Jump to content

MLB Expansion realization


wdm1219inpenna

Recommended Posts

From 1901 - 1960 there were 16 MLB teams, 8 per league.

In 1961 the AL expanded to 10 when adding the Angels & Senators (now Rangers). In 1962 the NL followed suit and also expanded to 10 with the Mets & Colt .45s (Astros).

7 years later in 1969 both the AL & NL expanded from 10 to 12 teams. The A.L. adding the Seattle Pilots (Milwaukee Brewers now) and Kansas City Royals, and the N.L. adding the Montreal Expos (Washington Nationals now) and San Diego Padres, and each league formed a 6 team Eastern & Western Division.

8 years later in 1977 the A.L. expanded to 14 teams when they added the Seattle Mariners and Toronto Blue Jays.

It wouldn't be until 16 years later in 1993 that the N.L. expanded to 14 teams by adding the Florida (now Miami) Marlins & Colorado Rockies.

5 years later in 1998 2 more expansion teams were added, the Tampa Bay (Devil) Rays to the American League and the Arizona Diamondbacks to the National League. This was when the Milwaukee Brewers were moved to the National League so the AL still had 14 teams and the NL now had 16.

There are no plans for MLB to expand in 2015, at least none that I am aware of anyway. This will mean 17 years will have passed since the last expansion teams were added, making this now the second longest drought ever, the longest of course being 60 years from 1901-60.

I've read many articles about possible expansion someday in Charlotte, North Carolina, which seems to me to be an ideal place. Other possible cities mentioned were Portland, Oregon, San Antonio, Texas and Montreal, Canada again.

It seems MLB will remain at 30 teams for quite some time, given how they went through the trouble in 2013 to realign to get 5 teams in each division, and 15 per league now. Just thought it was interesting that this will now be the longest drought in my lifetime at least (I'm almost 48) without any MLB expansion teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Oakland A's still have to deal with possibly being left high and dry by the city of Oakland if the Raiders get a new stadium, which I still don't think they will. San Jose is still a non - starter for now unless the Giants miraculously decide to give up territorial rights or forced to to do it with a huge pay off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I concur about Tampa. I was never too crazy about Arizona, Miami or Denver getting teams either to be perfectly honest. Florida and Arizona are Spring Training states for all the teams. Florida is more a college football state.

It is pitiful a team as old and as storied as the Oakland Athletics, one of the 8 charter members of the American League, is not able to get a new stadium. San Francisco and San Diego did, but the Dodgers and Angels still have their old ballparks too. At least Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium (or whatever they are calling it this week) seem serviceable. Oakland's Coliseum seems to be a terrible dump of a place, especially for professional baseball in the 21st century.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I concur about Tampa. I was never too crazy about Arizona, Miami or Denver getting teams either to be perfectly honest. Florida and Arizona are Spring Training states for all the teams. Florida is more a college football state.

It is pitiful a team as old and as storied as the Oakland Athletics, one of the 8 charter members of the American League, is not able to get a new stadium. San Francisco and San Diego did, but the Dodgers and Angels still have their old ballparks too. At least Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium (or whatever they are calling it this week) seem serviceable. Oakland's Coliseum seems to be a terrible dump of a place, especially for professional baseball in the 21st century.

The Rockies have never had attendance issues, despite being pretty terrible for all but one year of their 22 year existence.

Same with Arizona, although they pretty much became instantly good and won the series a couple years after they started out, which probably helped their cause in getting people interested.

Florida's attendance and support has always been subpar despite the fact that they won 2 WS titles in their first 10 years of existence, Cinderella style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cleveland and Houston attendance is tied to the product on the field. Tampa-St. Pete, should have never been awarded the second Florida expansion team. That should have gone to Orlando, or if not in FL, to Washington or Buffalo.

Portland does not have a stadium, nor does it have a suitable temporary one. The minor league stadium was converted to a soccer and football one years ago.

The Rays can relocate to Montreal, Las Vegas, Charlotte, or Orlando.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No expansion.

There are no ready markets. And there is at least one current market (Tampa Bay) which has no business with a team.

Tampa Bay, Houston, Cleveland all struggling markets (attendance wise).

Houston's struggling attendance is due to the fact that they are currently fielding a AAA team talent wise but charging major league pricing to get into the park. The end of the previous ownership and new ownership has turned many people off to the Astros for awhile, but Houston has shown over its 50+ year history that it can support a major league club. Its just going through a very bad rough patch. It doesn't help that only 1/3 of Houston has access to the channel that airs Astros games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cleveland and Houston attendance is tied to the product on the field.

Agreed. Tampa Bay is a unique situation, where they have pathetic attendance even when the product on the field is amazing.

