Printable View
The Al West only has 4 teams because MLB wanted all 30 teams to be able to play on any given day, without interleague play every day. To do this, they needed an even number in both leagues, so 15/15 wouldn't work, and 14/16 is the best choice. If they were to add teams, they would need to be added to the AL, and either be in the West, or use realignment to make the divisions more even spaced out.
Don't the D-backs play there?Quote:
Originally Posted by zarusprime
Yes, and I don't think it's large enough to support 2 teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by dannymac910
ins't is Glendale,AZ where they play or is that the Arizona Cards?
That's the Cardinals.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthJaker
But Glendale is JUST outside of Phoenix, anyway.
I live 10 minutes outside hartford. It could never support an MLB team.Quote:
Originally Posted by robinhoodnik
I actually would support expansion. I think the game is popular enough where put into the right situation it could survive. Thats just off the top of my head however, no research done on it.
As for locations.....I do think Mexico City is intriguing.
Although I don't know the population, nobody has mentioned Honolulu. Great weather, and I think you'd get a passionate fan base.
The Los Angelas Angels of all of California and Anehiem pretty much counts another Cali team out.
Although relatively small in population, how about Omaha? Center of the country baseball has been breed there for sometime because of the College World Series. It also borders Iowa, isn't far from Minneapolis & Kansas City.
Dunno enough about Charlotte to say yeh or neh.
San Antonio or Dallas, surely Texas can support two teams.
Oklahoma City for some reason is on everyones radar when sports expansion is discussed. May have merit.
I agree that the Northeast doesn't need another team, but southern Maine could probably support one.
Texas is supporting two teams, Astros and Rangers.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
As a resident of Maine, I highly doubt that southern Maine could support a professional sports franchise, as cool as it would be. The only two cities with anything close to a relatively large population are Portland and Augusta, which only combine for about a population of 70,000. Even if the region COULD support a team I doubt enough people would switch allegiances from the finally successful Red Sox to a brand new expansion team to net enough fans that it would matter.
As for cities I like, how about Oklahoma City and Brooklyn (again, call me sentimental)?
if Texas would be SanAntonio
Louisville aut to and
North Carolina
Well the logic would be to ADD 2 cities to the AL & if anything 2 to the West & allow Texas to be shifted to its natural time zone,the Central.Quote:
Originally Posted by YEAH DAAAAWG
Also it does help if the city already has a "baseball past" eg ex-MLB or current MILB AA/AAA team.
Thus the viable cities (IRL) would be IMO:
1° Portland
2° Vancouver (much richer than the BM version)
2B° Monterrey
3° Las Vegas
4° San Antonio (although they would be placed either in the West or Central)
5° Salt Lake
with the top 2 being my personal favorites & would help MLB's expansion OUTSIDE of the USA
Agreed & already has a stadium MLB ready - only problem is Ticket prices & altitude (Colorado problem)Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
Distance would be a problem - if my memory is right the CITY IS LIKE 500kQuote:
Although I don't know the population, nobody has mentioned Honolulu. Great weather, and I think you'd get a passionate fan base.
If one looks at the alignment Texas is NOT in its natural time zone (& I always have felt they have a natural disadvantage always playing outside of it) & thus the West would need 2 teams for an equitable balanceQuote:
The Los Angelas Angels of all of California and Anehiem pretty much counts another Cali team out.
Although relatively small in population, how about Omaha? Center of the country baseball has been breed there for sometime because of the College World Series. It also borders Iowa, isn't far from Minneapolis & Kansas City.
Dunno enough about Charlotte to say yeh or neh.
Agreed on the North East although there is a potential case for a third team in the NY basin like in hockey (New Jersey anyone ?) or a return to Montréal or even OttowaQuote:
San Antonio or Dallas, surely Texas can support two teams.
Oklahoma City for some reason is on everyones radar when sports expansion is discussed. May have merit.
I agree that the Northeast doesn't need another team, but southern Maine could probably support one.
