Jump to content

If you could prevent ANY relocation in sports history from happening, which one would you prevent?


FlyEaglesFly76
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

Brooklyn Dodgers. 

 

Really tore a hole in the heart of the city, this magnificent baseball city.   And if Koufax had come onto the scene when they were still in Brooklyn - would have been amazing. 

 

 

I often times wonder what it would've been like had the Dodgers stayed in Brooklyn and the Giants ended up in Minneapolis. Neither team would've been able to pull off the west coast move without the other, so the only way MLB baseball would end up in the west is if the Senators had moved to Oakland and San Francisco had gotten the expansion Seals or something like that. I also wonder what would've happened to the PCL. For awhile there they were in a class all their own (literally) and they had a ton of good talent. I wonder if we would see a split similar to the NFL after the merger  (PCL-MLB) rather than what we got. I've always felt that baseball should be more regionally split than it is (EX: rather than NYC, Chicago, Bay Area, ect having one AL and one NL team they all were combined by location), and I think we may have gotten that had the PCL been able to take off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's possible that a few PCL teams would have been able to make the jump.  Not the whole league, but the bulk of it in mass expansion.  We would today have the San Francisco Seals, Los Angeles Angels, Hollywood Stars, Seattle Rainiers and Portland Beavers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all of sports? Well, I'm biased as a Browns fan. But, I would reverse the Browns move. Or, as mentioned above, reverse the Baltimore Colts/Indianapolis Colts move and thereby removing one very eager market to draw away another team. The Browns, then, probably don't move as Nashville, Charlotte, Jacksonville, Memphis, San Antonio, St. Louis or Indianapolis probably wouldn't have the desire/pull to bring in the Browns.

 

Now, for other sports:

 

NHL Hartford Whalers. This was just a consequence of the southern push. The Whalers always lived in the shadows of the Rangers and Bruins. A 'small market' considered at the time in a smallish older arena. It's no wonder they moved. Within about 100 miles, the NYC market had 4 teams. Which partly did them in even though each team had their own base. NJ, LI, Manhattan/NYC Proper, and CT. But, it would've slowed the southern push, a bit.

 

NBA Minneapolis Lakers. Think about it. The LA Lakers, the notoriety, etc, never happens in LA. The big hollywood glamour team never happens. Instead, LA is saddled with the Clippers as their 'primary' and 'only' basketball team. Little attention paid to them. Which would help LA's other sports, the successful ones (Rams, Raiders, Dodgers, especially). Whether Minneapolis would've still had the success is doubtful, but they would've been a power in the midwest with Chicago and Detroit.

 

MLB Milwaukee Braves. This for so many reasons. First, it maroons the team in a 'small market' away from the deep south, but out of their original co-habitated home in Boston. The Seattle Pilots don't move there, leaving the new Mariners out of existence. There's a reasonable chance the Washington Senators (Version 2.0) move to Atlanta instead of Texas. If not, Miami or Colorado lose their spot to Atlanta. The Brewers never happen. But, the Seattle Mariners expansion team puts them in DFW, probably (if Senators move to Atlanta).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

NBA Minneapolis Lakers. Think about it. The LA Lakers, the notoriety, etc, never happens in LA. The big hollywood glamour team never happens. Instead, LA is saddled with the Clippers as their 'primary' and 'only' basketball team. Little attention paid to them. Which would help LA's other sports, the successful ones (Rams, Raiders, Dodgers, especially). Whether Minneapolis would've still had the success is doubtful, but they would've been a power in the midwest with Chicago and Detroit.

 

 

I know it's, like, your opinion man, but that's like wishing the original Orioles didn't move to New York (though I'm sure the Baltimore-to-Yankees connection isn't that clean). The Lakers are a pillar of the NBA; the league might not exist today if you didn't have the Lakers/Celtics rivalries of the 60s through the 80s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I think it's possible that a few PCL teams would have been able to make the jump.  Not the whole league, but the bulk of it in mass expansion.  We would today have the San Francisco Seals, Los Angeles Angels, Hollywood Stars, Seattle Rainiers and Portland Beavers?

 

I'd like to say that Sacramento, and eventually maybe BC would've been able to make the jump as well? It would've been interesting to see. Not that I don't love the coast-to-coast rivalry we got, but it's kind of a shame Northern California didn't get a shot at naming one of their baseball clubs. I think San Francisco Seals would have been a great pro name. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DiePerske said:

Baltimore Colts

 

Baltimore keeps their heritage, the junk about the ravens being the browns doesnt exist, cleveland keeps the team, all wins

 

I agree, though I wouldn't doubt the Cleveland Browns, v1.0, find a different city--probably Indianapolis--to move to if everything else transpires as it did in reality. If the football Cardinals still move to Phoenix and the league still expands to Charlotte and Jacksonville, then Art Modell still thinks the Browns can still go it alone in Municipal Stadium (after the Indians move to Jacobs Field), he'd still look elsewhere. Even if the 1995 expansion came to Charlotte and Indianapolis, Modell could still look to Jacksonville or St. Louis. (How would it be to have some alternate-universe's Browns spend a couple decades in St. Louis like the Rams, only to move back to their long-time home? Alternate sports franchise history is pretty fun to think about.)

