Photo

MLB Considering Expansion, Realignment, Shortening Schedule


  • Please log in to reply
182 replies to this topic

#21 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 43,952 posts

Posted 17 October 2017 - 04:41 PM

The Mariners can fight, but much like Angelos did they only get 1 out of 30 votes when it comes down to it. And while I'm sure MLB would like this to be unanimous, I think they only need a minimum of 75% of franchises (23) to vote in favor. And given that John Stanton has only owned them for a little over a year, he may not have built enough alliances yet to form a voting bloc.

 

As for Portland being too small, it is currently the 4th largest metro area without an MLB team in its market, behind Charlotte, Orlando and San Antonio. However, the difference between the largest of those (Charlotte) and Portland is less than 50,000 people. Not really that big a difference.

 

MLB gave away the farm to Angelos to get him to not fight the Nats moving in.  Of course they are now using the courts to try to get out of the shitty deal they agreed to.  Without knowing any of the details at all about Seattle's market rights in the area, my guess would be that their owners will be able to drive a pretty hard bargain with MLB as well.



#22 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 13,417 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 17 October 2017 - 04:44 PM

MLB gave away the farm to Angelos to get him to not fight the Nats moving in.  Of course they are now using the courts to try to get out of the shitty deal they agreed to.  Without knowing any of the details at all about Seattle's market rights in the area, my guess would be that their owners will be able to drive a pretty hard bargain with MLB as well.

 

Any US city that currently doesn't have a MLB team sits in the territory of at least one existing team. So good luck expanding without pissing someone off, unless you go outside the borders.



#23 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    SportsGuy's Muse

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,523 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 17 October 2017 - 06:06 PM

Seattle is what? Three hours from Portland? In a three hour or so radius from Baltimore there are five other MLB teams. More people, sure, but Seattle wouldn’t have a real complaint IMO

There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#24 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,741 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 17 October 2017 - 06:23 PM

I'd be happy with adding two great cities into the MLB for travel purposes. Plus, we haven't gotten the chance to have the fun of arguing over which players to protect in an expansion draft.

I don't want more playoff teams, though.

And yes to the shorter season.

#25 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 13,417 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 17 October 2017 - 06:27 PM

Seattle is what? Three hours from Portland? In a three hour or so radius from Baltimore there are five other MLB teams. More people, sure, but Seattle wouldn’t have a real complaint IMO

 

And that's in good traffic....so if the Mariners hold off until 10pm to have first pitch, someone in Portland can make it in time.

 

Just for sake of comparison, the other similar-sized markets to Portland aren't much different as far as closest MLB city. It's about the same from San Antonio to Houston. About an hour more between Charlotte and Atlanta, and an hour less between Orlando and St Pete.



#26 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 17 October 2017 - 06:35 PM

Need a shake up. I'm good with this proposal. Hope we would be designated an East team and not North. Avoid the NY, Bos, Phi markets. That's the key to any realignment. Would prefer playoffs not expand but Im ok with it. Makes sense that the divisional winners get a bye and you could then expand the WC round to best of 3.

#27 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 17 October 2017 - 06:37 PM

Here is a question. Does the divisional series need to be expanded to best of 7?? I know some people believe it does. I could take it or leave it

#28 Russ

Russ

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 8,987 posts
  • LocationNaughtyham

Posted 17 October 2017 - 09:33 PM

Portland's AAA team left because the city gave their stadium to the new MLS franchise. That doesn't scream baseball hotbed to me.

The Rays should move to Montreal.

#29 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 13,417 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 17 October 2017 - 09:43 PM

Portland's AAA team left because the city gave their stadium to the new MLS franchise. That doesn't scream baseball hotbed to me.

The Rays should move to Montreal.

 

They were all set to build them a new stadium where the Veterans Memorial Coliseum (Blazers old home) is. Then a bunch of loudmouth preservationists pressured city hall because they thought the coliseum had too much history. Anecdotal evidence suggested most of the population thought it was silly not to tear it down....but city hall caved, the vocal minority prevailed, and the Beavers were sold and moved.