Ottawa hasn't even done well at the AAA level...Montreal tried and failed, and I doubt the powers that be (i.e. Bud and his cronies) will give them another shot.
Why not Vegas? Besides the endemic gambling problem that would result, its an artificial city. No one in Vegas is from Vegas, and they all bring their hometown sports loyalties with them. It's a mish-mash of Yankee fans, Cub fans, Red Sox fans, Dodger fans, etc. Portland is a much, much better choice for the West Coast, and give Seattle something of a reprieve as the geographic outlier of major league sports.
Vancouver couldn't support basketball, I don't see it doing well with an MLB team.
As for New Jersey as a team location...did it ever occur to you that the teams that bill themselves as "New Jersey" play less than ten miles from Manhattan? In the same complex as both "New York" football teams? It's an artificial distinction. It's worse than trying to distinguish between L.A. and Anaheim. And one of the two major league teams that bills itself "New Jersey" is preparing to move to Brooklyn, and the other survives by virtue of being owned by George Steinbrenner.
Maine? Maine? Are you even serious? Why not put a team in...I dunno...Burlington, Vermont?
The idea with expansion is to tap a market that is supportive, economically vibrant, and large enough to allow the team to succeed. We don't want to create more Royals, Pirates, and Expos. These type of markets that are currently uptapped really exist only on the West Coast and in the Sun Belt. The rest of the country simply isn't economically strong enough to add more teams.
Mexico may be a great idea in theory, but there are serious practical security and economic issues that would need to be resolved. Mexico is economically a third world country, and large parts of it are extremely dangerous for travel. Plus there's the issue of paying salaries in dollars when tickets are bought in pesos, which aren't even close to equivalent, unlike the Canadian dollar.
We lost the chance to expand to Cuba when we failed to stop Castro 50 years ago. I think that country has been irrevocably harmed.
I think an MLB team would have a decent shot in Vancouver. The Grizzlies were a HORRIBLY run franchise when they were there. Awful management, awful marketing, awful customer service...just a complete joke. I don't blame them moving on the city, but on the franchise itself. The Canucks have done consistently well, and it's not like they're a perennial Stanley Cup contender...they just do an immensely better job of getting to the customer. Plus, keep in mind, with all the improvements being made to the city's transit and road grids for the upcoming Olympics, there are now a number of accessible locations in and around the city for a ballpark.
Also there is no "competition" for Baseball,as it is a summer sport & NHL is well a winter sport.Vancouver is a "rich" city with a varied & international community.Also it would provide,IMO,a natural rival to Seattle which as of today they lack.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
On a side note Baseball is becoming more influential in Canada & more & more Canadians are being drafted higher & higher each year - any expansion means a draft & a Vancouver team has every reason taking as many Canadians as possible....but the City/State has MANY advantages compared to say Oklahoma City
You think that Pheonix can really support two clubs?Quote:
Originally Posted by zarusprime
(oops, didn't see the second page...)
Two in the AL west and more Texas to the Central.Quote:
Originally Posted by EP Hotties
I agree. I used to think that Vancouver was too close to Seattle until I really looked it up. Portland - Seattle - Vancouver are all about equidistant from each other though, and are most certainly separate markets (as much as the Mariners front office would like to dispute that). Having teams in all three cities would certainly create a fiery, competitive atmosphere as well. Fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
I used to use Sacramento quite a bit. That would be a great choice to consider as well, I'd think.
Hawaii wouldn't work. The big island has a population of only 150k, all the islands combined only 1.2 mil. There is nowhere else to draw fans from. Assuming a major league team need to draw 30k at least occasionally to be successful, this means that one in 40 Hawaiians will attend each game. Simply put, not possible.
Is posters posing as famous people going to become common now?
I've got dibs on Jack Nicholson.
OK, I take it back, that was a pretty impressive Yogi phrase right there.
i di as well and it unfortunatly would not hold up. + its withing 70 miles of NY i thik or is it boston?Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
I think Hartford could support the Marlins.
