Where's He Been?

[BigMacFU]

The reason for-profit should matter to you is because you have an owner who is only willing to keep the fans in the seats by dangling a carrot that he never will give you. He doesn't want to win the world series, the cost to do so given the way the organization is built (not around scouting anymore, but free agency) is too much. Your owner could operate like Steinbrenner and be willing to lose money as an organization just to get those few extra players at the deadline or in the off season. Yes, most teams operate on a for profit model. I'm not saying that's a good thing, I'm saying that fans of those teams that don't admit this, that actually cheer for their team as if they thought the owner was one of them are foolish. The astros will not win a world series any time at all in the near future until they get different ownership. This is a horrible fact with so many teams because the owners do not treat these operations as they should, a non-revenue source, rather they treat them as a way for their personal net worth to increase. Unfortunately, the Astros, the Royals, the Brewers, the Marlins, the Cubs and so many others do this, it's disgusting. So, although I recognize someone's desire to cheer for their team, don't do so with disillusioned lollipop dreams, that is where the ignorance lies. You have a great stadium, no doubt, an awesome pitcher in Clemens and one in Oswalt, no doubt, but a great owner, not a chance. He would have kept Beltran, Randy, Wagner, and all those others. I'm sure Oswalt will be leaving once his contract is up too and he's worth even more.

You can make fun of the Cubs all you want, I don't care because they are one of these for-profit teams only in existence to increase a company's net worth.

But you continue to talk as if the Astros were doing anything special. The Cubs had no supposed hopes, the Astros imploded and they have an owner that only spends enough to keep you thinking they're a good team. Heck, in the NL that doesn't take much, you guys still have hopes at under .500. So, how can you call them a great team, unless you mean in the abstract sense of the Astros being your team, because there's no way a sub-.500 or .500 team could ever be considered great.

[CoventryCat86]

The reason for-profit should matter to you is because you have an owner who is only willing to keep the fans in the seats by dangling a carrot that he never will give you. He doesn't want to win the world series, the cost to do so given the way the organization is built (not around scouting anymore, but free agency) is too much. Your owner could operate like Steinbrenner and be willing to lose money as an organization just to get those few extra players at the deadline or in the off season. Yes, most teams operate on a for profit model. I'm not saying that's a good thing, I'm saying that fans of those teams that don't admit this, that actually cheer for their team as if they thought the owner was one of them are foolish. The astros will not win a world series any time at all in the near future until they get different ownership. This is a horrible fact with so many teams because the owners do not treat these operations as they should, a non-revenue source, rather they treat them as a way for their personal net worth to increase. Unfortunately, the Astros, the Royals, the Brewers, the Marlins, the Cubs and so many others do this, it's disgusting. So, although I recognize someone's desire to cheer for their team, don't do so with disillusioned lollipop dreams, that is where the ignorance lies. You have a great stadium, no doubt, an awesome pitcher in Clemens and one in Oswalt, no doubt, but a great owner, not a chance. He would have kept Beltran, Randy, Wagner, and all those others. I'm sure Oswalt will be leaving once his contract is up too and he's worth even more.

You can make fun of the Cubs all you want, I don't care because they are one of these for-profit teams only in existence to increase a company's net worth.

But you continue to talk as if the Astros were doing anything special. The Cubs had no supposed hopes, the Astros imploded and they have an owner that only spends enough to keep you thinking they're a good team. Heck, in the NL that doesn't take much, you guys still have hopes at under .500. So, how can you call them a great team, unless you mean in the abstract sense of the Astros being your team, because there's no way a sub-.500 or .500 team could ever be considered great.

You are so full of shit. They signed Oswalt to at least a five year contract and look at the fucking win-loss record, it's IMPOSSIBLE for the Astros to have a sub .500 record this year. They had their reasons for getting Beltran for the half year in 2004 and their reasons to not pay him the ridiculous money he could and did get elsewhere, good for Beltran, good for the Astros and good for the Mets.

And dammit, stop twisting my words. My statement about them being a "great team" was in relation to their performance and what they've accomplished over the course of their existance and in particular since the NL went to three divisions. You try and make me look like a fool because their win-loss record this year is below average in comparison to their average over the last 12 years.

Once again, I really don't care about your opinions or crazed theories on what makes a good owner or a bad one because it doesn't matter....