Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

Owner: Astros not changing name

Posted on: January 30, 2012 8:33 pm
 
By Matt Snyder

Last week, word circulated that new Astros owner Jim Crane and his front office were kicking around the idea of changing the team name from Astros to something else. Evidently, the fans have spoken, because it's not happening.

Via MLB.com blog network:
“You asked for change and we added several fan friendly initiatives last week and we hope you like them,” Crane said. “We will continue to listen, and to look for additional ways to improve on and off the field.

“One thing that we are not going to change is the name. We received strong feedback and consensus among season ticket holders and many fans, and we will not change the name Astros. The Houston Astros are here to stay.”
One area where Crane wasn't left a choice -- despite significant outcry from fans -- is the move to the AL West. That's still happening before the start of the 2013 season. Crane had to sign off on the move in order to become the new owner, but that still hasn't sat well with fans, as Crane obviously has an uphill battle when it comes to winning them over.

Perhaps keeping the same name will get a few fans on his side.

For more baseball news, rumors and analysis, follow @EyeOnBaseball on Twitter, subscribe to the RSS feed and "like" us on Facebook.
Comments

Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: January 31, 2012 4:14 am
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

Astro fans you need to get over the move to the AL West. Everyone knows it's just logial to move the Astros, you are all just pissed off cause no one likes change.
But it isn't logical at all to move the Astros. The team to move was Miami. The Marlins have only been around 20 years to the Astros' 50. They play in an area populated with Yankees, Red Sox and Orioles fans who have moved south in their old age. They would have a built-in rivalry with Tampa Bay. Plus, this would have allowed the Pirates to be reunited with the Phillies in the NL East, the Blue Jays to be reunited with the Tigers in the AL Central and the Royals to be reunited with their old rivals in the AL West.

Moving the Astros was the easy thing, not the logical thing. But baseball didn't want to do the logical thing.
    ----SkyHawk09


Not much surprise this, in the Age of Selig. If it makes absolutely no sense and serves to p*** off the largest number of fans to the greatest extent possible, then Bud will do it.  Afterwords, he'll lie like Pinocchio about anything that blew up in his face. Finally, at the end of the day, his fellow owners will somehow emerge even wealthier. Even a d-bag like Frank McCourt. This being almost all that most of them care about, they'll shower an extension and even greater riches on him.

No joy in Mudville? Debatable.

But that there is little enough justice and concern for the common fan, of that there's less doubt. Thanks, Bud.



Since: Aug 21, 2006
Posted on: January 31, 2012 12:26 am
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

Astro fans you need to get over the move to the AL West. Everyone knows it's just logial to move the Astros, you are all just pissed off cause no one likes change.
But it isn't logical at all to move the Astros. The team to move was Miami. The Marlins have only been around 20 years to the Astros' 50. They play in an area populated with Yankees, Red Sox and Orioles fans who have moved south in their old age. They would have a built-in rivalry with Tampa Bay. Plus, this would have allowed the Pirates to be reunited with the Phillies in the NL East, the Blue Jays to be reunited with the Tigers in the AL Central and the Royals to be reunited with their old rivals in the AL West.

Moving the Astros was the easy thing, not the logical thing. But baseball didn't want to do the logical thing.



Since: Mar 26, 2011
Posted on: January 30, 2012 11:45 pm
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

Orange Blue: Speak for yourself. With an attitude like this, I might not have the Angels as my favorite A.L. team anymore anyway.



Since: Mar 26, 2011
Posted on: January 30, 2012 11:43 pm
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

Amen, Jester. I want to see how these fans of their teams would react if it was their team being moved. Having followed the franchise since it's inception (1962 as the Colt 45's), I am not happy. At least he's keeping the Astros name. I'm undecided as to whether or not I will stay loyal to Houston though. I live in L.A. and the Angels have been my favorite A.L. team for years.



Since: Jan 6, 2008
Posted on: January 30, 2012 11:23 pm
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

I for one don't see a big deal for Houston moving to the AL



That's because they are not your team. I'm pretty sure that if the Cubs were moving it would be a big deal to you.  It is always easy to dismiss someone else's pain.