#30 MDtransplant757

MDtransplant757
  • Members
  • 391 posts
  • LocationVirginia Beach

Posted 17 October 2017 - 10:40 PM

The Mariners can fight, but much like Angelos did they only get 1 out of 30 votes when it comes down to it. And while I'm sure MLB would like this to be unanimous, I think they only need a minimum of 75% of franchises (23) to vote in favor. And given that John Stanton has only owned them for a little over a year, he may not have built enough alliances yet to form a voting bloc.

 

As for Portland being too small, it is currently the 4th largest metro area without an MLB team in its market, behind Charlotte, Orlando and San Antonio. However, the difference between the largest of those (Charlotte) and Portland is less than 50,000 people. Not really that big a difference.

 

San Antoino should get one next. Orlando will look like Miami and Tampa, and charlotte won't happen due to Braves, O's and Nats broadcasting rights and territories. 



#31 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 13,417 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 17 October 2017 - 10:42 PM

San Antoino should get one next. Orlando will look like Miami and Tampa, and charlotte won't happen due to Braves, O's and Nats broadcasting rights and territories. 

 

And unlike the Mariners, you think the Astros and Rangers will be fine with a team in San Antonio?



#32 MDtransplant757

MDtransplant757
  • Members
  • 391 posts
  • LocationVirginia Beach

Posted 18 October 2017 - 05:03 PM

And unlike the Mariners, you think the Astros and Rangers will be fine with a team in San Antonio?

 

San Antonio is a bigger TV market. The Rangers are blacked out for the most part in San Antonio, so it would be the Astros who would hypothetically block it. Cowboys and Texans have had the same problem for ages because teams will relocated to San Antonio because of the TV Market size. This is why Angelos owns the Nats' TV rights, because he could have sued MLB from putting a team in DC by the leagues own bylaws. This is also why good ol' Jerry Jones helped Kronkie, Davis and Spanos move their teams to LA and Vegas. That and with MLB, I think broadcast range is for exclusivity is around 100-150 miles, maybe? I can't remember, I'll ask dad tonight.

 

  Dallas is 5 1/2 hours away from San Antonio with 274 miles in between the two, with Houston being about an hour less away with 197 miles between the two. Portland is about 3 hours away, with seattle 173.0 miles away. The TV markets are what honestly will decide who gets a team. The Rangers and Astros can't put up a fight like the O's did years ago due to distance and market size. Dallas and Houston are the 5th and 10th biggest markets in the US, so losing San Antonio isn't that big of a deal. San Antonio's is 37th nationally, and the team would hypothetically have exclusive rights to Austin as well, the 49th largest market. Portland is 25th by itself, but the two markets merged together would have greater pull than Portland. Seattle is the only team in the pacific northwest, and I have no idea how desperate the Mariners would be hypotheically to defend this market. 

 

Honestly, it could happen, and I could be wrong, but I just see San Antonio getting a team because of TV money in its market and having exclusive rights over Austin. 



#33 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 13,417 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 18 October 2017 - 05:27 PM

San Antonio is a bigger TV market. The Rangers are blacked out for the most part in San Antonio, so it would be the Astros who would hypothetically block it. Cowboys and Texans have had the same problem for ages because teams will relocated to San Antonio because of the TV Market size. This is why Angelos owns the Nats' TV rights, because he could have sued MLB from putting a team in DC by the leagues own bylaws. This is also why good ol' Jerry Jones helped Kronkie, Davis and Spanos move their teams to LA and Vegas. That and with MLB, I think broadcast range is for exclusivity is around 100-150 miles, maybe? I can't remember, I'll ask dad tonight.

