It's about time for a team in Austin or San Antonio

[Caltex2]

Beating a dead horse here but this forcing the Astros to the AL sucks. Among the reasons is that now people in Texas and the surrounding states don't have an option nearby to watch NL baseball. That's why they should put an NL team in Austin or San Antonio so that people will be able to watch both styles and see every player and team each season. Or maybe there's enough of a market for another team in DFW in, say, Plano or near Houston in, say, Sugar Land.

Uhhg... (dead horse bloodied some more).

[Kam]

Years ago, there was talk of Seattle moving to San Antonio. This was before SafeCo was built.

Why, or what team would move?

atlanta
miami
new york
philly
washington

cubs
reds
brewers
pittsburgh
st louis

arizona
colorado
los angeles
san diego
san francisco

There are no teams that need a new stadium other than the Cubs. Despite Wrigley being a piece of **** dump, people seem to like it. The only other old stadium is Dodger Stadium.

Expansion? Does baseball really need to expand? No. Don't need to see two more crappy teams in MLB.

Got to think about this stuff.

[body slam]

San Antonio has the Missions SD AA team.

Austin has UT.

[Nick]

If Texas gets another team, they will be put in the AL and Houston should move back to the NL.

Of course it won't happen... none of the other markets are big enough or have enough corporate support to justify a new stadium/team.

[JayZ750]

I'll caveat this post as I do every one about baseball - not my favorite sport.

Nonetheless, I think there's too much bitching about this move. To the very casual fan like myself, frankly it's the one interesting thin that's happened to the organization since the WS team. And the upcoming uniform logo change.

I understand a purist old schooler being somewhat upset. But it's not like the Astros are a supremely storied squad. Yes, I know they have history. By not century plus type history.

A valid hint to be upset about is the DH. But that's a league wide issue, if you think it sucks. I hink in 2012+ the bigger issue to me is the fact that there are still leagues anyways. It's not hard to get from NYC to Seattle. So no need for leagues and extremely unbalanced schedules, IMO. A truly balanced schedule ensures the best teams make the postseason.

And, another Texas baseball team doesn't make any sense.

[msn]

The fact that there are definite leagues, with separate schedules, is one of the things that has set MLB apart from the other leagues. Not that it's "better", just that it's different: something other than the same. The regular season actually matters more when 55% of the damn league doesn't make the playoffs, for example. There is something special about the intrigue of the (recently not-so-rare) matchup between teams from different leagues--something that will be entirely flushed down the ****ter next year.

Congrats, Bud Selig. A few more dumbass moves, and the only way to tell the MLB apart from the NBA will be the funny sticks and the long pants.

Dumbass.

[JayZ750]

Originally Posted by msn The fact that there are definite leagues, with separate schedules, is one of the things that has set MLB apart from the other leagues. Not that it's "better", just that it's different: something other than the same. The regular season actually matters more when 55% of the damn league doesn't make the playoffs, for example. There is something special about the intrigue of the (recently not-so-rare) matchup between teams from different leagues--something that will be entirely flushed down the ****ter next year. Congrats, Bud Selig. A few more dumbass moves, and the only way to tell the MLB apart from the NBA will be the funny sticks and the long pants. Dumbass.

For one, not true. No sport has fully balanced schedule. Football may be worse off in this regard. Which is how you had a 7-9 Seahawks team not only make the playoffs a few years ago, bu host a home game.

Second, thats why it's retarded. If the AL consistently had a lot more better teams then the NL, it makes no sense that those teams should be left out of the playoffs. As noted were already moving down this path. The year the Cards made the playoffs 5 or 6 years ago wih a horrible record and got hot and won the WS isn't intriguing and certainly invalidates the importance of the regular season.

Just my opinion.

[bobrek]

Originally Posted by JayZ750 I'll caveat this post as I do every one about baseball - not my favorite sport. Nonetheless, I think there's too much bitching about this move. To the very casual fan like myself, frankly it's the one interesting thin that's happened to the organization since the WS team. And the upcoming uniform logo change. I understand a purist old schooler being somewhat upset. But it's not like the Astros are a supremely storied squad. Yes, I know they have history. By not century plus type history. A valid hint to be upset about is the DH. But that's a league wide issue, if you think it sucks. I hink in 2012+ the bigger issue to me is the fact that there are still leagues anyways. It's not hard to get from NYC to Seattle. So no need for leagues and extremely unbalanced schedules, IMO. A truly balanced schedule ensures the best teams make the postseason. And, another Texas baseball team doesn't make any sense.

You said it yourself, that to a 'very casual' fan, this is the most interesting thing that has happened in 7 seasons. You are a casual enough fan that you don't even mention the complete roster over haul in the past two seasons. The youth movement and seemingly massive improvement in the minor leagues is what is making the miserable records of the last two years bearable.

[msn]

I don't share your opinion.

The NBA season is a waste of time. I don't even pay attention until February. What's the point? If your team is mediocre, they're in. The race for playoff seeding from March onward is mildly entertaining.

And, for every Cardinals example their is a sixth-seed 47-win Rockets team getting hot and marching through the playoffs or a 7-9 Seahawks team making the second round. It happens in every league from time to time.