 

While keeping the Colts in Baltimore would be one of the top relocations I would prevent/reverse, I think keeping the original Browns in Cleveland is probably my top NFL relocation to prevent. Even though they waited 3 years to get a team back, the term "Cleveland Browns" has become a punchline, while at least Baltimore has recovered from losing the Colts, as has Houston from losing the Oilers (too bad they didn't Cleveland-deal the Oilers name/unis/colors) and Los Angeles (even though it took them 21 years to reclaim the Rams).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DG_Now said:

 

I know it's, like, your opinion man, but that's like wishing the original Orioles didn't move to New York (though I'm sure the Baltimore-to-Yankees connection isn't that clean). The Lakers are a pillar of the NBA; the league might not exist today if you didn't have the Lakers/Celtics rivalries of the 60s through the 80s. 

^This. People forget that in the late 70's, even in the aftermath of the merger, the NBA was in danger of folding. The Bird-Magic rivalry effectively saved the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right.  It's not like if the Lakers didn't exist, the rest of history would have unfolded the same way, resulting in the Clippers being LA's only team.  LA likely would have gotten some other team, and who knows what would have happened.  

 

Would the LA Warriors have had the same success?  Why the hell not.  They would even have had the same yellow uniforms!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Montreal Expos to Washington  or Baltimore Stallions to Montreal(requires Browns not to move) (USA/CAN)I would prefer MTL have a baseball team but if only one,

FC Wimbledon to Milton Keyes    (UKGBNI)

These is no reason that this had to happen 100%, it might have needed to, but might not have been the only option, this very controversial move angered so many fans, they instead bought a team to carry on the tradition, which now play in the lower professional leagues of the English Football System.

 

Another note-If the Browns don't move to Baltimore, then the Stallions might have stayed in Baltimore as the last American CFL team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The football Cardinals from St. Louis. If they don't move? The EJD probably still gets built, but the city doesn't feel the need to sign such a team-friendly lease. The Cards stay in St. Louis and the Rams don't leave LA.

 

36 minutes ago, sc49erfan15 said:

It killed the NBA for me. I tried to get into the Bobcats, didn't stick. Hornets 2.0 don't seem to be sticking, either.

Almost like changing the name to try and appeal to lapsed Hornets fans via nostalgia was an idea doomed to failure due to it still being the same sorry-assed team :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Almost like changing the name to try and appeal to lapsed Hornets fans via nostalgia was an idea doomed to failure due to it still being the same sorry-assed team :P

 

Well... it's a lot more complicated than that. I have more than a few friends who have season tickets to the Hornets, when they were marginal Bobcats fans at best. You see exponentially more Hornets (new logo) apparel around the Carolinas than you ever did Bobcats gear.

 

My personal experience is that I lived in New Jersey when the Hornets 2.0 rebrand began and now live 2.5-3 hours from Charlotte, so I don't have as many chances to go to games. I check scores and watch games intermittently, but I don't follow the Hornets as closely as I do, say, the 49ers or Winthrop. If I still lived in the Charlotte area, I'd be more into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

 

I often times wonder what it would've been like had the Dodgers stayed in Brooklyn and the Giants ended up in Minneapolis. Neither team would've been able to pull off the west coast move without the other, so the only way MLB baseball would end up in the west is if the Senators had moved to Oakland and San Francisco had gotten the expansion Seals or something like that. I also wonder what would've happened to the PCL. For awhile there they were in a class all their own (literally) and they had a ton of good talent. I wonder if we would see a split similar to the NFL after the merger  (PCL-MLB) rather than what we got. I've always felt that baseball should be more regionally split than it is (EX: rather than NYC, Chicago, Bay Area, ect having one AL and one NL team they all were combined by location), and I think we may have gotten that had the PCL been able to take off. 

I have been thinking about this all day and may try to see what happens in OOTP baseball

 

The way I thought of is the Giants go to Minnesota, so that means the Senators stay put. The PCL gets good enough to merge into the MLB creating a 3rd league. The current teams in 1958 would be the LA Angels, San Diego Padres, Portland Beavers, Sacramento Salons, Seattle Raineers, Hollywood Stars, San Francisco Seals, and the Vancouver Mounties(previously the Oakland Oaks). The Salt Lake Bees and Denver Bees probably make the jump to protect markets, and they'd be the first league to 10 teams. The World Series can't be split between 3 teams, so the first 4 team playoff happens with the wild card being the best non-pennant winner.

 

Kansas City doesn't lose the A's to Oakland. Houston gets the Colt .45's in the NL. The Braves move from Milwaukee to Atlanta, so the Brewers join the AL, skipping the Seattle Pilot year.

 

Then the next two expansion teams would be Toronto and Montreal. In this timeline, the Expos move to Miami and play at Sunlife Stadium until Marlins Park gets built. The White Sox and Giants threaten to move to Tampa Bay still. The Diamondbacks and Rangers don't exist, but would likely appear through relocation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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