Where's He Been?

[CoventryCat86]

Bill, when did I ever say the Cubs didn't suck. You continually to try and get my goat (pun intended) by saying the Cubs suck, but I don't care, I know this, I've accepted this, I don't care. I've never said they were the greatest team ever, that's the Yankees. So again, I haven't ignored anything. Do they have the worst record in the NL, absolutely, but that's not hard to know; every year it's them, the bucs/pirates and brewers at the bottom of the pack. That's a given. So, my point still stands, and you still can't face the fact you root for a for-profit team, you prefer illusion to truth, that McLane wants money, not wins, or at least only enough wins to drive profits. Although he spent 18 million for 2/3's a season out of Roger, the money he makes through people actually showing up because of Roger is just so much more.

Who gives a crap if they're what you refer to as a "for profit" team? I really don't want to argue the particulars of that with you because it doesn't fucking matter one iota. Don't most teams/orginazations strive to make money rather than lose it? I really don't see or understand the point you're trying to make at all. The Astros have a great team, a great manager, a great stadium in a great city a great owner, great fans and they're a whole lot of fun to watch. The Astros are almost ALWAYS in the playoff hunt unlike MANY other teams so what's to complain about? As I mentioned before, they have won more games than any other team in the NL Central since the inception of the three divisions, they've been steadily improving since the team began in the early 1960's and I've been following them and their climb for over 30 years. Sure, I wish they could win the World Series every year but that's an unrealistic want on my part. I tip my hat to other teams like the Yankees, the Red Sox and the Cardinals who consistantly put together great teams and organizations and once in a while it's nice to see teams pop up out of nowhere like the Tigers and the White Sox. The White Sox were awesome last year and if the Twins and the Tigers weren't playing so well this year, the White Sox would have made the playoffs again because unlike the Cubs, they're a very good team/organization.

Sorry but the Cubs suck The only real team in Chicago is the White Sox.

[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....