Mark A.

[Bulldogboy]

I was watching the presser for new Padres owners and it got me to thinking is Mark A overrated or underrated as Brewers owner? I have slandered him plenty here for being cheap and zero world series is a bad look for him. On the other hand I remember before he was the owner this team was Trats quality and he does deserve credit for being good caretaker of the public trust. I am torn but I'm going to say slightly underrated for now and if he can get us over the hump it becomes a no brainer. I would love to see him raise the trophy once and for all because I think he deserves it but he also has the power to impact it with his wallet. Thoughts?

[cragi]

vastly underrated for anyone who survived the Selig years. The org is run very tight from top to bottom. Dodgers-quality org on a T-Rats budget.

[owbc]

I think he was highly underrated during the Stearns and Counsell era. In the Arnold/Murphy era people have realized that the guy has built an incredible organization. 

As OP says, he's gotta raise that trophy to get full credit. 

 

[craigharmann]

1 minute ago, cragi said:

vastly underrated for anyone who survived the Selig years. The org is run very tight from top to bottom. Dodgers-quality org on a T-Rats budget.

That's what I was going to say. I grew up during the 80's, 90's and early 2000's on Brewers baseball. While those teams built my love of baseball, they were moderately competitive. And the farm system for other teams (see Gary Sheffield, Greg Vaughn and more). This is different. This feels built and long term. And credit needs to go to Mark for seeing this through. Now we have to get the trophy. 

[Brewcrew82]

Underrated to the nth degree. There's a reason the Brewers are now pretty much universally acclaimed as THE model small market organization, as their W% this decade is surpassed only by the Dodgers (last two seasons they've even been better than the Dodgers). It's because of Mark A. and his organizational hires. It starts at the top. Then you consider where this organization was before he bought the team.....

The lack of a WS to this point is simply a byproduct of the gargantuan obstacles put in front of small markets (with the Brewers being the literal smallest market) under MLB's existing financial structure. The behemoth that is the Friedman Dodgers arising during this period has only exacerbated this unfortunately. 

[MrTPlush]

The only owner that is probably better than Mark A is the Dodgers owner. Both are on polar opposites of the financial playing field and have built behemoths. Obviously the Brewers have less success, but what they have done and built for their market size is bordering historical at this point.

Dodgers may have the most money and the biggest market…but they are geniuses for working the system to the insane level they have.

[liveforoctober]

I'm not going to say anything new that anyone else here hasn't heard or felt or lived themselves ... but I was born in 1984 (for the context of this team's history). I have a few early, early memories of being at Brewers games when I was real young ... but one of the earliest CLEAREST memories I have of Brewers baseball is standing in the kitchen with my dad listening to Yount's 3000th on the radio. My dad clapped his hands once and threw them in the air as Uecker called it out and he was 25% emotional saying "oh, he did it!". I heard his voice catch. That was my first real "oh, wait ... baseball is awesome" moment.

I then went through the same thing you all did for the next 25+ years. Hitting the middle of August and plotting out the schedule to find a path to .500. Getting excited when we signed Jeffrey Hammonds because "this is the free agent acquisition we've been needing!". Signing Bob Hamlin and low key thinking "this guy was rookie of the year... there is an star in there somewhere". "Cal Eldred is going to carry us!". "Manny Parra could be an ace!". etc, etc ... only to be wondering each year by June which guy on our squad MLB was going to mercifully hand an all-star nod to so we could be represented.

To look at the standings today and see the Brewers 31 games above .500 is unfathomable to me. These are video game standings and something I would have bet my life back in the late 90s was unattainable for our team. Pair that with the best farm system in all of the game and the fact that I can still buy an SRO ticket for $10-$20* and carry in my own drinks to watch the Brewers on the cheap most days that I desire....

Mark A is vastly underrated. I want a title FOR him as opposed to IN SPITE of him, as some others seemingly have positioned themselves.

 

[RobertCrawley]

In my view, he spends less than one might hope, but he makes fantastic hires. Overall, the Brewers are an extremely well run organization that has brought this franchise out of years and years of painful mediocrity (if you will recall). It's an owner/GM success story.

[Fear The Chorizo]

It needs to be stated constantly that Mark A is the Brewers' principal and managing owner...but he doesn't even have more than a 50% stake in the overall organization.  Spending less than one might hope is fair - but like it or not the organization's spending power doesn't rely on Mark A's personal checkbook (which wouldn't help at all since I'd imagine most of his wealth isn't liquid).  It relies on the amount of revenue the league's smallest market can generate routinely.  Despite crappy tv broadcast revenue money and the geographic limitations the Brewers have for market size, the Brewers have rarely found themselves at the absolute bottom of league payroll - and that's a huge credit to Mark A. and the overall ownership group building an organization that operates like a mid-market ball club.

