he accidentally quoted my line-by-line response to one poster; he intended to quote my line-by-line response to him just above. Just an honest mistake folks; chill.
That is definitely something I'd get behind! If they move to the AL just do a complete makeover. Astros= Space Bring back the rainbow uniforms(not the awful ones in the mid 80s), Oribit and get rid of the train!
If we move to a new league might as well change the name too, and start from scratch. Hey people here might get excited for baseball again and think we got a new expansion team!
Just let Selig (aka "The dumbest Jew in America" - Jane Leavy) and Nolan tell us what we should be called.
Houston Express Let it be known, that I like the Track, and for the most part like our colors. I do not like the cursive Astros, nor do I like the pinstripes.
Replace the train with a rocket that shots flames, kill Junction Jack and hang his feet from the top of the left foul pole for good luck and reinstate Orbit.
msn explained it. You might have done some reading yourself before trying to make other people look stupid. You can see how your response was confusing.
http://blog.chron.com/ultimateastro...ore-of-a-position-of-power-than-people-think/ Crane is in more of a position of power than people think Some of the best deals are the ones that don’t come to pass. It’s true in business, it’s true in baseball and it’s true in the business of baseball. AOL and Time Warner rue the day they opted to join forces. The Astros lament, among many things in their 50-year existence without winning a World Series, doing the business of sending Joe Morgan to the Cincinnati Reds after the 1971 season. Prospective Astros owner Jim Crane has some hard questions to ask himself when it comes to doing business with Major League Baseball. Five months have passed since Crane reached a $680 million agreement to buy the team from Drayton McLane. The approval that McLane predicted would sail through with ease hasn’t, and Crane’s reputation has taken a hit from all the questions raised about the delay. Does MLB commissioner Bud Selig really have serious enough misgivings about Crane to stand in the way of a sale McLane so desperately wants, or is it all about the end game of getting the Astros to acquiesce to a move to the American League? Selig and the MLB Players Association want two 15-team leagues that will allow for the addition to two wild-card playoff teams. Some team will have to change leagues for that to happen, and there are no volunteers. Because of the pending sale, the Astros are vulnerable – at least theoretically – to MLB coercion to become that volunteer. From an MLB vantage point, moving the Astros would cause the least fuss and muss. Move a team from the one six-division team to the one four-division team and be done with it. As a residual benefit, it would give the Texas Rangers – AL West champions and World Series participants the past two seasons – an in-state division rival. Such a move, of course, would significantly change the deal that Crane struck with McLane. Crane signed on to buy a team with a 50-year history in the National League, not a newcomer to the AL West. Crane signed on to buy a team aligned in the time-zone friendly NL Central. What Crane didn’t sign on for – not in May – was to risk the potential alienation of a sizable segment of the fan base by forsaking those NL roots. He didn’t sign on for moving to a designated hitter league and playing more West Coast games with late starts, making it more difficult for fans to follow the team. Oh, and not so incidentally, more late starts mean lower ratings for a startup regional sports network. Assuming Crane and his investors aren’t desperate to get a deal – any deal – done, they’re in more of a position of power than people might think. If the sale goes through, it raises the value of the other 29 franchises. And if there were a long line of other buyers waiting to shell out $680 million for the worst team in the major leagues, McLane wouldn’t be so intent on pushing through this particular deal. MLB would not be wise to keep the ownership situation in any market, let alone one in the fourth-largest city in the county, in limbo when there is a ready, willing and able buyer. If Crane is willing to run the risk of not getting the team at all, he has a hand that could prove to be win-win. If Crane holds the line at changing leagues and doesn’t get the team, he can walk away his head held high and say, “I did everything in my power to keep the Astros in the National League.” If Crane holds the line and can keep the team in the NL, he begins his tenure as Astros owner as the white knight who preserved 50 years of heritage. If the only way to get the team truly is to accept a move to the AL, Crane needs to think long and hard about whether it’s akin to making a deal with the devil. Some fans have started an online petition opposing a move, and many others have expressed their objections in the blogosphere. An unscientific poll in these parts showed 75 percent of the respondents opposing a move. About one-third of the respondents said they would quit following the team or attending games if the Astros change leagues. It’s incumbent on Crane to figure out just how deep-seeded the resistance to a change is. Are those most resistant to change actual paying customers, or online snipers who don’t pay any of the freight? Do one-third of the season-ticketholders feel that way, and would they truly abandon ship if the Astros change leagues? And if the Astros do lose a chunk of their fan base over a move, are there enough people in the market who might fill that void? Could they gain fans they didn’t previously have by moving leagues? Would winning bring back those who seem so willing to defect at this point? Remember, there were legions of fans vowing “never” to support MLB again after the 1994 strike. In the final pre-strike season of 1993, attendance was 70.2 million. Attendance fell to 62.2 million in the first fill post-strike season (1996) and was up to 72.7 million by 2000. Could Crane win back any fans who jump ship simply by running a credible organization that produces a strong product? A move to the AL West would entail 27 road games, not counting interleague play, on the West Coast (nine apiece in Anaheim, Oakland and Seattle). Under the current configuration, the Astros played 15 games on the West Coast and six in the Mountain zone in 2011. Then again, the current configuration may not be in play much longer regardless of what the Astros do. There is a strong likelihood that even if the Astros stay in the NL, they’ll have to shift to West to even out the divisions. In a five-team NL West, the Astros would be looking at 27 West Coast starts (nine apiece in Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego) and nine more in the Mountain zone (Colorado or Arizona). As a practical matter, then, would the Astros be better off in the NL West than the AL West? The NL West would actually present more potential late starts that compromise the fans’ ability