• Has A-Rod Hurt The Yankees Brand?

    Posted by on July 29th, 2013 · Comments (12)

    Buster Olney says:

    In the eyes of that lawyer, an argument could be made — maybe successfully, maybe not — that Rodriguez’s actions have diminished the Yankees’ brand.

    Well, maybe, another way to say/ask it is: With the mess that A-Rod has created for himself now, does it help the Yankees brand (since he is associated with the team)? And, if the answer is “no,” then he’s either hurting it or not impacting it.

    And, I can’t see how it’s not impacting it…right?

    Comments on Has A-Rod Hurt The Yankees Brand?

    1. MJ Recanati
      July 29th, 2013 | 1:13 pm

      The bottom line is that the Yankees could be sold for at least the $2B Guggenheim partnership paid for the LA Dodgers. I’d imagine the Yankees would fetch closer to $3B.

      Brand diminished my ass. This is just noise and nonsense.

    2. KPOcala
      July 29th, 2013 | 1:42 pm

      CBA, excepted, how is a contract NOT voidable when a player illegally misrepresents, in effect, his “credentials”. The fact is, what A-Rod, and so many other have done (using steroid, with few exceptions), is simply illegal. And has been for many decades. If in “the real world”, someone crafted a resume that was fraudulent, he damn well better have produced some impressive work before he was “outed”. And I can’t fathom how that the CBA isn’t trumped by Federal Law.

    3. PHMDen
      July 29th, 2013 | 1:44 pm

      The brand’s diminished, but not by Rodriguez. It’s more diminished by having an organization mismanage the situation the way it has.

      Rodriguez is just 1 of 25-40 players and an athlete in his 30s – people generally accept/understand this. They generally don’t accept/understand executives in their middle age and beyond conducting themselves in the manner the Yankees’ have (eg leaking information, inappropriate public statements, and profane comments) – it hurts a brand well cultivated.

      Jeter more than cancels out Rodriguez. Who cancels out the executive that get down in the mud and leak information or tell Alex to shut the ‘f’ up?

    4. MJ Recanati
      July 29th, 2013 | 2:39 pm

      KPOcala wrote:

      CBA, excepted, how is a contract NOT voidable when a player illegally misrepresents, in effect, his “credentials”.

      No matter what we may think, it’s impossible to draw a direct 1:1 correlation between the use of PED’s and performance. Moreover, since it’s also nearly impossible to know when a player began using PED’s, it’s similarly impossible to know if (or when) a player began to “misrepresent his credentials.” Andy Pettitte admitted using HGH to recover from injuries during the 2002 (I believe) season. Do we know if his PED use made him pitch better? Do we draw the line at “improvement” as a misrepresentation of credentials then?

      KPOcala wrote:

      If in “the real world”, someone crafted a resume that was fraudulent, he damn well better have produced some impressive work before he was “outed”.

      Again, this type of thinking implies that 10 cc’s of a substance should equate to X level of incrementally-improved performance. It just doesn’t work like that. Though we may believe that some players’ statistics are enhanced beyond their true talent levels, we just don’t know enough to state that with any degree of certainty.

      KPOcala wrote:

      And I can’t fathom how that the CBA isn’t trumped by Federal Law.

      The CBA isn’t trumped by federal law, it’s just that doing something that is illegal doesn’t automatically carry a penalty under the CBA. It would take a commissioner’s invokation of his power under Article XII(B) of the CBA (Conduct Detrimental or Prejudicial to Baseball, whcih gives the commissioner the right to discipline players “for just cause for conduct that is materially detrimental or materially prejudicial to the best interests of Baseball including, but not limited to, engaging in conduct in violation of federal, state or local law.”

      Commissioners have historically chosen to suspend a player rather than void a player’s contract for violation of law. The latter is far more difficult and costly an undertaking than the former.

    5. MJ Recanati
      July 29th, 2013 | 2:42 pm

      MJ Recanati wrote:

      invokation of

      *invoking

      I hate when I have typos…

    6. #15
      July 29th, 2013 | 3:10 pm

      I’m still hoping for the whole enchilada, i.e., banned for life and no salary under the best interests clause, but if A-Rod goes down the ~ 1.5 year suspension route, the Yanks still stand to save around 35 million in salary between this year and next. Maybe, beyond that, they negotiate some relief for the out years as well. That’s a nice nucleus for accelerating a revamping of the team, especially when you combine it with Mo’s salary, Grandy’s salary, the chump change the owe Wells, and the reduction in Jeter’s take (the likely outcome). They would appear to be stuck with just two bad contracts at that point… Tex (who would have produced better than Overbay this year) and CC (I think the jury is still out on his elbow). Clearing out A-Rod, even if it’s only for 1.5 years would be a huge step toward rebuilding the Yankees. Just wish I had more faith this crowd will spend it wisely.

    7. MJ Recanati
      July 29th, 2013 | 3:13 pm

      #15 wrote:

      Just wish I had more faith this crowd will spend it wisely.

      Or spend it at all.

    8. #15
      July 29th, 2013 | 5:23 pm

      @ MJ Recanati:

      The Stadium is going to get awful large and empty if they don’t improve the on-field product. They can maybe draft off of the Jeter victory lap a bit, but without better baseball and a team that can hit a lick, there will be a big drop in fannies in the seats.

      Assuming they have the dough to throw around… Who should they spend it on?

    9. Raf
      July 29th, 2013 | 5:37 pm

      They have the dough, they choose not to spend it.

    10. MJ Recanati
      July 29th, 2013 | 5:47 pm

      Raf wrote:

      They have the dough, they choose not to spend it.

      Exactly.

    11. PHMDen
      July 29th, 2013 | 6:21 pm

      #15 wrote:

      Tex (who would have produced better than Overbay this year) and CC (I think the jury is still out on his elbow).

      Better to trade a player a year too early rather than a year too late. Too late.
      #15 wrote:

      Just wish I had more faith this crowd will spend it wisely.

      Easy to spend it wisely when a Tex or CC is on the market.

    12. 77yankees
      July 29th, 2013 | 8:41 pm

      I hope Lurch and Secret Squirrel in the Yankee front office are too smart not to consider this route.

      Then again, after the moat seats debacle in the new Stadium, I wouldn’t put it past them.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.