I don't see how anyone can view Mark A. as a negative in any way for the Brewers' organization.

[Fear The Chorizo]

51 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

The only owner that is probably better than Mark A is the Dodgers owner. Both are on polar opposites of the financial playing field and have built behemoths. Obviously the Brewers have less success, but what they have done and built for their market size is bordering historical at this point.

Dodgers may have the most money and the biggest market…but they are geniuses for working the system to the insane level they have.

It helps having an owner who dabbles in insurance companies to create what is likely a felony-level circular ponzi scheme for printing revenues in one of the largest TV markets in the world, I guess.

[Jopal78]

Where is the “Cheap Ass” meme? 
 

That he took over an irrelevant franchise has been mostly hands-off and incredibly loyal to the folks running the baseball team yet presided over the reemergence into relevancy and the  longest era of continued success is pretty much all one needs to know
 

 

[RobertCrawley]

7 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

It needs to be stated constantly that Mark A is the Brewers' principal and managing owner...but he doesn't even have more than a 50% stake in the overall organization.  Spending less than one might hope is fair - but like it or not the organization's spending power doesn't rely on Mark A's personal checkbook (which wouldn't help at all since I'd imagine most of his wealth isn't liquid).  It relies on the amount of revenue the league's smallest market can generate routinely.  Despite crappy tv broadcast revenue money and the geographic limitations the Brewers have for market size, the Brewers have rarely found themselves at the absolute bottom of league payroll - and that's a huge credit to Mark A. and the overall ownership group building an organization that operates like a mid-market ball club.

I don't see how anyone can view Mark A. as a negative in any way for the Brewers' organization.

It must be said that the public has not seen the books. We don't know how much the franchise is making.

Attanasio's bigger challenge might be getting the Canaries of Norwich City back in the Premiere League. It's been a rough few years there.

[Fear The Chorizo]

10 minutes ago, RobertCrawley said:

It must be said that no one has ever seen the books. We don't know how much the franchise is making.

Attanasio's bigger challenge might be getting the Canaries of Norwich City back in the Premiere League. It's been a rough few years there.

Whenever I read something like this, it never feels like the expenses an organization has to cover are taken into account, either.  When you say "making", is that based on profit or just income/revenue?  

The Packers, one of the few professional teams forced to disclose their books annually due to being publicly held, operated at a slight loss in 2026 despite huge advantages in shared TV money and a more nationwide following.  Them playing in a league with a salary cap tied to what the NFL brings in revenue-wise is a much different way to operate a franchise without worrying about longterm sustainability to run a team with increasing player payroll with contracts that are fully guaranteed - let alone remaining competitive when the financial playing field is equal for onfield players and one franchise QB can automatically guarantee you an annual postseason shot.

Based on recent events in the news, I'd imagine the Dodgers books look like a singed and crumpled up 9th grade book report gone wrong with how cooked they probably are.  And that's the team primarily driving the explosion in revenue disparity across MLB - what percentage of it is actually above-board is highly debatable at this point.

[RobertCrawley]

3 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

Whenever I read something like this, it never feels like the expenses an organization has to cover are taken into account, either.  When you say "making", is that based on profit or just income/revenue?  

The Packers, one of the few professional teams forced to disclose their books annually due to being publicly held, operated at a slight loss in 2026 despite huge advantages in shared TV money and a more nationwide following.  Them playing in a league with a salary cap tied to what the NFL brings in revenue-wise is a much different way to operate a franchise without worrying about longterm sustainability to run a team with increasing player payroll with contracts that are fully guaranteed - let alone remaining competitive when the financial playing field is equal for onfield players and one franchise QB can automatically guarantee you an annual postseason shot.

Based on recent events in the news, I'd imagine the Dodgers books look like a singed and crumpled up 9th grade book report gone wrong with how cooked they probably are.  And that's the team primarily driving the explosion in revenue disparity across MLB - what percentage of it is actually above-board is highly debatable at this point.

We don't know the bottom line of the Brewers organization. Better than to imagine the Dodger's ledger, it'd be better to see it, no? Belief is not evidence.

 

[Fear The Chorizo]

1 minute ago, RobertCrawley said:

We don't know the bottom line. 

We do know that a business has to make a profit to attract investor interest - expecting an ownership group to not receive some sort of dividend/return on investment annually and just hold an asset indefinitely until the franchise is sold is not realistic.

I think people assume MLB teams rake in much more profit annually than they actually do