You may recall my note of 19 October to Mr. William H. Neukom, MGP/CEO, and his reply of 29 October. He stated most artfully:
Be assured that we continually look for ways to improve and a winning team is always at the top of our objective list.
I didn't know we--er, the Giants--had an "objective list." But since they do, and we know that they do because W.H.N. said so, it seems time to talk about it (the list, that is) in more specific terms. In other words, what's on the list? And, uh, can we see it? At least we know "a winning team" is on the list, and it is "at the top." Does that mean it IS the top? Or just ONE of the top items? I'm having trouble with that wording. Seems a fella like W.H.N with his Dartmouth A.B. and his Stanford LL.B and all would have little trouble saying exactly what he means to say. And since he said something that isn't EXACTLY clear, I can only assume that was his intent. It would be OK with me if W.H.N. said "a robust revenue stream" was priority number one because it takes one of those to build a good club. Hey, I'm a practical guy. I'm down with capitalism and the free market thing. I got no beef with a business being business-like. It takes the big bucks to build the big winners, don't it? How 'bout those Yankees? I can join hands with the congregation and praise the Almighty Dollar just as well as any good American. So it's OK, Mr. N., you can come clean. If "$$" is numero uno and "in play--runs" is numero dos, let's just 'fess up and be done, OK?
For the record, here's my objective list:
1. Win the World Series.
2. Do everything in the organization with objective number one in mind.
3. Get rid of anyone who does not abide by objective number two.
It's a good thing I'm not the MGP/CEO. I'd be a tiresome bore, constantly droning on about winning the World Series. No one would want to work for me.
"Hey, boss, I got us some donuts!"
"That's fine, son, but how does it helps us with Objective Number One?"
You see? Tiresome.
God help me, I can't wait for Spring Training.