Master Index of Archived Threads


canada!

Nymr83 Nov 21 2012 04:26 PM

Baseball america reporting that nolan ryan owned ryan-sanders group will buy the binghamton franchise and move them to Ottawa in 2014. Mets are locked-in with that franchise until 2016.

TransMonk Nov 21 2012 04:41 PM Re: canada!

Break out the mayonnaise. That's what I'm talking aboot.

Edgy MD Nov 21 2012 05:21 PM Re: canada!

Good news/bad news from where I sit.

Frayed Knot Nov 21 2012 07:45 PM Re: canada!

So much for the Bingo owner's vows not to sell. This isn't a done deal yet and no one in Binghamton is talking, but it sure sounds like it'll happen. BA Report -- http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/mi ... 14356.html

Edgy MD Nov 21 2012 08:04 PM Re: canada!

One wonders whether the Mets have an out in their agreement.

Ceetar Nov 21 2012 08:55 PM Re: canada!

Edgy MD wrote: One wonders whether the Mets have an out in their agreement. they might. This was rumored a couple of years ago right? They had to know it was a possibility, or alternatively, they don't care about going to Canada.

Frayed Knot Nov 22 2012 05:44 AM Re: canada!

Edgy MD wrote: One wonders whether the Mets have an out in their agreement. "they might." -- I suspect they don't but that's just a guess. If they do it can probably only be invoked at the end of 2014 (Mets/Bingo current agreement runs through 2016) when the next "cycle" of franchise movement comes up. Remember this current off-season was one such period (hence the unwanted move to Vegas). "This was rumored a couple of years ago right?" -- Well, one year ago anyway "They had to know it was a possibility, or alternatively, they don't care about going to Canada." -- Not really a case of not caring so much as it is not being able to do much about it. The last agreement was signed at least two years ago (maybe four) at which point this wasn't even a rumor, and even when the rumor broke the Bingo ownership was denying it strenuously. Now maybe the Mets believed that or maybe they didn't but if you like the current arrangement (and this one has been ongoing for some 30 years so you assume both sides did) then longer-term agreements are preferable to shorter ones which in turn locks the Mets into this franchise for another four years regardless of where they wind up.

Ceetar Nov 22 2012 06:48 AM Re: canada!

I distinctly remembering the Ottawa rumors coming up BEFORE the Mets signed this latest agreement. I also recall it being so 'almost official' that people writing posts about other possible locations for them to sign on with. In fact, the agreement was signed in late august for 4 years, and it seems like they DO have an out after 2014 if need be. Ottawa really isn't a horrible location, especially with them expecting they might lose Buffalo anyway, so AA-AAA proximity was a crapshoot. why not try out the new place which I think has new facilities or renovations? It's not like they're losing a location to someone else, the location is actually going away. It was clearly a gamble, still is I guess. They could've preemptively tried to cut ties with them and find a different city first, or they could simply hope they stayed or that the move was delayed/postponed/canceled. Really we're only talking about 1 year in Ottawa.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 22 2012 07:00 AM Re: canada!

I also don't see what the problem is with being in Ottawa. It's not as close as Binghamton, but it's still a lot closer than Las Vegas. I personally have no problem with this. I was never likely to go to Binghamton anyway. The only time I would ever see the B-Mets play was when they would come to Reading (and I rarely go to Reading) and the O-Mets will be in Reading as frequently as the B-Mets.

Ceetar Nov 22 2012 07:10 AM Re: canada!

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I also don't see what the problem is with being in Ottawa. It's not as close as Binghamton, but it's still a lot closer than Las Vegas. I personally have no problem with this. I was never likely to go to Binghamton anyway. The only time I would ever see the B-Mets play was when they would come to Reading (and I rarely go to Reading) and the O-Mets will be in Reading as frequently as the B-Mets. Good way to help many New Yorkers in the extended Binghamton area be Mets fans instead of evil ones though.

Nymr83 Nov 22 2012 11:31 AM Re: canada!

yeah the benefit to Binghamton was hopefully creating Mets fan up there instead of Yankees/Indians(?)/BlueJays(?) If they're going to move the franchise though, why Ottawa? isn't Montreal empty?

seawolf17 Nov 23 2012 08:41 AM Re: canada!

That's not to say someone couldn't buy another franchise and move it to Binghamton in 2014. Not that they would, but a lot can happen between now and then.

Ashie62 Nov 23 2012 03:48 PM Re: canada!

Edgy MD wrote: One wonders whether the Mets have an out in their agreement. They could not afford one.

Edgy MD Nov 23 2012 10:30 PM Re: canada!

I'm not sure what that means. I wouldn't think of an opt-out as being a thing that the Mets would pay for in cash, and if they did, it would likely not be until/unless they exercised it. And would not be exercised unless they saw a financial incentive. A franchise being bought and moving in the middle of an agreement would seem to me to have a meaningful effect on the value of the agreement, and I would think any team should have an out option as standard fare. And with the commissioner of baseball overseeing most aspects of minor league options, I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

Mets – Willets Point Nov 24 2012 05:26 PM Re: canada!

Road trip!

Swan Swan H Nov 27 2012 02:06 PM Re: canada!

Woah, Canada.

Nymr83 Nov 27 2012 03:12 PM Re: canada!

Rubin reports deal fell through. A win for upstate!

Edgy MD Nov 27 2012 03:37 PM Re: canada!

Excellent.