hey linds @LindseyGrahamSC when you are done droning adam gadahn can you send another to 245 park avenue new york—
Jose Canseco (@JoseCanseco) August 19, 2013
Posted on 08/19/2013 3:04:26 PM PDT by smoothsailing
hey linds @LindseyGrahamSC when you are done droning adam gadahn can you send another to 245 park avenue new york—
Jose Canseco (@JoseCanseco) August 19, 2013
Who is at that address that Canseco could be so unhappy with? You might have guessed it:
Lindsey Graham calls for droning Adam Gadahn. Canseco calls for droning Bud Selig: twitter.com/JoseCanseco/st… #droneweek—
Alex Burns (@aburnspolitico) August 19, 2013
Yes, that’s the address of the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, among many other corporations.
Canseco has seen his fire breathing dragon and raised himself one drone strike.
We hope this rather one-sided feud can be settled amicably, but it doesn’t look that way.
(Excerpt) Read more at twitchy.com ...
fo dee chillin
That would be justice because the Brewers' move to the NL was what prompted the imbalance that made the Astros' switch "necessary". Simply move them back.
But Selig (Milwaukee's former owner and still benefactor) claims doing so would harm the Brewers' "great rivalries" against the Cubs and... well, the Cubs.
There were 25+ years where the Brewers competed with the White Sox and Twins but *those* rivalries apparently didn't count.
I think the Braves should be moved to the NL South and the Pirates moved to the NL East. As a Phillie Phan who started watching the Pirates on ROOT-HD because he wants to see baseball, I say your ballpark is just magical, next chance I get I’m comin’ to see a game and raise the Jolly Roger...
Here's my "tin foil hat" view of what happened. In 2008, the Rangers were bankrupt and up for sale. Nolan Ryan was the preferred bidder until the previous owner went back to bankruptcy court and the judge re-opened the bidding. That's when Jim Crane teamed up with Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban to outbid Ryan's group.
Selig did not want anything to do with Cuban so he awarded the Rangers to Ryan and Crane probably threatened to sue. Selig told him don't do it because the Astros will soon be up for sale and Selig would see to it that he would be approved to buy the Astros.
Then, in 2011, the Astros are up for sale and Crane's bid was ridiculously high and heavily leveraged at $678 million (Forbes had estimated the Astros were worth about $550 million). That scared away any other bidders.
Next Selig throws Crane a curve. As a condition to accepting the bid (which had already been agreed to between Crane and the previous owner), Crane would have to agree to switch leagues. That was not part of the original sale offer.
Crane is no idiot and realizes that this will not only piss off the fan base but that the AL means lower revenues (10 of the bottom 12 attendance teams are in the AL plus AL teams must pay for a full-time DH). He refuses to switch so Selig spreads dirt on Crane to accuse him of racism, sexism and child neglect through certain media contacts.
It takes six months for Crane to relent but only if he gets a rebate. The price? $70 million. Selig makes the previous Astros owner pay half the rebate.
Selig gets what he wants and they begin spinning how great this is for the Astros, ignoring all the obvious math that it wouldn't be.
To date, Crane has shrunk the payroll from $90 million under the former owner to $13 million presently and the team is heading to their third consecutive season as the worst team in baseball. Attendance has tanked and the front office is selling a "we'll be great sometime around 2017" mantra while they apparently try to retire as much debt as possible.
Thanks for the post! That’s very interesting info I wasn’t aware of. I’m strictly a Pirates and NL guy, so the AL is almost a foreign country for me. Can’t stand Selig, though. B^)
Umm, 100% wrong. The imbalance was caused by MLB expansion from 28 to 30 teams in 1998. Neither league wanted to add 2 expansion teams and with interleague play in its infancy, having two 15 team leagues was a logistical nightmare. The MLB owners voted to move an existing AL team to the NL. The Kansas City Royals were given the first option to move, but their owner decined. The Brewers were given the second option. Acting Commissioner Selig, fearing that the votes to approve expansion might vanish if he declined to move, agreed to take the Brewers to the NL.
****
But Selig (Milwaukee's former owner and still benefactor) claims doing so would harm the Brewers' "great rivalries" against the Cubs and... well, the Cubs.
Actually, you fail to recognize that Milwaukee & Chicago (and Wisconsin & Illinois) are intense longtime rivals in all facets of life. Wisconsinites call our immediate negihbors to the south FIB's - which stands for effin Illinois bastards. They dubbed us Cheeseheads. We turned that "insult" into a clever franchise of novelty headwear. They haven't come up with a way to market FIB's yet, although they did export one to Washington, DC.
Beyond that, the cities of the NL Central - Milwaukee, Chicago, Cincinatti, St. Louis & Pittsburgh are very similar. All were historically settled by German, Polish and Italian immigrants with an industrial (and now Rust Belt) base. On the field, the Brewers have developed intense rivalries with the Cubs, Cards & Pirates - slightly less with the Reds. You are also forgetting that the Milwaukee Braves were intense rivals with the Cards & Cubs.
