Skip to content

Braves president: we couldn’t tell anyone we were moving to Cobb County. They may have opposed it!

May 27, 2014, 1:30 PM EDT

John Schuerholz

This happened last week, but I’m just seeing it now via Deadspin. It’s Braves president John Schuerholz speaking to the Atlanta Press Club, talking about why the deal to move the Braves out of Turner Field and up to Cobb County had to be done so secretly:

“It didn’t leak out. If it had leaked out, this deal would not have gotten done,” he said.

Schuerholz told press and business leaders in Atlanta that he couldn’t have completed the Braves’ deal with Cobb County in public.

“If it had gotten out, more people would have started taking the position of, ‘We don’t want that to happen. We want to see how viable this was going to be,'” Schuerholz said. “We were able to get that all done.”

In other words: “if we told anyone we were doing it they may have opposed it and questioned whether it was a good idea, and that would’ve been awful for us!”

I suppose that’s a rare bit of candor for a corporate welfare recipient, although I assume it was unintentional.

  1. chacochicken - May 27, 2014 at 1:34 PM

    It is much harder to steal from someone when they are aware of the theft as it is taking place.

    • tbird05 - May 27, 2014 at 2:17 PM

      So, I wonder who has the obligation to make the public aware here…the public officials or the Braves front office?

      • chacochicken - May 27, 2014 at 2:38 PM

        I suppose some obligations are moral ones. If either party has to lower their voices then something shady is taking place. Selling stolen goods and receiving goods one knows to be stolen are both crimes. (I’m killing the analogies today)

      • tbird05 - May 27, 2014 at 2:59 PM

        The good news about moral obligations is how driven they are by the public…lets see how many viewers/fans the Braves lose as a result of this. If they tank, then we will know what society thinks about this moral obligation. If they don’t, well, you get the point…

    • 18thstreet - May 27, 2014 at 3:29 PM

      I wonder how many of the Cobb County Commissioners campaigned on transparency in government.

  2. gosport474 - May 27, 2014 at 1:36 PM

    Still not quite as bad as ‘If you like your health insurance, you can keep it’ but still very politician-like of him.

    • tbird05 - May 27, 2014 at 2:15 PM

      As someone who lost their health insurance, was forced to purchase a new policy (yes, the cost doubled) from the only insurer in the state that is offering ACA sanctioned policies, and then gets counted as someone who now “has insurance as a result of ACA”….I resemble that remark.

      I wonder how many people that gave you a thumbs down lost a policy they liked because of ACA…

      • chacochicken - May 27, 2014 at 2:36 PM

        I ended up with a much better policy with a lower premium and I’m saving $689/a month.

      • tbird05 - May 27, 2014 at 2:37 PM

        Congrats, I am glad I could help you lower your premium.

      • chacochicken - May 27, 2014 at 2:44 PM

        I doubt you had any effect. The ACA prevented my insurer from charging my autistic child as having a preexisting condition.

      • clemente2 - May 27, 2014 at 3:37 PM

        While I agree with the removal of the pre-existing condition structure, third is right that he is paying for your reduction, chaco, as his premiums went up closer to the average, while yours went down.

        One effect of the ACA is an averaging of premiums–an intended effect. So, third, rather than be aggrevated about it, be proud that you bear responsibility for providing insurance at a (more) reasonable price for someone like chaco’s child, an honorable result of cost shifting through insurance.

        third, what state are you in? Red states taht played games with implementing ACA often then screwed their residents because insurance companies gave up and did not enter the market. States that jumped in early are generally doing OK in that regard–almost every gripe I hear is people who were selected out as very safe risks and given low premiums (healthy 20s-30s) who now are bearing a more average premium. To get rid of pre-existing condition provisions and to permit portability, and to add in uninsureds, is to me worth it.

        Now, if we could have just gotten single payor, you would see alot more reduction for everyone in ACA plans, but that got railroaded by the insurance companies who do not want the competition, having a hard enough time with Medicare already.

      • asimonetti88 - May 27, 2014 at 4:40 PM

        “So, third, rather than be aggrevated about it, be proud that you bear responsibility for providing insurance at a (more) reasonable price for someone like chaco’s child, an honorable result of cost shifting through insurance.”

        So shouldn’t they feel guilty for taking the money out of my pocket? No offense, my responsibility is towards my own health, not towards others and their families.

      • lukedunphysscienceproject - May 27, 2014 at 11:43 PM

        chaco- not to sound overly insensitive, but chances are that your family will cost your insurance company 10’s if not 100’s of thousands more in reimbursable costs than a family that don’t have an autistic child. Why should a company be prevented from charging your family more when it will cost them so much more to insure you?

    • tbird05 - May 27, 2014 at 2:57 PM

      I’m pretty sure I did have an effect. If you want to talk about common sense approaches to fix a broken healthcare system, then I am all ears. If you want to try and convince me that the federal government will do a better job getting your autistic child better, more affordable healthcare in the long-term, then you are dreaming.