 

  Dallas is 5 1/2 hours away from San Antonio with 274 miles in between the two, with Houston being about an hour less away with 197 miles between the two. Portland is about 3 hours away, with seattle 173.0 miles away. The TV markets are what honestly will decide who gets a team. The Rangers and Astros can't put up a fight like the O's did years ago due to distance and market size. Dallas and Houston are the 5th and 10th biggest markets in the US, so losing San Antonio isn't that big of a deal. San Antonio's is 37th nationally, and the team would hypothetically have exclusive rights to Austin as well, the 49th largest market. Portland is 25th by itself, but the two markets merged together would have greater pull than Portland. Seattle is the only team in the pacific northwest, and I have no idea how desperate the Mariners would be hypotheically to defend this market. 

It appears you contradicted yourself by saying "S.A. is a bigger TV market," then mentioning that it's smaller than Portland (which it is, though S.A. is higher than 37th).

 

Also Rangers games, via Fox Sports Southwest, ARE carried in San Antonio. Though given the business model in which MLB teams generate local TV revenue, as long as FSSW would still be carried on S.A. cable systems with a team there (and these things are contractually negotiated over a course of years) then the losses aren't as big because the revenues are baked-in to every customers' cable bill. Same goes for Astros games in San Antonio, and Mariners games in Portland.

 

I agree that Baltimore and Washington really aren't a good comparison due to their proximity to each other compared to the above examples. While expansion may lead to some compensation for an owner whose territory is infringed upon by a new team, I'd almost guarantee it won't be on a level near what Angelos got....MLB doesn't want to make that mistake again.

 

Back to my main point, I can honestly think of several reasons why Portland is probably not the best candidate for MLB expansion, but you haven't brought up any of them. It has nothing to do with the TV market or metro area being significantly smaller than the other cities, or being too close to Seattle, or that the Mariners would be able to successfully form a bloc if MLB deemed Portland it's best option.



#34 MDtransplant757

MDtransplant757
  • Members
  • 391 posts
  • LocationVirginia Beach

Posted 18 October 2017 - 11:55 PM

It appears you contradicted yourself by saying "S.A. is a bigger TV market," then mentioning that it's smaller than Portland (which it is, though S.A. is higher than 37th).

 

Also Rangers games, via Fox Sports Southwest, ARE carried in San Antonio. Though given the business model in which MLB teams generate local TV revenue, as long as FSSW would still be carried on S.A. cable systems with a team there (and these things are contractually negotiated over a course of years) then the losses aren't as big because the revenues are baked-in to every customers' cable bill. Same goes for Astros games in San Antonio, and Mariners games in Portland.

 

I agree that Baltimore and Washington really aren't a good comparison due to their proximity to each other compared to the above examples. While expansion may lead to some compensation for an owner whose territory is infringed upon by a new team, I'd almost guarantee it won't be on a level near what Angelos got....MLB doesn't want to make that mistake again.

 

Back to my main point, I can honestly think of several reasons why Portland is probably not the best candidate for MLB expansion, but you haven't brought up any of them. It has nothing to do with the TV market or metro area being significantly smaller than the other cities, or being too close to Seattle, or that the Mariners would be able to successfully form a bloc if MLB deemed Portland it's best option.

 

I should have sourced that, but I'm arguing the side that I know for the most part due to personal experience. Why do you think portland is not the best canidate for an MLB team? Weather? No public funding for a stadium (not like there should be any in general for anywhere)? I'm a bit lost. 



#35 BSLMikeLowe

BSLMikeLowe

    CFB Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 13,417 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon

Posted 19 October 2017 - 12:17 AM

I should have sourced that, but I'm arguing the side that I know for the most part due to personal experience. Why do you think portland is not the best canidate for an MLB team? Weather? No public funding for a stadium (not like there should be any in general for anywhere)? I'm a bit lost. 

 

Definitely the stadium funding. There's a $150 million commitment from the state that was made about 15 years ago that is still good today, but I don't get the sense that there is any appetite from the public to chip in the hundreds of millions more that would be needed.

 

Weather isn't really an issue if you build a retractable roof, but then that drives up the costs, which goes right back to the first point.

