Earlier this month, Sheel Seidler, the widow of the late Padres owner Peter Seidler, filed a lawsuit against her brothers-in-law, Matt and Robert Seidler, over control of the San Diego Padres franchise. Central to her claim is the assertion that she had a "substantial role in decision-making for the Padres," which the suggests might not be entirely accurate.
The Union-Tribune's piece, based on interviews with nearly 20 individuals, many of whom allegedly had direct or indirect involvement with the Padres' operations, paints a different picture. According to these sources, Sheel Seidler had little to no role in the operational aspects of the team.
This is contrary to her claims in the lawsuit where she describes herself as Peter Seidler's "primary advisor" on matters related to the Padres, asserting they operated as a "partnership" before his death in November 2023. The report indicates that even those with close ties to the Padres' business operations or baseball management were unaware of any significant influence or input from Sheel Seidler in team decisions.
In response to these findings, Sheel Seidler, through her representatives, suggested that there are individuals within or closely associated with the Padres organization who could corroborate her involvement. However, she also mentioned a reluctance from these individuals to come forward due to fear of job loss or explicit instructions not to assist her, which the Padres management denied. This situation has created a 'she-said, they-said' scenario, further complicated by the legal nature of the dispute.
The U-T report also highlights the absence of Sheel Seidler at significant meetings like the twice-yearly gatherings of Padres owners, which contradicts her claims of attending these meetings with Peter. High-level associates within the team's ownership structure and other business dealings with Peter Seidler have stated that before 2020, Peter himself was only peripherally involved in day-to-day operations, casting further doubt on the depth of Sheel's involvement.
Moreover, the article mentions a handwritten note from Peter Seidler from 2020, which Sheel claims lists her as the preferred successor for the control person role. However, this note seems to be viewed as more of a personal or whimsical reflection by Peter rather than a formal directive, given the context provided by those familiar with his habits of jotting down ideas. It should be stated that Sheel included a photo of this note in the context of her legal complaint.
The implications of this dispute extend beyond just control of the franchise. It touches on financial interests from Peter's other ventures and family dynamics, with Sheel alleging attempts to undermine her reputation within MLB circles, which has been refuted by Padres sources.
While Sheel Seidler presents herself as deeply involved in the Padres' operations, the Union-Tribune report suggests otherwise, based on the accounts of numerous sources. This legal battle not only questions the narrative of her involvement but also highlights the complexities of family business dynamics in professional sports.
Jurickson Profar, San Diego's All-Star left fielder from the 2024 team, recently broke Padres fans hearts when heÌýjoined the Atlanta Braves on a three-year contract. Following his departure, he specifically mentioned the ownership turmoil as an apparent reason he did not return to the Padres.
"Obviously the Padres have some issue with the ownership and all that," Profar said in a video call with Atlanta media last week.
The outcome of this lawsuit will be pivotal in determining the future leadership of the Padres and could potentially redefine the role of non-directly involved family members in MLB team management. Either way, Padres fans wait patiently for some sort of resolve and for a sign of life from team ownership, who have not made one noteworthy acquisition this entire offseason.
Originally published on January 27, 2025.ÌýÌý