to watch the games and torpedo the television ratings. On top of travel logistics and start times and television ratings, on top of risking the alienation of fans, there is another peril of moving to the AL West. For the Astros to compete as opposed to just take up space, they’d have to be prepared to make more of a financial commitment. In the Astros’ NL Central home, the average payroll is $84.6 million. Even with the Moneyball Oakland A’s in the equation, the AL West sported an average payroll of $95.9 million. As a whole, the cost of doing business in the AL was more than $9 million higher than in the NL ($97.8 million to $88.6 million). Sure, financially-challenged franchises such as Tampa Bay have demonstrated an ability to compete against better-heeled teams, but nobody in their right mind would want to compete with fewer resources than the competition. Yes, the Astros could count on box-office draws such as the Yankees and Red Sox coming to Minute Maid Park on a regular basis. That also means the Astros would have to actually play those teams – not to mention, the suddenly mighty Rangers – on a regular basis. Can Crane get MLB to kick in $10 million a year to make an AL move worth the Astros’ while? Would fans still begrudge him of making a move at that point? Even if Crane were to hold the line and MLB rejects him, Astros fans have no assurances the next buyer would be willing to make that same stand. Could the best deal for Crane and his investors be one that doesn’t come to pass? Maybe. On the one hand, MLB sure does seem eager to kick the Astros while they’re down and in disarray. On the other hand, the opportunity to take over the Astros while they’re in such a state may prove to be irresistible. Just five years ago, coming off a World Series appearance, an 82-80 team drew more than three million fans. As miserable as the 2011 season was, even with an in-limbo ownership situation and the worst on-field product in the majors, the Astros outdrew 11 teams. Houston is a sleeping-giant market, and Crane is willing to pay a premium price for the team because of it.
http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?...stros-heres-why&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39 Jim Crane Will Be Approved to Purchase Astros. Here’s Why Written by Maury Brown Tuesday, 18 October 2011 11:38 The Houston Astros will be getting a new owner in Jim Crane. No, it’s not been made official. No, the vote hasn’t yet occurred, and as with anything in MLB, it could change at the last minute. But, over the last two weeks, matters have moved, and with it, expect Crane’s approval. If you’re asking, “What changed?” you might as well be asking how an owner thinks; it’s not one thing. But, here’s what did happened that delayed the initial vote. It was not the first story on Crane, but something in the report on him in June of this year on Forbes, coupled with the mess that is the current state of the Dodgers under Frank McCourt, got some of the owners rethinking approving him without more information. It wasn’t just an EEOC investigation into discrimination charges against one of Crane’s companies. It’s possible it was the war-profiteering that occurred after that, in conjunction with other matters. Repeatedly we’ve been told, it wasn’t one thing with Crane. It was slowing up and asking for more information on his dealings. It was getting a “comfort level” with approving Crane. There’s never been anyone willing to say on or off-record which owners weren’t willing to vote to approve Crane in August. Speculating, it’s possible the Rangers might not have been keen to Crane. After all, Crane was part of a quickly cobbled together partnership with Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban that had them in the auction process for the Rangers that eventually saw a group headed by Nolan Ryan and Chuck Greenberg winning. The auction process drove the sale price up higher than expected, which didn’t exactly sit well with the new Rangers ownership group. The odd thing is, that sale likely played into how much Crane’s exceptionally large group is now paying for the Astros. All that aside, at least 7 owners must have had questions about Crane as the move to approve ownership transfer requires 75 percent of the owners agreeing. Certainly, Drayton McLane is for it, so 75% of 29… you do the math. Two weeks ago, Crane met with Commissioner Selig. What was discussed hasn’t been said in detail, but what is known is this: Bud wanted to hear directly what Crane’s story was on the character issues surrounding his company. It should be noted, he was never directly linked to the war-profiteering aspect – something that was done by regional execs in the Middle East – but rather, it occurred on his watch. There’s also the move of the Astros to the American League West, something that has been said to be a lynch pin in Crane’s approval. To be clear, that is important, but the serious discussions about moving the Astos to the AL occurred as part of the August owners meetings after the vote on Crane had been delayed. As a source close to the situation has said repeatedly, “It’s a factor with Crane, but not number one.” So, owners weren’t comfortable with Crane, sought more information, and now seem ready to vote for his approval during the Nov 15-16 meetings in Milwaukee. The timing makes sense, as well. There will no doubt be articles talking about Crane’s controversial elements that occurred at his companies. If you’re going to go there, you do so during the off-season. While the baseball media will have something to say, most fans will be talking about football and basketball (college, at least, and possibly NBA if the labor dispute is resolved). There will be less media churn than if Crane had been approved in August in advance of the postseason. What will be interesting is knowing what Crane said to the Executive Board that has been created as part of the exceptionally large investor pool for the purchase. Crane is covering about 20% of the deal, while dozens of others make up the difference. As we reported yesterday, Crane and a lawyer flew to meet with league officials last week, and it’s likely that while he’s been told the votes are now there to approve, seeking compensation for moving to the AL could have been part of that meeting. So, mark it down. Crane will get approved. It’s not in stone (see what happened to Miles Prentice at the 11th hour when he tried to purchase the Royals), but most everything points to his winning the day. Not since the league struggled to get an owners for the Los Angeles Dodgers have the owners hand wrung so much. That was a different situation, with different personalities, and certainly, different financing. But, stopping a $680 million deal, scuttling Crane’s group, and starting back over would not be good for the Astros in 2012 (and give Drayton McLane even more aggravation). After November, Crane gets the focus back to turning the Astros around on the field, and off the front office discussions that have swirled for months.
