STLtoday.com

BrummerStealsHome wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 09:29 am

RobbieRe wrote: ↑02 Aug 2025 23:05 pm In the business world, I learned the importance of building a “Brand”. Unfortunately, after several years the St. Louis Cardinals Brand has been terribly damaged.

Additionally, I also learned that rebuilding attendance, is not like turning a water faucet on and off. Unfortunately, we can probably not expect attendance levels to come back quickly. If attendance does not come back soon enough, will ownership spend the money.

How did we get here? The root cause of this dilemma is the severe damage to the St. Louis Cardinals Brand. Who is to blame for this deterioration?

I'm not one to reflexively blame those in charge when bad things happen. I was a Marmot supporter long past when many posters here wanted his hide. Same with Mo. The Cardinals brand is severely damaged, and the responsibility for that lies with the chairman. Loyalty is a good thing, even in sport, but the chairman put loyalty over everything, including the brand. When Mo and his operating team got stale and lost their way, he should have moved the enterprise in another direction to right the ship. He didn't do it. And granting MO this lame duck season with Bloom in the background is terrible business practice. In many ways this is a lost season because of that. A half-[ashed] rebuild is the result.

The brand is not irretrievably lost. It can be restored, and relatively quickly, with a determined effort to do so. Can the chairman do it? Will he, once Bloom takes over? We'll see.

cardstatman wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 00:02 am

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑02 Aug 2025 23:54 pm

RobbieRe wrote: ↑02 Aug 2025 23:05 pm In the business world, I learned the importance of building a “Brand”. Unfortunately, after several years the St. Louis Cardinals Brand has been terribly damaged.

Additionally, I also learned that rebuilding attendance, is not like turning a water faucet on and off. Unfortunately, we can probably not expect attendance levels to come back quickly. If attendance does not come back soon enough, will ownership spend the money.

How did we get here? The root cause of this dilemma is the severe damage to the St. Louis Cardinals Brand. Who is to blame for this deterioration?

I don’t know I think the fans will come flooding back. Attendance was down then in 1996 new ownership came in jocketty was turned loose and a flurry of exciting moves brought fans flooding back. Same could happen if they turn bloom loose. I still remember how exciting that offseason was after years of meh

Yes. Turnover of players would help.

Since I don't see the Cards competing in 2026 or 2027, I'm okay with trading Nootbar and maybe even Donovan as long as the return is something to get excited about. Make Romero closer and trade him at the 2026 trade deadline. Need to move on from Gorman. Send Walker back to AAA for 2026 and see if he can dominate AAA. Take a look at Saggese. Look at Torres (as the super versatile 13th man).

Get back to a good defense and your pitchers will look better.

desertrat23 wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 09:38 am

BrummerStealsHome wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 09:29 am

RobbieRe wrote: ↑02 Aug 2025 23:05 pm In the business world, I learned the importance of building a “Brand”. Unfortunately, after several years the St. Louis Cardinals Brand has been terribly damaged.

Additionally, I also learned that rebuilding attendance, is not like turning a water faucet on and off. Unfortunately, we can probably not expect attendance levels to come back quickly. If attendance does not come back soon enough, will ownership spend the money.

How did we get here? The root cause of this dilemma is the severe damage to the St. Louis Cardinals Brand. Who is to blame for this deterioration?

I'm not one to reflexively blame those in charge when bad things happen. I was a Marmot supporter long past when many posters here wanted his hide. Same with Mo. The Cardinals brand is severely damaged, and the responsibility for that lies with the chairman. Loyalty is a good thing, even in sport, but the chairman put loyalty over everything, including the brand. When Mo and his operating team got stale and lost their way, he should have moved the enterprise in another direction to right the ship. He didn't do it. And granting MO this lame duck season with Bloom in the background is terrible business practice. In many ways this is a lost season because of that. A half-[ashed] rebuild is the result.

The brand is not irretrievably lost. It can be restored, and relatively quickly, with a determined effort to do so. Can the chairman do it? Will he, once Bloom takes over? We'll see.

Yes. They put the bulk of the “rebuild/reset” whatever on hold for a year out of loyalty to ONE MAN.

I wonder how much that decision has cost them in attendance/revenue? And if it was worth it?