You may prefer the other formats (and clearly you do), but *I* prefer that there *are* (or at least were) other formats at all. I have no interest in seeing the MLB become more and more like the other leagues.

[bobrek]

Originally Posted by JayZ750 For one, not true. No sport has fully balanced schedule. Football may be worse off in this regard. Which is how you had a 7-9 Seahawks team not only make the playoffs a few years ago, bu host a home game. Second, thats why it's retarded. If the AL consistently had a lot more better teams then the NL, it makes no sense that those teams should be left out of the playoffs. As noted were already moving down this path. The year the Cards made the playoffs 5 or 6 years ago wih a horrible record and got hot and won the WS isn't intriguing and certainly invalidates the importance of the regular season. Just my opinion.

Kind of like the Rockets making the finals with a 40-42 record? Anomalies like that happen in every sport at some point. Did that invalidate the regular season?

You don't think it is intriguing when a team with an 83-78 record can seemingly come out of nowhere to win the championship?

[josephnicks]

maybe in 2050 when the Texas Triangle is a mega market.. but right now austin and san antonio are pathetic tv markets.. SA is lucky they have the spurs..

[TheRealist137]

I have an idea, why not move the Astros to the NL?

[JayZ750]

To those pointing to issues with other sports.... And? I'm not saying the NBA or NFL are better systems. They do some things better, some worse. I like the sports themselves a lot more, but wih regards to format, I believe all sports should move towards balanced schedules (to the extent possible).

[msn]

That sounds just boring. Let them all remain unique in their scheduling and playiff formats.

[Caltex2]

Originally Posted by body slam San Antonio has the Missions SD AA team. Austin has UT.

Texas doesn't play all year and besides, just like the Round Rock Express, it's not major league sports. Austin is a more affluent market than San Antonio and they would probably appreciate the prestige of having a major league sports team. They're probably the largest city in the country that doesn't have a team in their county. And no, cheating at UT doesn't count.

[Caltex2]

Originally Posted by josephnicks maybe in 2050 when the Texas Triangle is a mega market.. but right now austin and san antonio are pathetic tv markets.. SA is lucky they have the spurs..

If the Spurs hadn't become the best organization in the league next to the Lakers for such a prolonged period of time and won so many titles it's possible they may not even have still been in San Antonio. SA just passed the 1 million mark as a metro area in the late 80's and as at around the 2 million mark. More people live in the city of Houston alone.

This is why I was really leaning on Austin as a better market for the MLB. Even Dallas-Fort Worth, especially the northern suburbs, can support another team at this point.

[Caltex2]

Originally Posted by JayZ750 To those pointing to issues with other sports.... And? I'm not saying the NBA or NFL are better systems. They do some things better, some worse. I like the sports themselves a lot more, but wih regards to format, I believe all sports should move towards balanced schedules (to the extent possible).

Nah, my only critique is that in the MLB every team should play each other every season and the divisions should be balanced (now that it's been forced on us). Every ballpark should host every team every two seasons so fans can get to see each team, included relocated fans and not be deprived of seeing players from other leagues. Can you imagine what it was like for Jackie Robinson and Babe Ruth to never appear in some ballparks? It was tradition then but now it's just absurd that attitude prevails. Perhaps it'd be good to switch the league rules when a road team visits a team from another league.

The NFL is great in that you play three of the same teams each year, allowing you to build rivalries unlike any other pro sport. You also have a high percentage chance of developing rivalries within your conference due to scheduling and playoff matchups. Teams are guaranteed to play every other team once every four years and at every NFL stadium every 8 years. They need to de-emphasize the importance of winning a division and hosting a playoff game, it's technically possible that a 3-13 team can host a 15-1 in the Wild Card round and the 15-1 has virtually no chance to host a playoff game (as they'd be the fifth seed).

In the NBA, I agree on balanced schedules but they should make each team in each conference play four times. It's okay if certain teams don't play in certain cities some years for the sake of fairness. If you're so concerned about LeBron increasing attendance at each arena every year, just expand the schedule by two-three games. And eliminate divisions since they really don't affect teh schedule much, especially if you're going to enforce them for playoff seeding, which creates matchups that aren't fair in some cases.

Well, I'm done.

[Castor27]

Originally Posted by Caltex2 They're probably the largest city in the country that doesn't have a team in their county.

For grins I looked this up. There was an article on Yahoo about a year old.

http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slug=ycn-8611569

Austin is 1 and surprisingly El Paso is number 2.

[bobrek]

Originally Posted by Caltex2 ...They need to de-emphasize the importance of winning a division and hosting a playoff game, it's technically possible that a 3-13 team can host a 15-1 in the Wild Card round and the 15-1 has virtually no chance to host a playoff game (as they'd be the fifth seed)...

This is your logic for de-emphasizing the importance of winning the division? Only one team in the history of the NFL has ever made the playoffs in a full season with a losing record.

[Scolalist]

University of Texas pays the city of Austin millions every year not to pursue a major sports franchise. I doubt they ever do.