Rivalries exist when both teams are good. Location DOES NOT MATTER. The Astros rivalry with the Dodgers was every bit as heated as any other rivalry in Houston sports history. Same goes for Oilers-Pittsburgh. Or a more apt example... the Rockets-Jazz rivalry was every bit as heated (perhaps more-so) than the Rockets-Spurs... even though the Spurs were closer in proximity. The Astros and Rangers are still relatively "young" teams... thus the reason neither team are anybody's #1 rival. In fact, other than Dodgers-Giants, Cubs-Cardinals, and Yankees-Red Sox... there are no other historic "great" rivalries that come close.
It's a Rockets site so many of the posters here are biased, but this statement is undeniably true. The Rockets are a fast-paced fun to watch team with marketable players and they still can't come close to filling the Toyota Center. The Astros were still averaging almost 30,000 people per game in 2010, 5 years removed from our last playoff appearance. It literally takes historically bad teams for Houston to lose interest in the Astros.
Regarding the lack of investment in the international market: In the international market, it's about presence. This Three Astros Things on The Crawfish Boxes from last August shows that the Astros neglected the Latin American market for a while, and as a result, its presence in the region suffered greatly. Felix Francisco, the previous Director of Latin American Scouting, brought them back somewhat with notable signings such as Ariel Ovando, Jean Carlos Batista, and Michael Feliz, and what looks to be a $20K bargain in Teoscar Hernandez, but it's clear that the Astros still have a ways to go. That couldn't be any more apparent when Jose Cisnero is currently the only DSL Astros alumnus on the 40-man roster. The $2.9 million cap for every team last year probably hampered things, but it was pretty clear that the Astros didn't really add any big names in 2012. Luis Payano, who got $500K, is probably the biggest name of that group, and he probably has the biggest upside. Exit Francisco, and enter Oz Ocampo, who has worked extensively with Luhnow when they were members of the Cardinals front office. The first major signing (read as: bonus over $100,000) under Ocampo was LHP Junior Garcia, who signed for $200K. He also signed two other players for much smaller bonuses. I'm highly sure that Oz Ocampo and the Astros' Latin American operations are hard at work right now, seeking out kids who could make an impact for this team in the long run. A $5 million bonus pool for this upcoming July 2 signing period doesn't hurt either. However, with that budget, I think we're all expecting at least a couple of big-time signings, and personally, I think that the biggest bonus they'll hand out this year could top $2 million. But, it's not about who receives the biggest bonus, or which team shells out the biggest bonus, it's about efficiently doling out the money to these kids. As much as I would like to see the perceived blue-chip players succeed, I'd also like to see a kid who received a paltry bonus become an integral part of the Astros for years to come. I wouldn't be surprised if the Astros incorporated elements of their Draft approach to the international signing period, either. Once May and June roll around, we'll see who's separated themselves as the top Latin American prospects for the class of 2013. And in the days leading up to July 2, I'm hoping that the Astros will be the favorites, or at the very least, in the mix, to sign some of those top kids. Felix Francisco brought the Astros back to Latin America, but Oz Ocampo is seeking to re-establish the foothold that they once had on the region. I believe that they're also considering thinking outside the box when trying to improve the minor league system, because talented, young foreign baseball players aren't exclusive to the Dominican Republic and Venezuela, after all. And indeed, Ocampo took a Christmas trip to Colombia, Curacao, Panama, and Nicaragua.
Funny that the three rivalries you listed all have teams that are geographically close to one another. I agree that teams have to be good for rivalries to exist. But once the Rangers and Astros are both good at the same time, this rivalry will take off. No Astros sports fan had to deal with Dodgers fans the next day at work. No Astros fan could spontaneously purchase tickets and drive to LA for a meaningful road game late in the season. No Astros fan had to watch one of their most beloved pitchers and a home town kid bring the Dodgers to prominence. Again, this isn't a rivalry yet. But it has all the makings to be a great one. We just need to give it time... And get good again.
I wonder... 5-6 years from now, what if the Astros' biggest rivalry was one with, say, the Blue Jays, or the Mariners, and not the manufactured rivalry with the Rangers?
I could see it being with the A's. The Rangers window could be closing when the Astros finally become good again... and the Astros seem to be taking on a similiar player development model that Oakland already has in place. That usually serves both teams to not only minimize payroll, but also have a continuous supply of young guys coming up from the minors.
If we formed a meaningful rivalry with a random team 5-6 years in, then I'd say the AL move was a success. How many NL teams even consider us a rival? I know we would name a bunch of teams, but I think you'd struggle to find one that agrees.
Sure, it always makes things more fun when your biggest rival is close by... I'm just saying that it usually doesn't work that way. Both teams need to be good, that's it. If the Astros/Rangers are never both good at the same time, they won't be each other's biggest rivals, regardless of how close they are. Phillies/Pirates are a good example of teams that have never had much of a rivalry, yet play in the same state, because their good eras never coincided much (save for the late 70's). Also, San Francisco is not that close to LA. Those rivalries go beyond simple "location".
