Well, that's the end of that. Chuck Greenberg has officially resigned as the managing partner and CEO of the Texas Rangers, and team president Nolan Ryan will now add the title of CEO and oversee all of the ballclub's baseball and business operations. Per the official team press release, the severing of ties is full and absolute, as Greenberg is also selling his equity stake in the team back to the rest of the Rangers Baseball Express ownership consortium.
As far as where we currently stand on the juicy details of the breakup itself, a few more details have come to light in the last 12 or so hours -- namely, that the underlying cause was "a clash of personalities and a clash of management style." Earlier this morning, Craig Miller on KTCK 1310 AM The Ticket indicated that according to one source, Nolan Ryan had conveyed to the Rangers' main money men (Bob Simpson and Ray Davis) that it was now a me-or-him situation, and that one or the other was going to have to be oustered; this account seems to dovetail with Randy Galloway's latest column, which indicates that the rest of ownership had become dissatisfied with Greenberg, and that that Ryan had the power to quell that dissatisfaction and make things work, but would only say "it's me or him."
And going beyond the earlier report that Greenberg interfered with a potential Michael Young trade by insisting upon a monetary concession that would have violated the terms of baseball's collective bargaining agreement, there's some word out there today -- also per Galloway, on ESPN 103.3 FM's Ben & Skin radio show -- that Greenberg's last-ditch visit (and subsequent offer) to Cliff Lee's Arkansas home with co-owner Ray Davis and assistant general manager Thad Levine didn't sit well with Nolan Ryan and general manager Jon Daniels, both of whom had decided that Lee wasn't going to sign with Texas and that it was best to move on and focus their energies elsewhere. I would imagine that any interference by Greenberg in the baseball operations department -- be it merely perceived or actualized -- is something that would hasten the deterioration of the relationships higher up in the organization.
There appear to be a few other little examples of Greenberg undermining Ryan's authority, including a reference by Galloway to Nolan being unhappy with how Daniels' contract extension was handled (specifically, the delay, which Galloway intimates was on Greenberg), and some more discussion on Ben & Skin about how Greenberg sold a ballpark suite that was earmarked for Daniels as part of his extension package even after Ryan told him not to sell it. While it doesn't appear there was a single cataclysmic incident that led to this divorce, I think you can lay all of these different stories out in front of you and piece them together and come up with a picture that paints Greenberg as obstructive and meddlesome in areas where he had no business messing about. If that was truly the case, then it's rather difficult to argue that this wasn't the right thing for the Rangers to do.
The fact of the matter is that nobody looks real great in all of this, and it's going to leave a bad taste in a lot of fans' mouths, because Greenberg was portrayed in the media as the white knight that was coming to free the Rangers from the tyrannical and mismanaged rule of Tom Hicks, and he endeared himself to many people with his candid approach to media relations and heavy focus on fan-friendly initiatives at the Ballpark. People aren't fond of change in general; they're especially unfond of change when it involves the complete removal of a very likeable team executive. I guess the only thing you can really say about it all at the end of the day is that regardless of how much we hate (or like) the move, what's done is done, and the rest of the principal management figures are still in place. Life will go on, and hopefully the Rangers will keep on winning.