Beeston interested in buying the Blue Jays?

youngLion · Post #1 » by **youngLion** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 8:18 pm

Just heard McCown mention this rumour at the top of his show. It is as of yet unconfirmed, but apparently there's a talk that Beeston is attempting to put together a group to buy the Blue Jays from Rogers. Obviously no one here has any idea if this is true, but I must say I find the prospect rather encouraging, considering the non-committal attitude that Rogers has about building a winning team.

TDotFan · Post #2 » by **TDotFan** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 8:32 pm

I guess anything would be better then Rogers

zilby · Post #3 » by **zilby** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 8:33 pm

TDotFan · Post #4 » by **TDotFan** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 8:38 pm

Also we would get SKYDOME back.

Modern_epic · Post #5 » by **Modern_epic** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 9:17 pm

^No, we wouldn't.

youngLion · Post #6 » by **youngLion** » Wed Aug 5, 2009 9:21 pm

Modern_epic wrote:^No, we wouldn't.

Probably not, but I wouldn't rule it out. Beeston was around when the Dome was built, and he was gone by the time they bastardized it with the new name. This is all just speculation right now, so I don't think we can say anything either way so definitively.

Modern_epic · Post #7 » by **Modern_epic** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 3:31 am

youngLion wrote:
Modern_epic wrote:^No, we wouldn't.

Probably not, but I wouldn't rule it out. Beeston was around when the Dome was built, and he was gone by the time they bastardized it with the new name. This is all just speculation right now, so I don't think we can say anything either way so definitively.

Even if a Rogers does sell the Dome to a new owner along with the jays, which is uncertain upon uncertain, a new owner isn't about to give up on naming rights now that the barrier has been broken. The only way we get the skydome back is if the economy is so bad no one will pay for the rights.

J-Roc · Post #8 » by **J-Roc** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 11:31 am

I don't expect some random ownership group to be of any use to us. They won't start spending like the Red Sox and Yankees. Our only hope is for an ownership group with the balls/foresight to demand that MLB 1. institute a cap or 2. get the Jays out of the AL East.

zilby · Post #9 » by **zilby** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 8:45 pm

J-Roc wrote:I don't expect some random ownership group to be of any use to us. They won't start spending like the Red Sox and Yankees. Our only hope is for an ownership group with the balls/foresight to demand that MLB 1. institute a cap or 2. get the Jays out of the AL East.

we need to get to the AL west.

Post #10 » by **LittleOzzy** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 9:36 pm

That would be amazing.

He would be much more interested in building a winning team.

I can't even think of a negative about this idea.

Modern_epic · Post #11 » by **Modern_epic** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 10:23 pm

Has anyone seen any media source mention this? Or blog? Or did anyone else listen to the show? Because I've seen nothing about this anywhere else. I'm not claiming OP is lying, just perhaps he misheard? It's weird that none of the 5 jays blogs I looked at since had a word on it. It seems like even a rumour would be pretty big news...

youngLion · Post #12 » by **youngLion** » Thu Aug 6, 2009 10:56 pm

Modern_epic wrote:Has anyone seen any media source mention this? Or blog? Or did anyone else listen to the show? Because I've seen nothing about this anywhere else. I'm not claiming OP is lying, just perhaps he misheard? It's weird that none of the 5 jays blogs I looked at since had a word on it. It seems like even a rumour would be pretty big news...

He mentioned it a couple of times in the 4 oclock call-in hour. I looked around and couldn't find any other sources either, so it may be a rumour that McCown picked up from somebody he knows in the industry, I'm not sure.

With any luck, there's something to this and we'll be hearing more about it.

-MetA4- · Post #13 » by **-MetA4-** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 12:52 am

LittleOzzy wrote:That would be amazing.

He would be much more interested in building a winning team.

I can't even think of a negative about this idea.

You cant? It depends entirely on who is providing the money to fund the team. No matter what your views on Rogers are, we're still near the middle league-wide in terms of salary. While we aren't competing with the Yankees or Red Sox there are still about 15 or so teams that spend less money than us (last time I checked). Funding-wise there are a lot of worse teams you can be a fan of, and I dont even blame Rogers all that much considering that this market is generally a bandwagon fanbase.

If we can get some high rollers that love baseball to get involved then yeah this is a no-brainer, otherwise you are overblowing just how "bad" Rogers really is.

squeekysneakers · Post #14 » by **squeekysneakers** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 4:13 am

Getting Rogers out of ownership is not simply the answer. The new ownership coming in would need to be someone like Jim Balsillie for this idea to succeed. To compete with the Yankees and Red Sox the new ownership would have to be ready to signifiacantly increase payroll. Yes, Rogers has a bottom line as a gigantic company and doesn't have a personal interest in baseball, bt at the moment they are spending significant money on the team. If this group is willing to come in and a) spend big bucks on big name talent and b) Tie a tin can to JP Riccardi then I am all for it.

As for the name of the Building: I imagine it will stay Rogers Centre as long as Rogers continues to pay for the name. There is nothing stopping new ownership from offering it to another company like Bell or TD Canada Trust in order to generate further capital.

That being said I have trust in Paul Beeston (One of the reasons he was brought back here) and if he were to become a part owner it would, at least, be a promising idea.

Mustard_Tiger · Post #15 » by **Mustard_Tiger** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 5:31 am

Anything is better than Rogers. I hate being owned by a profit-oriented corporation. Their only concern is their shareholders, not how good their baseball team is.

Test of Wills · Post #16 » by **Test of Wills** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 9:09 pm

LittleOzzy wrote:That would be amazing.

He would be much more interested in building a winning team.

I can't even think of a negative about this idea.

Beeston is a winner and has always been one.

This Rogers group is not a bunch that is intending to put together a competitive team and anything would be better than them IMO.

There is no downside of having Beeston and his group looking over the Jays club.