"Quite possibly, quite possibly. I think if for some reason there was a better ownership group that we felt like would be better for Kansas City than us and would agree to contractually keep the team here in Kansas City for a long time, then we'd have to consider that I think. But right now, I would say yes."Wow! Sounds like that guy is giddy with excitement about the future of the organization and his future with it. Really what it sounds like is a guy who is ready to be done with the whole baseball team ownership thing. Seriously, how many owners in baseball would answer this question in such a way.
The question wasn't even asking what it would take to sell the team, yet that's the direction Glass chose to take it. How easy would it have been for Glass to simply say "we love Kansas City and right now I can't see a scenario that would result in a change in ownership." Instead, Glass talked about what it would take for him to move the team, almost as if he was laying the groundwork.
Listen I don't think Glass was attempting to publicly declare the team available, but answers this question in such a way definitely doesn't paint the image of an owner in love with the organization. David Glass is a savvy businessman and I have no doubt that he has learned to choose his words carefully in interviews. I find it very interesting that he answered this question in such a way.
I don't think Glass has been the villain in the Dayton Moore era as he was during Allard Baird's time at the helm. However, I don't think that winning is his number one priority either. He does himself no favors when he answers a question in this manner, but it is good to see that before he sells the team the buyer would have to insure a long-term commitment to Kansas City. I don't think I'd be the only one disappointed if the Royals became the toy of another billionaire owner, so long as he plays with that toy in Cow Town.
Follow me on Twitter @Landon_Adams!