They had no reason to blink. MLB held the trump card: approval. If he had walked away, which he was never going to do, his chance to ever own a MLB team goes with him. He knew this. They knew this. I commend him for extracting a pound of flesh and getting $200MM out of them. But that only serves to underscore their resolve. This was worth them each paying $200MM. I don't know why, but Selig sold them on a 15/15 split and they held fast on it. Again, I spoke to him personally about it. I can understand he might be prompted to save face - but I got no vibe that's what he was doing.
First of all, this was never going to be a Dodger situation; apples to bowling balls. That owner was corrupt and broke. That has no connection to this at all. And yes, this was absolutely seemingly driven by Bud's agenda and yes, I would agree - Milwaukee moving made 100000000000000000000000000 (note: I'm just randomly adding a whole bunch of zeroes here) times more sense. This wasn't about Crane; it was about Selig protecting the Brewers and convincing himself (or being convinced) that a 15/15 split better serves baseball. So why would that not continue to be a condition of sale if they did had to move to a new owner?
My question is if the Astros changed their names to the Greens, how many would stop going to the games because of that..? Nobody. Groogrux would come around and get out of his bad mood. MadMax would buy that olive green jersey in a second and embrace the change! -
Houston has a lot of trees, but it's not known for that. It's known for Oil, NASA, and the Astrodome. Astros fits. Greens only fits if you're moving the team to Charlotte, and then it's still a stupid name.
Bud Adams was the worst owner in Houston by far. I understand that McLane wasn't perfect...but there was good mixed in there too. The franchise he bought never sniffed the kind of respect he brought to it. It also never sunk as low as he allowed it to this last season.
How many of those same people would still go to an Astros game? And Greens? Really? On the heels of the state's worst drought in history, you want to name the team the Greens while a brown, mostly gray area loses thousands of acres of trees?
No. Disagree. Cash is and was the trump card. There was no second bidder waiting in the wings. And certainly no one willing to pay the kind of money that Crane ultimately offered, upon which future franchise valuations will be based. If Crane said, "I signed a deal to buy a team with an NL charter...that's what I intend to buy, and nothing else," I believe MLB would have caved to that. You don't want a franchise floundering with an owner who doesn't want the team any longer...and, more importantly, you don't walk away from an offer that is as big as Crane's was.
So you're contending he never said that? I would gamble he said it. A lot. And they shrugged their shoulders and continued to point to the American League West. That's why they paid him $200MM. If he was agreeable and didn't give a flip, they never would have compensated him. Otherwise, why did it take so long? They would have run him off over EEOC filings but not over a strong-arm tactic to switch leagues? So these are ethical owners on the one-hand, and greedy, self-interested on the other? Doesn't add up. Franchise values are escalating with or without Crane's offer.
I think a name change would be fine. But, only if it truly represents this city. Here are some more accurate ideas: Houston Humidity Houston Mosquitoes Houston Refugees Houston Traffic Houston Crime Houston Narrowminds Houston Pollution Houston Rednecks
I'm sure he said it...and I think when they knocked money off the deal (they knocked for $70 million, not $200 million) he jumped all over that. Again, to him this is an investment. He did not HAVE to accept compensation for it...he could merely say, "no...my charter is for an NL team...thanks for the amended offer, but no thanks. I'm here to buy an NL team..you have my offer." I think MLB still takes the cash. Cash is king, particularly when you consider how much Crane's offer blew everyone away. So yeah, he said it...but they bought him out of that position. The discussion here is whether Crane had a choice or it was forced on him....that's what I've been responding to. He absolutely had a choice. The EEOC stuff/war profiteering was, imo, nothing more than smokescreen. I said over and over again as this thing was playing out that they already knew who Jim Crane was before he ever bid on the Astros. He had tried to buy a team before, and no doubt MLB had done their due diligence. All the charges were nearly a decade old. No new information to garner out of that. MLB used that smokescreen of, "we need more time to sort through all the 10 year old claims" because it was a card they could play to get to the point where there was agreement on moving the team to the AL.
not in a million years. the minute they walk away from the 50 years of history i'm connected to is the minute i walk away entirely. no doubt in my mind. they might as well move the hell out of town at that point, as far as i'm concerned. change the name and i'm gone. couple a new league with a whole new identity and you're not talking about anything i care about anymore. having said that, i think they heard that message loud and clear yesterday through the media...and i don't think it's going to happen...i'd be shocked...but i said that before about the whole AL switch.
The league was under the gun. They had something like one month until a new CBA was signed, which was the deadline for moving a team. My assumption is that the reason it took so long was because.Crane wanted cash, and MLB didn't want to pay it. I seriously doubt that Crane ever saif 'no' to the AL. Otherwise the timing doesn't make sense. Ig Crane could have strung it out for a month.or two, a move to the AL would have been a moot point and the Astros would sill be playing real baseball. Certainly Drayton wouldn't have been willing to move leagues after his 'buddy' Bud had just killed his dream deal. My guess is that if it hadn't happened when it did - if Crane had delayed even a week - the league would have had to use the remaining time to prep another team for league change
Yeah, sorry - had $200MM in my head for some reason. They still ponied up $35MM - so why would greedy owners who'd never let a cash-cow deal walk away, be OK with McClane knocking $70MM off the price? I guess we're arguing semantics, then - he had no choice IF he wanted to own the Astros (or any other MLB team), and by every indication, that's exactly what he wanted. In that scenario, he's vulnerable to strong-arming. Like I said, he told me personally it would have been an issue with any and every prospective buyer. MLB could hold approval over all of them and intended to.
You can say it isn't Drayton's decision, but it certainly is. He wanted to sell the team badly, and MLB wanted to move the team to the AL. Therefore, unless Drayton wanted to wait longer, as in years longer, any deal was going to be contingent upon moving the team to the AL.
If the Astros change there name I am switching to cricket. The "Astros" are a great name and here is the proof. I met this girl on Rottnest Island, Western Australia and shortly after meeting me she took my hat right off my head without asking and put it on. Here is a 2 year old kid in Australia who I caught wearing my hat when I had put it down. Even people in Australia who know nothing about the MLB, Houston, or even how to use the toilet properly know that the name "Astros" is a great name!
