Once again, factually incorrect. Game 1 - 3:26 Game 2 - 3:05 Game 3 - 3:25 Game 4 - 3:34 (10 innings) You can make your case without resorting to distorting the facts.
This thread went from "Jim Crane is a cheapskate" to some sort of pseudo "Is Baseball relevant?" thread
This is the factor that makes people feel the NBA will be taking over the #2 spot... however, baseball has been plagued by some pretty crappy post-seasons lately (ie - no Yankees, Red Sox), and the NBA has been blessed with the culmination of Lebron/Durant/Kobe all being in or near their primes at the same time. I still point to the revenue disparity (MLB>NBA) and the argument that most cities, all things being equal (both the basketball and baseball team are both good or both mediocre), feature more local support for the baseball team. All that being said, things are cyclical... and the NBA currently has the advantage in marketable stars, the younger demographic, and favorable finals matchups that they were missing from the Jordan retirement till ~ 2010.
anyone else remember McMullen, and what we called him especially after the Ryan departure? lol the more things change, the more they stay the same. to the average fan, *every* owner is a "cheapskate". except, of course, for Steinbrenner or Cuban.
I have a very bad feeling that he could end up being the worst owner in Houston sports history when it's all said and done. There are a million red flags with this guy. If he doesn't put a winner on the field in about 5 years, he will be HATED in this town.
I'm not buying into that BS one iota. I see that as a feeble attempt at an official cover story to excuse the fact Crane took $70M to move to the AL. He sold out the Houston baseball fans pure and simple. For one to believe that fairy tale, one would have to actually believe that MLB would have turned their backs on $680M if Crane had refused to change leagues. The MLB owners are some of the most greedy bastards that ever drew a breath yet we in Houston are supposed to believe this would have actually happened. Riiiiight. After all, the Padres got sold last year and there was nary a peep about them being considered for the move to the AL West even though it actually made more sense as they ARE a west coast team. I didn't buy this then and I don't buy it now but Crane, MLB & Selig know that if they keep repeating this "story" that over time the myth will become the reality I am so pissed at what he's done that I cannot even get to consider his ownership. I cannot get past the fact that he's an unprincipled POS who flushed away 50 years of baseball history all the while showing his rear end to those fans who lived, died and bled with this franchise. No, he showed us just what he thought about us when he took the money. Well good for him - he got his money and I sincerely hope he chokes on it.
I have been busy and really only checking this thread while I have had free time on a flight or in a terminal. I think you and BigTex are just bigger baseball fans that's why you see things the way you do just like a huge Hockey fan does not see that Soccer is more popular in the states than their sport now. So before I get back on point about Crane let me say this I absolutely love the sport and am a lifelong Astros fan as I used to ride my bike or get dropped off at the dome as a kid sitting in the outfield pavilion for a buck to cheer them on under the Yankee owner and then Drayton. As far as the popularity of baseball I agree it is strong in cities with teams but it is exclusive to their teams. I travel all over the country and there are very few towns that are excited about the sport outside the their hometown team. This is why you see the NBA ratings higher across the board. Also as discussed in this thread there are many cities in which after the NFL it's NBA over MLB with all things being equal. OK now back to the OP, like I said who cares if we win 50 games or 70 games? Let's do what we are doing which is draft smart, sign those players, invest in central america and guess what if we lose 100 games the next 2-3 years as we have been doing than so be it. This does not mean we shouldn't sign a few mid level free agents to plug into positions and maybe they play well enough to flip them or end up being good fits and young enough for when good young players catch up. As far as CSN Houston, I will be upset if I can't watch the Astros when I want but honestly there would be more outrage missing a good Dynamo team considering the staggering numbers (around 1,000 some games in September) http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/10/no-one-watched-the-astros-on-television-sunday/ BigTex trust me a ton of people that are not on clutchfans want their Rockets and if it gets resolved there will be good ratings. Now in a few years if we develop some good young players and still don't spend than Crane should be bashed. He also is smart enough to not do what Drayton did to the farm system and that is a good thing.
About the ratings... everyone recognizes this is only a very, very recent occurrence, right? So recent and such a small sample size as to not provide anything very relevant other than to say that basketball right now has a group of very marketable stars who happen to be playing for titles. I mean, if we go back to the 2007 NBA Finals (just 5 years ago) we're talking about the lowest ratings ever...6.2 rating. Crazy low. Baseball has NEVER been that low. In that very year in MLB, you had a World Series sweep. Yet they still averaged a 10.6 rating. Last year was MLB's lowest rating ever (SF sweep over DET) and it was still a 7.6 overall. The year before, the World Series drew a 10.0....for all the fanfare about the NBA "dominating" ratings, the NBA Finals the last 2 seasons were a 10.1 and a 10.2.
