Holding McCourt

Welcome to the first edition of LOL or BMEO (ball my eyes out) Many stories, especially those worth writing about, elicit a visceral reaction. It either makes me laugh (as in all the way to the bank or because it’s actually hilarious) or cry (as in you’ve got to be kidding me or because it’s really unfortunate). Besides my thoughts, I’m always curious to know what you think – did you LOL or BYEO?

The McCourt divorce story struck me, probably because few women hold positions in any industry, let alone sports, as high as Jamie McCourt did as CEO of the Los Angeles Dodgers. So when I first heard about the McCourt-Dodgers divorce, I was curious about who Jamie McCourt was (Yes, apparently the Dodgers are also divorcing Jamie since the team was named as a party to the proceeding. Jamie has since moved to remove the Dodgers as a party. See also Joshua Fisher’s dodgersdivorce.com). I couldn’t help but think that only a limited number of circumstances would lead to a woman’s ownership of what her husband claims is his sports franchise – (1) it was her money or (2) she was smart. As it turns out, it’s probably some combination of the two. I was even more intrigued to learn that Jamie is from Maryland, my home state, and shared a similar background. She earned her Bachelor’s from Georgetown (where she met Mr. McCourt), a J.D. from the University of Maryland and her MBA from M.I.T. I don’t have an MBA, but otherwise, she’s a woman after my own heart. Fortunately for her, she is smart enough to know that she should seek half of the franchise, but unfortunately, she apparently signed away her interest in the team to her husband in 2004. Now, I’m curious to know why she did. Was it because at some point her emotions got the better of her? Or was it just business?

You could tell by the dramatic fashion in which Mr. McCourt terminated Jamie from her position as CEO that it was personal. Sure enough, news of Jamie’s affair with her driver/security guard (who was also terminated) surfaced. Mr. McCourt alleges that the two had a romantic rendez-vous in France at the Dodgers expense. What’s notable here is that had the roles been reversed and Jamie been the one to fire Mr. McCourt, she likely would’ve been labeled "emotional." She would’ve been the poster-child for why women shouldn’t run businesses because their emotions will cloud their business judgment. All we would be hearing is how successful the Dodgers have been in the past five years, even if they have fallen short of a Championship, and how she was merely enacting revenge over the affair in firing him. In truth, it appears that at some point each of their judgments may have been clouded. Mr. McCourt in his swift and vicious termination of Jamie, probably an attempt to publicly regain his control and heal his wounded ego, and Jamie by her willingness to sign away her interest in the franchise, just as she became a Dodgers executive.

At this point, I’m primarily "crying" because sadly, the most we’ve heard about Jamie as a leader in the sports industry is during her divorce. And now, we have to hear about how incompetent she was in her position, despite the Dodgers overall success during her tenure. Which begs the question, if she’s so incompetent, how competent is the person who hired her? In any event, I hope she gets her share and perhaps I’ll chuckle, not because I condone the behavior but because she beat a game that many men at her level have been playing for years. However, it will be interesting to see whether she (and in essence, womankind) end up losing anything else in the process, even if she does win the franchise.

Although the story has fizzled some since the Dodgers were eliminated from the playoffs, this one’s worth following…

View amber2jewel's Profile

• Filed Under:  
• Baseball, Sports, SportsPLUS, OpEd, Career, Sexism, Business