LA Times: Villaraigosa asks baseball to pick local owner for Dodgers

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/11/villaraigosa-asks-baseball-to-pick-local-owner-for-dodgers.html

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa issued the following declaration: “Dodger fans and all Angelenos deserve an owner who loves and believes in this city, who understands that the Dodgers and their historic baseball stadium are not just a team; they are a collective community asset.” [he wrote to the commissioner.]

1) They are not a "collective community asset." They are not the Green Bay Packers. You might really like them, even love them, and really want them to win, but they belong to the owner(s). 2) They have only been a "community asset" since 1962, when the original owner came with them from NYC. And they seemed to do alright.

The Mayor continued: “I understand that Major League Baseball is a business first and the outcome of any auction and final decisions must be fiscally successful for all.  However, I urge you to weigh heavily the merits of local ownership.”

No. In fact, I put forth the argument that local ownership is a very low priority.

The Dodgers need, even deserve, a complete culture change and new direction. They've been saddled with a pair of Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum owners for the better part of the last decade and need to be freed from that mire. And that mire was influenced by the cesspool that is the "LA Culture" of self-indulgence and me-me-me attitude. Someone from the outside, who will always remain vigilant and resist the Reality TV Star identity, is exactly what the Dodgers need. Someone from outside the LA bubble.

Priority number one is someone that is passionate about baseball and expects the best from their players and their entire organization. The thought often occurs to me that many East Coasters move to Los Angeles because they know they can use their domineering attitudes to rule native, laid-back Californians like kings. If the future owner is local, my guess is that chances are slim they're originally from here. Not sure that jives with the underlying theme of what Tony is saying above.

Another important priority is breaking with the past. The biggest change that needs to happen would also be the most-controversial: demolish Dodger Stadium. It is terrible. I haven't enjoyed a single seating area in the stadium; I'm either the length of a football field away from the action or I'm baking in the sun on a crummy bleacher with no breeze. And this comes from someone who attended dozens of games yearly at the multipurpose, function-over-style Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium.

Dodger Stadium has got to go. The Dodgers need to work out a situation where they play as long as it takes in either a time-share situation in Anaheim or at the Coliseum. In that time, tear the stadium down to the ground and start over. First, turn the whole stadium around and have it face the city. Who decided the visual attraction beyond the outfield should be a non-descript section of barren hillside instead of a bustling metropolis? Then go about building the all-important corporate suites and exclusive dining clubs, but subtract about 8-10,000 seats and bring them all closer to the field. And for God's sake, cover the bleachers with more than a tin roof. With the space saved from the smaller footprint, build an actual place for the "collective community" to gather around the stadium, both before and after games. And build it on the stadium grounds. Instead of pouring more pavement, build restaurants, bars, and condominiums. Something akin to the neighborhoods around Yankee Stadium, Fenway, and Wrigley. Build Dodgerville, for crying out loud!

The other big priority I'll mention here is rebuilding the farm system. The Dodgers are not going to have a lot of play money for a long time, because it's all going to be wrapped up in buying the damn thing. They won't be able to sign big-time free agents, just like they haven't the last two years of the McCourt Reign. They have to harvest from within, and that means well-structured farm teams with plentiful pools of talent. And the talent has to be attracted by one thing: an owner committed to excellence and winning.

If all of that can come from someone who is "local," great, but, for me, it doesn't matter which city that sort of ambition and determination calls home.