We've seen it in action - the Rays can lead the AL East from Opening Day through the final game and still be right at the bottom of the attendance figures, with whole sections of empty seats every night. You give Cleveland or Houston something like that to watch and they'll actually show up. Unlike Tampa Bay, which is why even the Rays players publicly call them out for a lack of support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Cleveland's closer complain within recent years that the fans weren't showing up for a first place team?

And Ned Yost complained about Royals fans on a random weeknight this year, comparing them unfavorably to Braves fans. A KC Star columnist debunked it the next day, citing several weeknights in Atlanta with comparable attendance during their '90s dominance.

Now, the Rays are an exception, but somewhere along the line the failure to sell out all 81 home games became an indictment on MLB fanbases. The reality is that just doesn't happen except in rare cases. Even in the best years there were empty seats in April and May at Wrigley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, the Rays are an exception, but somewhere along the line the failure to sell out all 81 home games became an indictment on MLB fanbases. The reality is that just doesn't happen except in rare cases. Even in the best years there were empty seats in April and May at Wrigley.

Agreed. Most fan bases aren't like the Cubs, Cardinals, Yankees, or Red Sox. While some are stronger than others, it usually takes fielding a competitive team to have the ball park be at 75% capacity. There are just a lot of other/cheaper options for people these days than go watch a sub-par baseball team play in late august. You can't even give away free astros tickets right now because people will complain that they have to drive into houston, pay to park, and buy overpriced food and drinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read many articles about possible expansion someday in Charlotte, North Carolina, which seems to me to be an ideal place. Other possible cities mentioned were Portland, Oregon, San Antonio, Texas and Montreal, Canada again.

The Rays can relocate to Montreal, Las Vegas, Charlotte, or Orlando.

Charlotte isn't going to be a site for expansion or relocation any time soon. The Charlotte Knights just moved into a new downtown ballpark this season that isn't expandable to MLB standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, the Rays are an exception, but somewhere along the line the failure to sell out all 81 home games became an indictment on MLB fanbases. The reality is that just doesn't happen except in rare cases. Even in the best years there were empty seats in April and May at Wrigley.

That's true enough. 81 games is a lot to sell out, and even good teams (and teams with otherwise good support) will struggle at the box office from time to time. But to be at the bottom of the list even when going to the World Series? That's something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Random thoughts...

1. If MLB expands to the Carolinas, it'll be Raleigh, not Charlotte, that will get the nod. The reason? No April-October competition for disposable income from a major league sport for a 200-plus miles in any direction (nearest - Atlanta and D.C.)

2. Tampa should not get a new stadium; the Rays should be relocated as soon as possible. As much as I dislike franchise relocations, you can only assess so much blame on a stadium when your team is competing for the AL flag year after year.

3. The A's should leave Oakland, and do so immediately. San Jose's not happening, and a new stadium in Oakland won't happen without a major shift in mindset. The team should give MLB an ultimatum: give us San Jose, or we move to NYC for 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLB will not expand. They should just relocate the crapshoot locations and move them to viable areas.

The A's will guaranteed move out of Oakland, but not out of California. In a nutshell, SJ or bust.

Montreal is another option, obv because it has a working stadium according to MLB standards. It is pretty old, but it's still good. The 2 largest non-MLB stadiums (besides MTL) are in Williamsport and Omaha, both of which host other baseball events. Long shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there'll be expansion, but not for another generation or two. Populations and economies change, and I have my doubts that by 2030 there won't be two more metro areas able to give healthy support to a team.

PS: Mac, while I imagine the Giants would have to reluctantly fork over the San Jose rights if the A's give MLB that ultimatum, if MLB said no, where would the A's play in New York? I can't imagine the Yankees or Mets would open their stadiums for them even if they wanted to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLB will not expand. They should just relocate the crapshoot locations and move them to viable areas.

The A's will guaranteed move out of Oakland, but not out of California. In a nutshell, SJ or bust.

Montreal is another option, obv because it has a working stadium according to MLB standards. It is pretty old, but it's still good. The 2 largest non-MLB stadiums (besides MTL) are in Williamsport and Omaha, both of which host other baseball events. Long shots.

Haven't heard from the Montreal Baseball Project for some time now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLB will not expand. They should just relocate the crapshoot locations and move them to viable areas.

The A's will guaranteed move out of Oakland, but not out of California. In a nutshell, SJ or bust.

Montreal is another option, obv because it has a working stadium according to MLB standards. It is pretty old, but it's still good. The 2 largest non-MLB stadiums (besides MTL) are in Williamsport and Omaha, both of which host other baseball events. Long shots.

If the A's are guaranteed to stay in California but not in Oakland but don't get San Jose where do they go? Sacramento is not an option either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.