How many of the following teams possess a #1 rival that is reciprocal?: Reds, Pirates, Brewers, D-Backs, Rockies, Padres, Mets, Braves, Phillies, Nats, Marlins, Orioles, Rays, Jays, Tigers, Indians, Royals, Twins, Chi Sox, Angels, A's, Rangers, Mariners. Nearly all teams are in the same boat as Houston. We formed a decent enough rivalry with the Cards (and less so the Cubs) in the brief era of the "comedy central" (94-12). It likely would have continued to blossom once/if the Astros became decent again. I was in St. Louis in the late 90's/early 00's, and they did consider the Astros a healthy rival. The Cubs games were crazy there, but the Cubs were no good till 2003, and didn't really threaten the Cardinals much. Two things have hindered the Astros in their rivalry development... longevity and realignment. Their rivalry with the Dodgers was REAL. Same with the Cardinals. Had both divisions continued to exist as is, they would continue to grow. Now they get to start all over again... and as long as they become good, they'll develop some healthy competitive banter with any other quality team in the division.
Brooklyn is very close to Manhattan, however. Again, i think we're saying the same thing. I 100% agree that both teams need to be good. I'm just very confident that that will happen. And when it does, all of the other factors will take it to the next level. I didn't mean to come off as some big AL supporter, because I'm not. I'd rather stay in the NL. But I'm just trying to take a "glass half full" approach in a thread that is anything but. The reality is that we have a possibility to create a true #1, reciprocal rival. That wasn't an available option in the NL. But yes, it all starts with us getting good again.
We totally should have signed Berkman and lost that 2nd round pick for it! I'm sure quality FA's are just dying too play for the Astros.
Los Angeles, Denver, Phoenix for sure. I think an argument could be made for Chicago as well. Dallas before the last two seasons. Even in cities where the baseball franchises are huge you can make an argument that the NBA teams are just as popular, especially Boston.
I'd counter that by saying the above teams baseball teams garner just a much if not more support when mediocre, along with the fact that they have a greater reach of fans around the country. Dodgers still have fans in Brooklyn, along with Vero Beach. There are Cubs fans everywhere. Red Soc nation has a greater base than the Celtics. I was just in Denver, and despite a young up and coming Nuggets team, sports radio was talking more football/baseball. Phoenix is an interesting example... I don't think they support any team "badly", but there are a ton of baseball fans in that city due to spring training and transplants. I know this site is biased being a basketball one... But nationwide, MLB still gets more coverage and has larger fan bases than the NBA. Perhaps those demographics change as the traditionally "younger" NBA crowd that grew up during the NBA golden era (Jordan, bird, magic, Hakeem, Barkley, etc) gets older.
You can't say he is cheap until we have a reason to spend money. What do you want him to do? Go and spend 50 million more on 3-5 guys so we could MAYBE be a .500 team? It is smart business wise to save the money and suck this much for the best possible draft pick. He has proven he will spend in the draft where we spent almost all the money we were allotted. I will call him cheap if ~5 years from now he won't pay to sign a free agent or to keep one of our guys, if we have a core at that point. For now, he is doing the right thing business wise.
And yet, look at this message board every time the Rangers series came up and how badly people wanted to beat them.
bro seriously I've said this more than once -- I don't want him to sign people like this. I'd like him to use the payroll savings to invest in other areas of the team like international signings, stadium improvements and coaching talent.
I think it has the potential to be awesome. I agree wholeheartedly that region/geography doesn't have to be a driver in rivalry...but it can certainly help...particularly when you're sharing a division with a team. It never mattered that the Spurs and Rockets were in the same division...never a great rivalry...but being in the same division in baseball and basketball are entirely different animals. There's not umpteen other options to make the playoffs in baseball aside from being a division winner. You might sneak in as a wild card...but in the NBA, I can't remember ever hearing of a team truly celebrating winning a division..and just be one of the best 8 in a conference of 15 and you're in. Head to head playoff matchups dictate rivalry more in that league as opposed to geography (think Lakers/Celtics). The Pirates and Phils don't have a real rivalry because they're not in the same division....in the marathon of the regular season, Pirates fans aren't forced to root against the Phils while scoreboard and standings watching each night. At some point it will be advantageous to Astros fans to see the Rangers lose, no matter who they're playing...and vice versa. Now add geographic, inherent city rivalry that already exists and you have the formula for what could be a terrific rivalry. Just needs time for the Astros to become competitive again.
NBA TV ratings destroy the MLB's TV ratings, not to mention the NBA's global's impact something even Roger Goodell has not seemed to do for the NFL the MLB has BY FAR the oldest fanbase and viewership between ages 18-49, and the NBA has by far the YOUNGEST MLB doesnt appeal to younger fans because their players are constantly cheating, the MLB record book is owned by roiders Outside of America nobody knows who Mike Trout or Miguel Cabrera are. Metta World Peace and Brian Scalabrine are more popular than Derek Jeter in Asia Basketball as a sport is the 2nd most played sport in the world behind soccer. Funny how some americans hate basketball and soccer, but outside the USA they are infinetly more popular than the NFL
wrong 3 out of the past 4 years the NBA Finals has destroyed the World Series tv ratings, World Series TV ratings are actually dropping every year. But thats what happens when you have the oldest fanbase for any major sport in the USA, your fans dont stick around long