      • kinggw - May 27, 2014 at 3:13 PM

        There are plenty of sites for political commentary, perhaps you should go there. Furthermore, your lack of understanding regarding the basics of the ACA, makes me think your tale is fabricated. Half the costs are offset by projected savings in Medicare payments to insurers and hospitals. Another quarter is offset by added taxes on medical-device makers and drug companies. The other source of revenue is a tax increase on the wealthiest Americans.

        Long story short, you didn’t have any effect.

      • chacochicken - May 27, 2014 at 3:20 PM

        We’re seeing the same doctors with the same insurer BC/BS and I’m completely conscious.

      • tbird05 - May 27, 2014 at 3:21 PM

        I wish my “tale” was fabricated, but it is not. I understand you have great talking points, but lets allow time to be the judge of your theoretical offsets. Not a snowballs chance in hell the law will work properly as constructed…or pay for itself without hitting the middle class. Premiums up, deductibles up, value down. Pretty simple. I will say this though…you are correct about the proper venue for this discussion. See you there.

      • clemente2 - May 27, 2014 at 3:45 PM

        The ‘federal government can’t do anything’ better than the private market is an teenager schitck. third, read up on what Medicare has done as a huge buyer to flatten out costs, and the admirable job of administrative cost control.

        And in general, read up on the pre-Progressive Era for a wonderful picture of what the world was like before the federal goverment stepped in. For all its faults, there has been a huge improvement in life for many. Don’t gripe you have to incur some of that cost.

      • asimonetti88 - May 27, 2014 at 4:43 PM

        “The ‘federal government can’t do anything’ better than the private market is an teenager schitck.”

        Oh really? Try sending a package through the USPS on a Sunday. Now try doing it through FedEx or UPS.

      • Kevin S. - May 27, 2014 at 5:59 PM

        Uh… UPS doesn’t deliver Sunday, and FedEx rarely does. What’s your point?

    • 18thstreet - May 27, 2014 at 3:39 PM

      The basic rule, if you’re going to bring up political crap unrelated to the topic at hand, is to complain about marijuana laws. #RonPaul2012

      • asimonetti88 - May 27, 2014 at 4:43 PM

        It’s now #StandWithRand :)

    • pelumaad - May 28, 2014 at 12:51 PM

      I kept my health insurance and my doctor…..and re-elected my president….but I won’t be driving the extra hour from Augusta to attend Braves games in an area very hostile to folks like me.
      Go Marlins!

      • tbird05 - May 29, 2014 at 2:49 PM

        Folks like you? The Braves are moving from a terrible part of town to a safe part of town and you are worried about how you will be treated? Your comments actually explain a lot…

  3. thetoolsofignorance - May 27, 2014 at 1:41 PM

    I know people like this. They assume because they are doing it and are for it then it must happen. If they detect any hint or suggestion of opposition they make their moves in secret because being thwarted in any way is much worse than being wrong in a general sense. When they lose all their money they try to act like they still have it and will attempt every dirty trick in the book get back to being wealthy. His obliviousness to the idea that opposition to the move means its a bad idea is symptomatic of the breed. I used to let my wife’s long passed on dog Bones McCoy leg hump this sort when they came within range. Watching them as the recipient of a good unwanted humping balanced the karmic scales in my opinion

  4. daveitsgood - May 27, 2014 at 1:59 PM

    I’ll play devil’s advocate and say that he might have, albeit inarticulately, been referencing the NIMBY folks.

  5. hatenapa - May 27, 2014 at 2:11 PM

    I guarantee in 10 years Cobb County is going to have the biggest case of buyer’s remorse ever.

    • 4d3fect - May 27, 2014 at 3:51 PM

      That long? Was thinking single digit there.

    • pelumaad - May 28, 2014 at 12:53 PM

      I kept my health insurance and my doctor…..and re-elected my president….but I won’t be driving the extra hour from Augusta to attend Braves games in an area very hostile to folks like me.
      Go Marlins!

    • pelumaad - May 28, 2014 at 12:55 PM

      Between Fredi Gonzalez and Cobb county…I’d rather go see the Rome or Gwinnett Braves.

  6. bitlrc - May 27, 2014 at 2:36 PM

    Me: Did you do this?

    My 4 year old child: Yes

    Me: Why didn’t you ask me first?

    4YO: Because you would have said “no.”

  7. joecool16280 - May 27, 2014 at 3:47 PM

    Does this whole move have anything to do with the poor TV deal they made? Just saying.

  8. kman8889 - May 28, 2014 at 10:31 AM

    We do oppose you idiot!!! We didn’t have a choice to oppose it!! Why use tax payers money to build YOUR stadium?

  9. mkprz - May 28, 2014 at 1:52 PM

    No one wants to tell the public, but it is the public’s money and property that will be used to build it.
    Then, the investors and owners (LOL) will charge crazy prices to the very same people who put up the money…the public.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

A's, Tigers big winners at trade deadline
Top 10 MLB Player Searches