 

I also don't get the feeling that Portland is a baseball market. The area is growing rapidly, so maybe there is a nascent market that could be tapped, but I haven't sensed it. If anything I think an NHL team could do well here. It helps greatly that an arena already exists, but there is also plenty of loyal support for their WCHL team and hockey in general here. Whereas with the PCL Beavers there really wasn't much uproar when they left. The last couple games they ever played here drew well (they played a lot of their final season as lame ducks) but for the most part they were lucky to get 3,000-4,000 people. I usually only went on the nights they let you bring your dog, about twice a season.

 

Of course I would absolutely love it if Portland got a team simply because I could see the O's in person more often. I've been here over 10 years and have only gone up to Seattle to see them twice. The problem is the O's almost always seem to go through there on weekdays, which makes it tougher. And when I have made it up it was only for one game. If they came to Portland I'd be there for every game no matter what day it was. So I hope there's a fire somewhere near all this smoke about Portland being a leading contender for expansion. But I'll remain skeptical right up until the first pitch.


  • MDtransplant757 likes this

#36 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,151 posts

Posted 19 October 2017 - 12:50 PM

Nashville or Memphis would be ideal for a team. (I think rhey're similar in population to Baltimore). San Antonio was in the running when talks started about the Saints needing a new city after Katrina.
@BSLMikeRandall

#37 MDtransplant757

MDtransplant757
  • Members
  • 391 posts
  • LocationVirginia Beach

Posted 19 October 2017 - 02:57 PM

Definitely the stadium funding. There's a $150 million commitment from the state that was made about 15 years ago that is still good today, but I don't get the sense that there is any appetite from the public to chip in the hundreds of millions more that would be needed.

 

Weather isn't really an issue if you build a retractable roof, but then that drives up the costs, which goes right back to the first point.

 

I also don't get the feeling that Portland is a baseball market. The area is growing rapidly, so maybe there is a nascent market that could be tapped, but I haven't sensed it. If anything I think an NHL team could do well here. It helps greatly that an arena already exists, but there is also plenty of loyal support for their WCHL team and hockey in general here. Whereas with the PCL Beavers there really wasn't much uproar when they left. The last couple games they ever played here drew well (they played a lot of their final season as lame ducks) but for the most part they were lucky to get 3,000-4,000 people. I usually only went on the nights they let you bring your dog, about twice a season.

 

Of course I would absolutely love it if Portland got a team simply because I could see the O's in person more often. I've been here over 10 years and have only gone up to Seattle to see them twice. The problem is the O's almost always seem to go through there on weekdays, which makes it tougher. And when I have made it up it was only for one game. If they came to Portland I'd be there for every game no matter what day it was. So I hope there's a fire somewhere near all this smoke about Portland being a leading contender for expansion. But I'll remain skeptical right up until the first pitch.

 

Thank you for elaborating. I think an NHL team would be a smashing idea, but one more team is going to be in the East, and you guys lost out to Vegas. Maybe when the coyotes pack up and move, they'll go to Portland. 



#38 MDtransplant757

MDtransplant757
  • Members
  • 391 posts
  • LocationVirginia Beach

Posted 19 October 2017 - 02:59 PM

Nashville or Memphis would be ideal for a team. (I think rhey're similar in population to Baltimore). San Antonio was in the running when talks started about the Saints needing a new city after Katrina.

 

Nashville would be my other guess for a team. I don't think memphis would get a team due to it being so close to Saint Louis, and Nashville is the bigger TV market. San Antonio made sense due to the Saints owner having a ton of businesses out there along with NO. 



#39 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,680 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 19 October 2017 - 07:25 PM

Nashville or Memphis would be ideal for a team. (I think rhey're similar in population to Baltimore). San Antonio was in the running when talks started about the Saints needing a new city after Katrina.

Nashville, maybe. But Memphis, despite the civic population, is small. There's no way they could support a team. I mean, there's a reason why the Titans only stayed there two years in between Houston and Nashville.

Nashville has a lot of the same things going for it as Charlotte, and it doesn't have the same TV market issues.
@DJ_McCann

#40 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 120,598 posts

Posted 20 October 2017 - 07:05 AM

SI: If MLB Considers Expansion, What Would a 32-Team League Look Like?






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners