Another Jim Pohlad Interview

[jimmer]

 

Seriously?  He answered the question Oscar posed.  Are you saying he was stupid to ask the question or are you upset that Oscar didn't do research on all things said by Jim Pohlad?

My issues have zero to do with the interviewer at all. My issue has to do with an owner who seems completely clueless.

[jimmer]

 

No one is criticizing Oscar at all. His interview was fantastic. He asked direct questions and wrote piece perfectly. And like a good writer he is getting his readers talking about it. The answers given by Pohlad were not what you want to hear coming from the owner of your favorite baseball team. In my opinion Pohlad seems disinterested in the Baseball business.

I think questions Oscar asked were very professiinal. Pohlad's answers on the other hand seem amateurish.

exactly. nothing in my posts even come close to suggesting I was criticizing the interviewer and everything to do with the responses given by the owner/leader of a MLB team.

[HitInAPinch]

 

No one is criticizing Oscar at all. His interview was fantastic. He asked direct questions and wrote piece perfectly. And like a good writer he is getting his readers talking about it. The answers given by Pohlad were not what you want to hear coming from the owner of your favorite baseball team. In my opinion Pohlad seems disinterested in the Baseball business.

I think questions Oscar asked were very professiinal. Pohlad's answers on the other hand seem amateurish.

Okay. What’s the worst part of owning a sports team?   Very cool question!

[bird]

 

Ok, he WAS wrong on the number of winning month.  There were exactly 2:  May 20-7 and Sept, 15-13.  Aug was 14-14.  The month of May DID carry the whole season.

 

"The importance of winning is so highlighted in our market, it takes the fun out of the actual game."

 

Next sentence:  "I’m so worried the team is not going to win and people are going to hate the Twins and not come to the ballpark, that it takes the enjoyment out of watching the game, and it’s an enjoyable game. It takes that away."

 

In other words, it takes the fun out of the actual game FOR HIM.

 

'One problem with the Twins: people don’t seem to leave. There isn’t a lot of turnover'

 

The question was:  What advice do you have for kids who want to work in sports?

It was about the office people, not the team. 

 

'One theory: the team isn’t as good as we thought it was. Maybe we’re doing something wrong in developing players. Maybe last year was just a fluke. Maybe they appeared to play better than they really did.'

 

Why would a person single that out, when the first 2 sentences were:  "We’re trying to figure that out. A lot of people have looked at it. It doesn’t appear to be just one thing."

 

Pohlad's responses were legit.  Oscar did a good job:  good questions and I liked the flow.

 

 

Thank you for adding some context that others chose to simply ignore. Adding this context does nothing to de-legitimize arguments that Jim Pohlad and the other members of the Twins Board of Directors couldn't do a lot of good by re-shaping their thinking about their ownership goals, their relationship with the community and various segments of the fan base, etc. Proper context simply makes good discussion possible. Otherwise, the thread just turns into a lot of vapid ranting with an occasional reasoned thought.

[Loosey]

Okay. What’s the worst part of owning a sports team? Very cool question!

Seems like a perfectly acceptable question to me. He may have been expecting kids glove type of answer. But Pohlad was open and honest. Which no-one has faulted him for. He is very honest in his answers from what I have read in interviews. Maybe too honest in telling readers of his disinterest.

 

But the question was legit.

[ashbury]

I don't know why, but the article's photo cracks me up. In a good way.

 

[ashbury]

At one point he was asked if enjoyed going to Twins games. His answer was "I think I have to go to the games. If I don’t, it’s hard to tell people they should go."

Be fair. He did go on to clarify that going to games wasn't a hardship.

[TheLeviathan]

I think a lot of this is Pohlad talking to an 11 year old and trying to tailor his remarks to that.  I think that's where the weirdness of the "fun" comments come from.  I wouldn't take this too seriously.

[ashbury]

I think a lot of this is Pohlad talking to an 11 year old and trying to tailor his remarks to that.  I think that's where the weirdness of the "fun" comments come from.  I wouldn't take this too seriously.

Then again, seeing how one talks to a (bright) 11 year old offers an additional insight to how anyone's mind works.

[Loosey]

Be fair. He did go on to clarify that going to games wasn't a hardship.

That's the part that got me mad actually. He could of said "don't get me wrong, it's awesome I get to go to any Twins game I want and sit in a suite." instead he said it's not a hardship. Granted he could have said it with a tongue in cheek smile, since we didn't hear the interview . But I would guess he would rather do something else and Twins games are part of the job onto him.

[nicksaviking]

Then again, seeing how one talks to a (bright) 11 year old offers an additional insight to how anyone's mind works.

