Which is worse? A rotten GM who can't even see the problems the team has, and acquires inappropriate players, alongside ownership with sufficient riches
to be mentioned in the same breath as George Steinbrenner? Or ownership so poor the sale of the team stalled until the very last minute of the offseason, acquiring a supposedly great but untested GM -- who, thanks to that same ownership, now has no financial flexibility?
Start writing. You have thirty minutes. At the end of the period, please fold your blue books and hand them to the person on your right.
Update: The answer should be obvious. I'll take the Mariners' situation any day. A bad GM can be fired. Bad ownership cannot, save by the courts.