Heck, Worcester could support the Marlins.
:)
We'll take the Marlins. The ****ing Braves just stole our AAA team, we need a new one. Oh, wait, the Marlins are a major league team, they just draw similar crowds to my D-III college team.
I find it hard to believe that the Marlins can't be successful where they are. Give them the right stadium...and if they build upon their current competitive product, couple it with some good marketing there's nowhere else that has as much potential.
I agree. Miami can and should be a great baseball town, it's just a matter of the team getting everything together (namely, as you said, a stadium).
maybe if the owner spent more then he recieved from the revenue sharing/luxary tax every year they could field an EXCELENT team.
No to SLC, yes vancouver, no las vegas, san antonio is intriguiging, portland - after vancouver -, monterrey - is this in california? Don't they have like 12 teams?Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
How many of you have been to a Marlins home game? It sucks. They need a stadium bad. With a dome. And air conditioning.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckwillard
Isnt Monterrey in Mexico?Quote:
Originally Posted by belial
Monterrey is in Mexico
as a mater of fact why not
combined with the carabean theres enough to fill a club.
or two.They would also have a pic of minor clubs that already exsist there for Farm.
as far as denero problem don't see it.
Why should he?? If he takes a loss on the team because they can't get them in a halfway decent stadium, he has every right to try and recoup it. I don't get it, didn't the Rockies and D-Backs start out in brand new state of the art stadiums??? Why did the Marlins and D-Rays start out in second hand sh!t boxes??? Did someone want them to fail?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
You may not see it, but I guarantee that the team, the player's union, and the player's themselves will.Quote:
as far as denero problem don't see it.
The Players'/Union will NOT see it Ohms as ALL contracts are paid in US dollars* - the team & the fans MAY see it depending HOW on much they would set the initial ticket prices,which will be in Mexican Pesos** & even then only if the ownership tries to recoup what it is paying out directly - however a "weak" Peso will also have advantages in non Baseball terms of spending such as cheaper food/admin costs/hotels etc .Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
When the Expos were moved,Monterrey was one of the 3 last teams in the running (with Portland I think) so it must have some positives....
* see Toronto (one of the reasons that they have upped Payroll in the late 2000's is that the Canadian $ is way stronger than it was in the 90's & signing players is cheaper than in the past).
** one has to also consider that 20% of Income/PNB in Mexico comes from Mexicans who live in the US & resend it back to Mexico
From what I remember, the players union was none too happy about all the talk about moving the Expos to Monterrey or Mexico City.
Personally I don't remember EVER reading such a thing - but it seems contradictory considering that the players' union supports the AAA Mexican Summer league & if you are right then they would oppose any player being sent Down there...but as I say I may be wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
Monterrey "lost" because:
1) It didn't have the Stadium for MLB ball (although neither did the Nationals :rolleyes:) but more importantly
2) the MLB didn't believe they could make "uber" profits in the team's sale.
It is interesting to note that the Expos were bought for ~20 million by the MLB from Loria & resold by them 2 years LATER for ~400 million & that the MLB still owns 50% rights to all Nationals apparel/merchandising till 2012...;)
Monterrey or even a Portland franchise value would be considerably less in their initial inception - Forbes' calculated that a Portland MLB franchise would be worth 250-300 million & Monterrey 100-200 million,Bud ALONE just made a cool 20 million in the move to the capital :eek:
The Marlins had an operating income (Operating Revenue minus Operating Expenses, pre-taxes and interest) of $43.3 million last year, second were the Dodgers at $25.5 million.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
most of which Ned Colletti promptly wasted on Andruw Jones.Quote:
Originally Posted by SirKodiak
right, and if you believe the financial stats they spin you'll probably believe the quotes that the Yankees actually lost money. I believe they may be selling bridges now.Quote:
Originally Posted by SirKodiak
Bring baseball to Vancouver...
"Vancouver Canadians" [just picture it] I can only see success with that combonation... and GREAT SUCCESS I may add you