And to me, it didn't sound like he was condescending or even choosing his words carefully. He mostly sounded unprepared and perhaps not too adept at speaking off the cuff.

 

There was a time you could toss a token interview to a kid, a student newspaper or a small town reporter and no one would ever know or care. Now is not that time.

[big dog]

If I were the owner, I could imagine how tied up in knots I would be about this team (and this half-decade).  I would be really worried about what I should be doing, and probably uncertain about how to do it.  I would feel like I had to go to the games in order to see what I might be able to do, and I can see how that wouldn't be nearly as fun as if I were an ordinary fan with a lot less to worry about with respect to every single thing that happens at Target Field.

 

Does anyone think Glen Taylor enjoys sitting in his suite and watching the Wolves night after night?

 

Look at all the posters here who have said they will not go to TF until TR is fired, or whatever else they want happens.  Why should any owner be laughing about how great it is to get to go to the ballgame and watch this product every night?  Think how this board would light up if Pohlad had said how much he enjoyed this year's team.

 

PS, great job by the interviewer.  And it's nice of JP to sit down with him for this.

[ashbury]

So you decided not to read the interview then?

Actually I also found that part of the interview difficult to process. He says literally, to the worst part of owning a sports team? "The importance of winning is so highlighted in our market, it takes the fun out of the actual game." And then he goes on to contrast the situation to the Yankees. He apparently doesn't realize the baseline of the typical Yankees fan going into each season is for that team to win the World Series. The difference, he implies by mentioning the "much bigger population", is that they still fill up the ballpark even in bad seasons, Thus, he is still trying to find a way to sing the Small Market Blues, without coming right out and saying it.

 

The weird part is that he asked for it. In answer to What’s the hardest part? he closed by saying "You should have asked me what’s the worst part of owning a sports team." So he apparently thirsts to be asked that, then he dances around his real point.

 

As for his clean whiff on the question What do you think is the best seat at Target Field? IMO he should take a page from Bill Veeck and go sit in the cheap seats (or some good ones) with random fans. Best way in the world to take the pulse of his customer base. And he'd gain an opinion on the seats, as a bonus.

 

Honestly, I'm not slamming Pohlad as a bad owner. I'm sure an interview with me could be picked apart. Kudos to him for sitting down with the boy. But the funny thing is that if I did get picked apart, it would be an opportunity to re-consider the things being mentioned, and see if I might not want to modify what I'm doing. At the very least, he should consider getting a refresher course in "Public Relations for Accounting Majors".

 

I think we should replace our world of journalists with 11-year-olds. Interview subjects might let down their guard more.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

"The importance of winning is so highlighted in our market, it takes the fun out of the actual game."

 

I don't mean this as a dig at Pohlad in any way, but it is entirely possible that we Twins fans read that and think "the game of baseball" while Pohlad thinks "the game of making money hand over fist as a baseball team owner."

 

Just a thought.

[Riverbrian]

 

I agree that his responses can easily be taken out of context. On the other hand, he did a lot of that himself by saying barely-sensical things like this:

 

The importance of winning is so highlighted in our market, it takes the fun out of the actual game.

 

and this

 

It’s not fun to watch the game for the sake of watching the game.

 

Sooooo, fans wanting to win takes the fun out of the game, AND it's not fun to watch a baseball game just for the sake of watching a baseball game? Exactly what is the correct way to enjoy a baseball game, are there other options?

 

My take aways from the two recent Jim Pohlad interviews:

 

1) He may not be as bright as we might hope.

 

2) He isn't as seasoned at giving interviews as more experienced Twins personnel.

 

3) He almost certainly underestimated the journalistic skills of an 11-year-old.

 

3)  Explains it in my opinion. 

 

He was talking to an 11 year old sitting across the table.

 

I think the answers would sound different if Ed Bradley was across the table.  

 

 

 

 

[nicksaviking]

3)  Explains it in my opinion. 

 

He was talking to an 11 year old sitting across the table.

 

I think the answers would sound different if Ed Bradley was across the table.

 

Maybe. I wish I hadn't used the word bright. I really meant quick witted. From most accounts George W Bush was pretty intelligent despite his Billy Madison-esque responses to questions. The responses here sounded similar to me.

[Hrbowski]

How many people think that going to work is fun?

[Craig Arko]

How many people think that going to work is fun?

You got me there.

[jimmer]

 

How many people think that going to work is fun?

Obviously, if I had the money, I'd wouldn't work, but since that isn't the case, other than about 4 years of my adult life, I had fun at work. Still do.  

 

If I had a job watching baseball, that would be a dream job that I would never tire of.

[old nurse]

 

How many people think that going to work is fun?

My job can be fun. Can be a real nightmare. But part of the fun is surviving the nightmares.

