Who should own the Dodgers?
It's pretty hard to find a fan who thinks the nearly-divorced Frank and Jamie McCourt should continue owning the Dodgers. But now that they've agreed to put the franchise up for sale, it's less clear who the new owners will be, or how they will run the team.
Over the past few days, several intriguing ideas have come up.
Local news from across Southern California
Peter O'Malley, whose father brought the Dodgers to Los Angeles in the first place more than 50 years ago, has said he would like to buy the team back from the McCourts. Other names floating around: Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, or the TV companies that might be interested buying a piece of the team so they can show the games.
O’Malley, who sold the team to Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. in 1998., seems to be the sentimental favorite. But the 73-year-old still has to put together a group of investors to make the purchase.
In a piece in the Los Angeles Times on Friday, notoriously contrarian columnist T.J. Simers questioned the idea, saying that while he respects and likes O’Malley, the team was “irrelevant under O'Malley his last nine years on the job.”
One idea that has local fans buzzing is a proposal – backed by Congresswoman Janice Hahn – to let the public own the team. To that end, Hahn re-introduced a bill this week to prevent Major League Baseball from stepping in to prevent such a deal.
Stanley Stalford, a local developer and chairman of the group, “Own the Dodgers,” told NBC LA’s Colleen Williams he wants to sell shares in the team to local residents so they can band together to buy it.
Each share would cost $500, Stalford said, and if 2 million shares were sold, it would raise $1 billion – the price McCourt has said he wants for the team.
“The team should be owned by Angelenos,” Stalford said.