****
There were 25+ years where the Brewers competed with the White Sox and Twins but *those* rivalries apparently didn't count.
Ah, now your baseball ignorance is really showing. Despite their geographic proximity, the Twins and White Sox never developed a rivalry with Milwaukee. The Brewers were only in the same division as the Twins & White Sox for 6 years (AL West in 1970-71, AL Central (1994-97). If you consider the old unbalanced schedule, the Twins & White Sox were as much rivals of the Brewers as the Angels & A's.
Ironically, the Brewers & Twins developed a rivalry only AFTER the Brewers moved to the NL and were desginated as the Twins' interleague rival.
You could call the Indians a rival of the Brewers since they played together in the same division for 25 of the Brewers 27 years in the AL. Or even the Tigers (21 of 27 years). But the Brewers, Tigers & Indians were never very good baseball teams at the same time, so they never developed on-field rivalries. Truth be told, the Brewers' biggest on-field division rivals in the 70's & 80's were the Yankees, Red Sox & Orioles or even the Blue Jays.
The Astros really only lost one rival in their move to the AL West - the Cincinatti Reds. The Astros and Reds played in the same division for 43 years. But other than the Reds, the Dodgers, Giants & Padres were all bigger rivals for the Astros than any NL Central team.
Would it have been better to move the Diamondbacks or Rockies to the AL West? Perhaps. Even so, the Astros were definitely headed to a West division.
It's unfortunate that the novelty of interleague has worn out and the big market owners wanted to balance schedules, divisions and playoff opportunities at the same time as the Astros required their votes to approve an ownership change.
Look at it this way, at least you get to maintain the natural Dallas/Houston rivalry and play more games with the Rangers.
Selig did not want anything to do with Cuban so he awarded the Rangers to Ryan and Crane probably threatened to sue. Selig told him don't do it because the Astros will soon be up for sale and Selig would see to it that he would be approved to buy the Astros......
****
Nice conspiracy theory. Where it falls down is by making Selig the boogeyman. Selig simply does the bidding of the big money, big market teams.
Selig is just a used car salesman schlepper from Milwaukee. Nice guy, loves baseball, likes to build group consensus. He might be able to bend or slightly shape the opinions of the big owners, but he is no evil mastermind.
Your conspiracy needs to include Bilderbergs or Steinbrenners or John Henrys.
Now, you're showing your ignorance. The Astros had a fierce rivalry with the Cardinals stemming from the 2001 pennant race and the postseasons of 2004 and 2005. Likewise, the Braves were an intense rival (at least from Houston's perspective) after postseason battles in 1997, 1999, 2001, 2004 and 2005. The Cubs had also risen in rivalry status after the Hurricane Ike fiasco in 2008 that Selig had a hand in.
Houston also had simmering feuds with the Mets (expansion twins in 1962 and LCS opponents in 1986) and the Dodgers (from those NL West wars of the 1980s).
We were forced to give all that up for 14 teams that mean nothing to us although the flacks on Selig's payroll told us how wonderful it would be to play the Rangers, Red Sox and Yankees every year. The dirty truth is that Rangers/Astros games never sold out when they had fewer dates.
For now, Astros fans are so turned off by the move and the losing that those games have more Rangers, Red Sox and Yankee fans at the park than they do Astros fans. And the other 11 AL teams can't attract flies. Attendance is down 60% from what it was six years ago and tv ratings are worse than MSNBC's.
But other than the Reds - the Braves, Dodgers, Giants & Padres were all bigger rivals for the Astros than any NL Central team.
I stand by that statement, as amended.
I think we have a difference of opinion on what constitutes a rivalry. I don't view 2 playoff series 26 years apart as a rivalry. I don't view being forced to play a make-up game played on a neutral field as a rivalry.
Rivalries require reciprocity of animosity or respect - on the field, in the stands or at neighborhood taverns. Rivalries can also be based upon geographic proximity (like the remaining NL Central) or long-term familiarity (like the Reds vs. Astros).
BUT if your closest divisional opponent is more than a 10 hour car ride away, it's hard to call that team a rival. If the players and fans of the other team are ambivalent about your squad or fans, you don't have a rivalry.
As I said, it's unfortunate that the Lords of Baseball compelled the Astros to move to the AL. Personally, I would have moved the Rockies to the AL West and returned the Astros to the NL West. The Rockies' style of play is better suited to the AL, the travel to/from Seattle would have made more sense and the Rockies don't have a lengthy NL history.
But while that scenario would have kept Houston in the NL, it would have left Phoenix as the Astros' nearest divisional destination - a mere 1,200 miles away. Maybe that's why the MLB owners chose to move the Astros - to give them at least one nearby rival.
Baseball ownership is a good old boys network. Mr. Crane simply came late to the party. Someday that could change. Who knows what the future holds for the Rays in Tampa Bay?
“And move the Astros back to the National League. I’m sure the Angels will second the motion.”
And do we get to give Josh Hamilton back to the Rangers as well?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.