It is indeed all relative. The NBA has rebounded in the ratings department from the all-time low as you mentioned, but the overall ratings aren't that spectacular. If they ever get a matchup that doesn't involve Lebron/Durant/Kobe (or simply involves the Spurs), they'll be in trouble again. Likewise if MLB gets back to having the Yankees/Red Sox/Chicago or Dodgers/Angels in the World Series, their numbers will be fine.
I'm not prepared to judge on how cheap he'll be since the Astros are rebuilding... ... but I am pissed off that the Astros are the primary reason why I can't watch Rockets games right now. That alone is almost unforgivable.
Without looking it up I know there were some years in the 90s in which the NBA Finals had better ratings than the world series. Also both sports were pretty much neck and neck as far as the number 2 behind the NFL. The NBA had a bad stretch post Jordan but the good ratings are here and here to stay. Someone like you or I can enjoy baseball because without knowing you I bet you played it. I also bet you knew all the rules, history and players as a kid. Imagine someone from Europe who moves to America it would be difficult getting them into the sport because of how slow it is if you don't know or appreciate the games nuances. This translates to the younger generation and their short attention span. Anyway it does not matter everyone will watch what they want and who knows what will be popular in the future. At one point baseball, boxing and horse racing were the big three
1993, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2008, 2010, 2011 and 2012 NBA all had better finals ratings after never out-rating baseball not including no world series in 1994 off a quick search. That is basically 50-50 which is now trending heavy to basketball when you look at local, national regular season and playoffs.
Not sure where you're getting your numbers. I'm drawing from here and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association_Nielsen_ratings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings If you're gonna go back to Jordan years, you're absolutely right. He's a giant that transcended his sport in the same way Babe Ruth and Ali did. But even with that...according to the links I just posted, you're wrong on 2: 1996: NBA Finals - 16.7 World Series - 17.4 advantage: MLB 2000: NBA Finals - 11.6 World Series - 12.4 advantage: MLB The NBA has had a nice 3 year run, getting back up into double digit ratings after being in single digits for the previous 5 years in a row. But even during that 3 year run, there was nothing decisive about their viewership in relation to MLB. The highest rating over the last 3 years for the NBA is a 10.6...the highest rating for MLB over the last 3 years is 10.0. Where is this narrative coming from about the NBA dominating ratings? That's silly. Both sports are down significantly since the 1990's. There's a real trend. NBA ratings have never remotely approached what they were during the Jordan years. But where was the discussion about the NBA falling apart when for 5 seasons their ratings were below 10 and in 2007 they drew a pitiful 6.2? I've heard the same thing about "young people liking basketball and prefering it over baseball, ultimately making baseball relegated to a distant 3rd" for years...since I was a "young people." Yet baseball attendance is killing it...and their revenues damn near match the NFL's, which is a giant so big that no one ever dares compare themself to it.
Nonsense. He sold out the small subset of fans who simply can't accept the move. The vast majority of fans didn't care, have already gotten over it, or will get over it fairly soon; and as soon as the Astros are good again, they will be just as into the team as they were in early 2000's.
Flip your perspective: For Crane to hold his ground, he had to be willing to walk away from ever owning a ML baseball team. They were not going to approve him as owner - and what owner would approve future bids if he kyboshed a near $700MM deal on league preference? He had enough issues to hand Selig the needed ammunition to hold him over a barrel. The $70MM was his pound of flesh. The Padres' sale was approved nine months after the Astros’. Had Crane stood his ground, and the deal collapsed with no viable plan B in place, the Padres likely would have been targeted. But if they agreed to the move, it’s not like Crane would have had the chance to revisit the Astros. He would have burned too many bridges. He was up against a wall. And I've been told *every* prospective owner would have faced the same problem. The sale was unfortunately poorly-timed.
Yep; he had enough red flags for them to exploit. But it was going to be a condition of sale, regardless - Selig is to blame for that one, 100%. The Astros had bad timing.
This is certainly true to some extent, but the ratings hold in the regular season and early playoffs too. And while the NBA has had stars in the finals, that's the nature of that sport - it will always have its biggest stars in the finals. It's not like the NBA has had big cities like LA or Chicago or New York - the last two years involved Oklahoma City, Dallas, and Miami. Compare that to MLB's San Francisco, Detroit, Dallas, and St. Louis - not all that different. And one of those World Series featured one of the greatest players ever (Pujols) and was a 7-game stunning thriller. If the WS needs New York or Boston to be equal to an NBA series with Oklahoma City, then that says something about the two sports.