[USAFChief]

How many people think that going to work is fun?

You're young enough to end up one of the few.

[Champuckett]

I remember when I was about 10 years old, just about the same age as this kid, and I was attending a Twins Fest with my mom.  Carl Pohlad was on the Metrodome floor walking around and he saw me with my terrible neon green Twins cap which were popular in the early 90's.

 

He actually approached us while we were checking out the World Series trophies and he seemed very interested in my enjoyment of the Twins and baseball in general.  He wished us luck and to have fun in continuing to watch and support the Twins.  My mom said she was blown away that such a rich business man would give some average fans like us the time of day and go out of his way to greet us.  But he did.

 

I think the Pohlad's have a soft spot for children and to a greater extent, families, and it shows with this article, the level of honesty he gave to these answers to this kid that has an interest in baseball and the Twins.  I think they are all about being family friendly and that's why you always hear an emphasis on concessions and bringing the family to the park.  That's what Carl wanted and those values were instilled in his sons.

 

It's just not enough to "have fun" and put out a competitive product unfortunately and never will be.  I do appreciate what the Pohlad's did for the state of Minnesota, giving us our only 2 professional sports wins in the modern era, but I think it's clear it is time for them to move on and get into other business ventures.  Something where there is not so much pressure to please a large fan base that are getting hurt by caring about such a lousy product on a daily basis.  You can't be so delicate in this business and I think that's what they continue to be, delicate, to such a degree that necessary decision making does not happen, ala rehiring Terry Ryan, Bill Smith, etc.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I think the Pohlad's have a soft spot for children and to a greater extent, families, and it shows with this article, the level of honesty he gave to these answers to this kid that has an interest in baseball and the Twins. I think they are all about being family friendly and that's why you always hear an emphasis on concessions and bringing the family to the park. That's what Carl wanted and those values were instilled in his sons.

 

Actually, Target Field is generally considered one of the more family unfriendly MLB parks these days.

[Ncgo4]

A baseball team these days with MLB.com, TV, Cable, satellite radio, $299 jerseys (made in Bangledesh) and $200 million gov't subsidies for team owned stadiums is a cash printing machine. Almost the only time a franchise is sold is for tax reasons following death of a majority owner. Even then the first choice is to sell other businesses and keep the ball club.

[Linus]

Actually, Target Field is generally considered one of the more family unfriendly MLB parks these days.

Generally considered by whom?

[Dman]

I guess I am the only homer that some what understands his statement about the focus on winning takes away some of the beauty of the game. To me if you are a truly unbiased and objective baseball fan you love watching players from both sides making great baseball plays. Sure you want "your" team to win but great baseball is great baseball. Even great teams lose. Granted ultimately we measure a teams success by wins and losses but if you really love baseball you just love baseball.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Generally considered by whom?

There have been a few reviews of MLB parks that have noted it, as well as fans here.

 

Here was a review from 2011, and nothing has changed in this regard since:

http://www.ballparkratings.com/viewpark/n/Target_Field/f/Amenities

 

Target Field’s one severe flaw, while obviously not fatal, is the complete lack of entertainment options and kid related activities.

 

It’s obvious with the land restraints that they weren’t going to have some requite amenity.I’d rather a couple restaurants than a playground.But by my account, it’s the only ballpark built in more than 20 years to lack any significant activities for the kids, other than new Yankee Stadium.No playgrounds.No speed pitch.No batting cages.And while most of us don’t care, it’s hard to overlook that when judging amenities.

[TheLeviathan]

Most people don't know how to talk to kids.  That's really all this is.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I guess I am the only homer that some what understands his statement about the focus on winning takes away some of the beauty of the game. To me if you are a truly unbiased and objective baseball fan you love watching players from both sides making great baseball plays. Sure you want "your" team to win but great baseball is great baseball. Even great teams lose. Granted ultimately we measure a teams success by wins and losses but if you really love baseball you just love baseball.

But he also says this is an issue "in our market" and then compares us unfavorably to Yankee fans. That is the part that is confusing. If he was talking in universal, generic terms like you, it would make more sense.

[ashbury]

But he also says this is an issue "in our market" and then compares us unfavorably to Yankee fans. That is the part that is confusing. If he was talking in universal, generic terms like you, it would make more sense.

Pohlad would have done himself better to take the "focus on winning" in the direction of explaining what a beautiful sport it is and, even if you root root root for the home team and they don't win, it's not a shame because you were watching an interesting game that most people can understand the fine details of and enjoy what is going on (or second guess if they like) and see some plays that most mortals can't make, yet it's being played by mortals and not freaks of nature in most cases such as in other sports. Then he'd be criticized for being schmaltzy, I suppose.