Blog Entry

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Posted on: June 17, 2011 12:36 pm
Edited on: June 17, 2011 9:43 pm
The feuding McCourts reached agreement on a divorce settlement early Friday morning.

Great. So we're done with them?

Think again.

First off, the settlement is contingent on baseball approving the long-term television deal Frank McCourt agreed to with Fox television. That approval is unlikely to come, even though by the terms of the settlement deal Jamie McCourt agrees not to challenge the TV deal herself.

There had been speculation that a possible Jamie McCourt challenge was one of baseball's main issues with the prospective Fox deal, because of a fear that she could step in as possible co-owner and try to block it. But according to sources, baseball has other other issues (such as whether it represents true market value) that commissioner Bud Selig considers more significant than whether Jamie McCourt would challenge it.

Again, it's highly unlikely that baseball approves the deal, which would make Friday's settlement "null and void," according to the document posted on the website.

Without the TV deal (which according to the court document includes a $385 million loan), not only is the settlement in jeopardy, but Frank McCourt is still in serious danger of running so low on cash that he can't meet the June 30 Dodger payroll. If he can't pay, baseball will, but that would almost certainly mean that baseball would take control of the team and force a sale.

The settlement provides for a one-day trial to determine whether Frank McCourt owns the team, or whether the Dodgers are community property, which would give Jamie McCourt a 50 percent stake. If the court determines that Frank McCourt owns the team by himself, the settlement provides for him to pay Jamie $100 million. If the court finds the Dodgers are community property, the McCourts would then sell the team.

But remember, the settlement deal is "null and void" if Selig doesn't approve the TV deal, and he isn't expected to approve it.

So this isn't over, no matter how great that word "settlement" sounds to everyone who is tired of this circus.

Maybe it gets closer to an end on June 30. Maybe it drags on all summer, or into next summer.

There's no way to know that yet. All we know is it's not over.


And if you're not already disgusted by this case, feel free to read the actual court filing on the settlement, from

Category: MLB

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 14, 2012 7:20 am

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Simply put i believed to be it absolutely was entirely possible that getting a little bit of uninspiring traditional apply for, nevertheless it really ought to be positively to put it differently fee based available for my own time.

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 30, 2011 12:39 pm

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

My partner and i respect the very invaluable basic facts and also info you make readily attainable after only your posts. Details first bookmark your website together with maintain my personal miniature kinds seem to be towards ascending here consistentl y.

Since: Nov 19, 2011
Posted on: December 23, 2011 9:32 am

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Your word wide web blogging site happens to be referred to with the content perfectly ahead of to enterprise to. Pleasant data and information you have these. I'll move equally as well before.

Since: Nov 19, 2011
Posted on: December 3, 2011 8:44 am

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Since: Nov 27, 2011
Posted on: November 27, 2011 3:54 pm

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Since: Oct 21, 2011
Posted on: October 21, 2011 9:54 pm
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator

Since: Oct 7, 2011
Posted on: October 12, 2011 9:13 am

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Now i'm the truth is notably new to wp. but that which you publish on this on line log is in fact terrific and notably useful.

Since: Jul 10, 2008
Posted on: June 18, 2011 2:33 pm

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Yes, actually they do...subject of course to whatever contractual agreements with MLB may exist in the franchise agreements owners sign.  That is really the whole point of being the business owner, I can sign whatever contracts I want for my team, including a 17 year $3billion dollar TV deal (I think the Lakers just did basically the same thing, but for 10 years).

Actually, the McCourt can't sign whatever contract he wants.  He may be a business owner, but the Dodgers are a franchise of MLB, much like individual owners of McDonalds restaurants are franchises McDonalds.  And, unlike the NBA, MLB has a "not in the best of of baseball" clause in their contract that allows the league to step in or take over if a move by the franchise owner is not in the best interest of baseball.  MLB has already stepped in and taken over the business and day to day operations of the club in the best interest of baseball.   And if Selig believes that the deal with Fox with one of the league's flagship teams is not in the best of baseball, it will be void.


Since: Oct 12, 2010
Posted on: June 18, 2011 2:05 pm

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Remember when Fox bought the Dodgers and everybody was worried that they would buy up all that talent?  Well, now that the Yankees, Red Sox, and Phillies are buying up all the talent nobody seems to be complaining.  The Dodgers?  Well, good for them.  EVERYBODY hates LA....until they move there.

Since: Jun 5, 2008
Posted on: June 18, 2011 12:53 pm

McCourts settle, but Dodger circus could drag on

Deal is a shame for dodgers. First of all, if selig  oks McCourts deal dodgers lose 100 million from 2billion dollars tv deal. She gets 100million from dodgers team for a divorce. That money was for dodgers and the team. Not his personal divorce. Come on just close this deal and move to new owners.

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or