And Houston was not chosen because they were a better fit; they were chosen because the pending sale of the team gave MLB the perfect sword to hold over the Astros to force them to agree to the move.

And yes the creation of the NL Central meant that the Astros were no longer in a division with many of their old rivals. But we at least still played the Padres, Dodgers, Giants, Braves on a regular basis.  Furthermore, that was part of a major realignment of baseball where every team had to make adjustments and share in the burden.





Since: Sep 19, 2011
Posted on: January 30, 2012 10:40 pm
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

This whole Houston to AL thing really sits bad with me. If they would have moved Pittsburgh to AL Central or Milwaukee since they were the most recent to move to NL it made more sense. Why Pittsburgh? No state would have 2 teams in the same league other than California that has the size to support it. Houston and Arlington are way too close to have teams sharing the same league let alone the same division. Atleast Philly and Pittsburgh are in sepearate divisions. I never cared one way or the other for this current commissioner but this move where he forced this move to be agreed upon as a part of the trade, taking a team with almost 40 years of rival history that is wrong. All because his team (MIL) he pushed and pushed to get them in the "easier league" so they could compete better as a smaller market. This is all kinds of wrong in so many ways.
Look if we talking Al Central need one more team, I would agree that they are few Teams to pick from. But it was the AL West they want to bring up to 5 teams so it be even with the rest of the league, it have to be a team that close to all the West coast teams. Now they could had sent Milwaukee to Al central and move Kansas City to the west coast, but they felt that Hoston was a better fit.
Using that Houston and Arlington are too close won't work, Chicago Cubs/Whie sox and New York Yankees/ Mets are closer to each other then Houston and Arlington. Chicago teams and New York teams has no problem playing in the same leage, but there not an lot people would want both New York teams in same division as a example. The same thing would go for the Chicago teams, now I know an few Chicago baseball fans that would like to face their cross town rival 18 games an year but it won't happen.

I for one don't see a big deal for Houston moving to the AL, all it mean that Houston will have 1 less Pitcher and add 1 more hitter. For most of Houston 40 year history their Rivals was the Dodgers, Giants, Reds and Padres, but when they move to the central Division in 93' only the Reds went with them.





Since: Jan 6, 2008
Posted on: January 30, 2012 10:26 pm
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

I am glad that  the Astros name will remain the same.  From some of the comments the owner floated it seemed like he really, really wanted to change the name but has been dissuaded from doing so because of a strong, adverse reaction from the fan base.

I am not happy about the league change either but at this point it is a done deal so there is nothing that can change it. Although I do bristle when fans of other teams tell Astros fans how they should feel about  the move.  It is very easy to dismiss someone else's suffering and say that it is no big deal to lose the rivalries you have grown up watching. And for the record, the Astros have no real rivalry with the Rangers.  It's a novelty series that happens as a result of interleague play.

 I will just say that the Astros have been in the NL since 1962, and six other teams have joined the NL since then, including one with significant American League history.  Any one of those six teams would have made a better candidate to move than the Astros.  Seniority should count for something.




Since: Dec 30, 2008
Posted on: January 30, 2012 10:11 pm
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

 Astro fans you need to get over the move to the AL West. Everyone knows it's just logial to move the Astros, you are all just pissed off cause no one likes change. But trust me you will all learn to deal with it and realize it was a great decision to change leagues. I mean you get the chance to further develop your rival with the Rangers and also get to add more offense in theory with the DH. I know change sux at the beginning but I bet you'll all be ok with it in time. From on behalf of an Angel's fan, welcome!



Since: Jan 30, 2012
Posted on: January 30, 2012 10:06 pm
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

Houston and arlington are no more closer than boston and new york or philadelphia and washington ..



Since: Dec 5, 2011
Posted on: January 30, 2012 9:55 pm
 

Owner: Astros not changing name

I am not happy about them moving to the AL but I am glad they are at least keeping the ASTROS name.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com