of 2nd tier teams to be an acceptable bar to aim for.

Being the biggest city in Canada, with the most money and the kind of sponsorship, television and gate revenue that our teams produce...that is simply not an acceptable justification for our underachievement. We need to hold our teams accountable to the level of success they SHOULD be achieving all things considered.

[Whoop]

This more of an aside... but sports related.

Add to the fact that Toronto has lost two Olympic bids. (Not to mention an Expo bid.)

While Vancouver, Calgary, and Montreal have all won Olympic bids. Hell, even Edmonton and Victoria have had a Commonwealth Games. And Winnipeg has had a Pan Am Games. Edmonton has even had an IAAF World Championship in Athletics.

Toronto has never held any sort of significant multi-sport event, which ties in with the lack of athletic infrastructure, which could be a smaller part of the lack of Champions from the Toronto area. The biggest significant world event that was held in Toronto was the World Indoor Championship in '93.

[Beach_Red]

I would say yes...because the strategies in place to bring in players sometimes emphasize issues that don't help on scoreboard.

What issues do you think the strategies emphasize?

I can tell you when it comes to the Leafs I believe that for years MLSE gave the fans what they wanted. I was shocked back in the early 90's when Leaf fans were calling for Doug Gilmour for MVP. Gilmour was a hard-working player, a solid second line player, but people in Toronto were talking like he was Mario Lemieux (who did win the MVP that year). After the Leafs traded away Wendel Clarke (in a good trade that got them Sundin) the fans never got over it so they brought Clarke back. They brought Gilmour back, too. these were things Leaf fans asked for and received that weren't good for the team.

Since TFC started people told me that soccer fans were more sophisticated and wouldn't pick favourites like that. Like I said, I don't know enough about soccer to be able to tell, but what I saw with Dichio sure looked like Leaf fans.

[bimmer]

I find that argument a little lacking.

Most of those cities do not have the size, money or support that Toronto gives it's teams.

While we should be contending with cities like Chicago, Boston, Houston and New York, we intentionally put ourselves in the same category as smaller cities like Cleveland, Washington and Seattle? That's like comparing London against Cardiff.

Philly is the only city I would say Toronto SHOULD compare itself to, but this is where the argument falls off the tracks. While the Eagles continuously fall short of actually winning championships, they are constantly contenders, and regularly make the playoffs.

Same with the 76ers.

And lest you forget who is in the World Series this year? And who won it last year?

This is the ultimate point...either we are a world class city or we are not. We continuously underachieve when compared against cities we SHOULD be similar to and instead accept mediocrity and allow the inadequacies of 2nd tier teams to be an acceptable bar to aim for.

Being the biggest city in Canada, with the most money and the kind of sponsorship, television and gate revenue that our teams produce...that is simply not an acceptable justification for our underachievement. We need to hold our teams accountable to the level of success they SHOULD be achieving all things considered.

The professional leagues that we are contending about (excluding MLB which MLSE doesn't partake in anyways) all operate within a cap, so there's not much that ownership can do that would result in a significant advantage over the smaller market teams. And the current states of franchises such as the Knicks, Mets, Clippers, Texans, etc. should hint that big markets do not necessarily equal success.

As for Philly, you yourself claimed that championships were in many ways the ONLY method of judging a team's success. By that standard, Philly should be considered a failure, seeing as how until the Phillies won the series last year, the Flyers, 76ers, Eagles and Phillies had not won a championship in roughly 30 years (or never). If you see Philly as a winning city, why not give Toronto 30 years as well?

[Whoop]

I remember as a kid watching Dr. J and the 76ers beating the Lakers for a NBA championship.

At least those all Philly teams have at least been in a couple of finals since the 80s.

I think the point that Roogsy is making is not so much $$$ decisions but personnel decisions. From recent appointees like Rob Babcock, JFJ, and JP Ricciardi to past hires like Isiah Thomas to Mike Nykoluk.