SportsLogos.Net News

2019 MLB Changes

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Marlins93 said:

How are you accounting for the fact that the Marlins' stadium is only about seven years old?

I don't see how that changes anything. If anything, their attendance should've increased with a brand new stadium in downtown Miami, which it did, in 2012, the first year in the new stadium. The age of the stadium shouldn't have anything to do with the team's stats regarding attendance. Dodger Stadium is like 60 years old and still brings people in, and the Braves' current success at SunTrust Park shows that new stadiums are also successful, as long as the team is actually a part of the community, unlike the Marlins. Admittedly, the team has been a poorly run mess for its entire existence, but that shouldn't change that the constant firesales and shaky ownership has permanently damaged the reputation the Marlins had with the community. The point is, the Marlins & Rays consistently rank as last in their respective leagues in terms of attendance. That's not because they've had bad teams (the Rays have been to the World Series and the Marlins have won two, for God's sake), but because of poor decision making regarding timing, stadium placement, and a simple lack of interest among the general populaces of Florida.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, marlinfan said:

 

The country has changed dramatically since MLB had 24 teams. By not expanding they would be leaving hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue on the table every year by not entering new markets. Miami, Denver, Tampa-St. Pete, and Phoenix are larger markets than a third of the league. Florida is the third most populous state in the country. They would also risk losing interest in those markets for the sport with other leagues setting up shop.

 

The comment on the Dbacks losing money was accurate 15 years ago, but that’s because ownership poured millions into establishing a winner fast. Their threat to leave Arizona because Chase Field is falling apart is just a ploy to get taxpayer funding to renovate it. The same game that’s been played in nearly every other city, including the oldest markets. There aren’t any other cities throwing money at the Rays and Dbacks (yet) so they likelihood either move is slim to none for the foreseeable future. Besides, no person in their right mind would want to leave Arizona for a smaller market in a sport where your local TV contract plays a significant part in deciding success.

 

What MLB should have done with Florida expansion is award teams only after new ballparks were approved. The owners in 1991 chose Miami over other markets because an MLB-ready stadium was already in place and they needed the revenue to payback the MLBPA quickly. But in the long run the stadium limbo directly led to the 1997 and 2005 fire sales which really poisoned the well with fans. Once Huizenga was done with MLB after the 94 strike’s inability to put a salary cap in place, his goal was to win a World Series and lock-up a new ballpark he could then sell the team for at a nice profit. When he couldn’t, he stripped the team and sold it.

 

MLB should have played the long game with Miami and held off expansion until a new ballpark was in place. Same with Tampa Bay. The Trop was obsolete the day it opened and a relic by 1995 when the Rays were awarded. It should be no surprise their expansion brethen have been more successful with new downtown parks from the start. The new ballpark or bust strategy is certain to play out during the next round of expansion.


The thing is... the whole reason such thing as a commissioner of baseball even exists is so that the integrity of the game is protected against purely financial interests.  And I don't think it's a coincidence that baseball's expansion patterns tend to correlate almost to a T to where the commissioner started becoming more of a figurehead who acted in the interests of the owners.  This is a problem with major pro sports in general, which have all become more of a television product than an athletic competition.  Again, what good does it do ANYONE when a team like the 2018-2019 Orioles exists? 

Now every league at least a handful of teams that were either forced into a big market where there was no demand, or in a small market that lacks the infrastructure to make them consistent contenders and sinks like a rock when the team falls on hard times.  It also kills the fan experience by making the sport harder to follow because of all the teams.  As a kid I could have told you all four division leaders, plus how many games back their closest competition was.  Now I don't bother to watch anyone but the Brewers other than when I'm at work.  And I don't know who's leading anything but the NL Central.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, QueenCitySwarm said:

I don't see how that changes anything. If anything, their attendance should've increased with a brand new stadium in downtown Miami, which it did, in 2012, the first year in the new stadium. The age of the stadium shouldn't have anything to do with the team's stats regarding attendance. Dodger Stadium is like 60 years old and still brings people in, and the Braves' current success at SunTrust Park shows that new stadiums are also successful, as long as the team is actually a part of the community, unlike the Marlins. Admittedly, the team has been a poorly run mess for its entire existence, but that shouldn't change that the constant firesales and shaky ownership has permanently damaged the reputation the Marlins had with the community. The point is, the Marlins & Rays consistently rank as last in their respective leagues in terms of attendance. That's not because they've had bad teams (the Rays have been to the World Series and the Marlins have won two, for God's sake), but because of poor decision making regarding timing, stadium placement, and a simple lack of interest among the general populaces of Florida.

My point is more along the lines that the stadium is still technically brand spanking new and logistically speaking it does not seem realistic for MLB to even consider relocation. The city and county would also fight it tooth and nail even if the financing arrangement was controversial. MLB isn't going to abandon a brand new, state of the art ballpark because of low attendance figures that can most readily attributed to distasteful ownership practices.

 

MLB teams in Florida face a lot of obstacles that other regions don't, but the stadium itself sure seems like the anchor that would prevent relocation. This is what could keep the Marlins in Florida and force the Rays to relocate, even if the latter has a more competent front office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Marlins93 said:

My point is more along the lines that the stadium is still technically brand spanking new and logistically speaking it does not seem realistic for MLB to even consider relocation. The city and county would also fight it tooth and nail even if the financing arrangement was controversial. MLB isn't going to abandon a brand new, state of the art ballpark because of low attendance figures that can most readily attributed to distasteful ownership practices.

 

MLB teams in Florida face a lot of obstacles that other regions don't, but the stadium itself sure seems like the anchor that would prevent relocation. This is what could keep the Marlins in Florida and force the Rays to relocate, even if the latter has a more competent front office.

They'll consider relocation if not even 10,000 people can be bothered to show up for games. 7 years old isn't what I'd call "state of the art", and we're seeing stadiums get replaced quicker and quicker every year. The city can fight it all they want, if there's no prevention clause in the contract between the city and team, there's nothing legally wrong with the Marlins packing up tomorrow. Even if there's better ownership, the point is that the people of Miami don't care all that much. Other teams that are struggling just as much, like the Royals and Orioles, are still averaging much better numbers than the Marlins or Rays. I don't want to see the Marlins relocate, but it seems to be in the best interest of the MLB that they do. I hope I'm wrong, the new owners are much better, and people actually show up, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, tohasbo said:

 

 

Yeah, that has me nervous too.  It's not really about the team wanting to break the lease as much as it has a LOT more to do with doing the major upgrades it does need.  However Maricopa County is not willing to play ball.  It still is a nice stadium but from what I have gathered, it is lacking in areas.  Last I heard the team wanted north of $60M in upgrades, but again, Maricopa County doesn't want to foot the entire bill for it  (which I understand why).

But this article does not leave a lot of hope for me.  The last time I saw a game out there was in 2000 when I was 14 and that is when I for certain became a fan of the team despite living in the DC area.  I seriously hope the team does not move out of Phoenix because it is, from what I remember, in a good location in the city.

I think it has a LOT more to do with the fact that the Diamondbacks want a new stadium that is smaller, in the suburbs, and where they own the surrounding land to control and turn in to a retail destination. Similar to a Westgate in Glendale or like the Braves new stadium and their "The Battery Atlanta" Entertainment District. And, they would probably like it to be in either Scottsdale or on Reservation land that is near their Spring Training area.

 

The problems with the stadium aren't anywhere near as bad as they seem, that’s the narrative the team has put out there to gain public support for the need for a new stadium. Ultimately there were disagreements between the team and the county over the terms of their lease and what certain provisions meant and who had what responsibility. Diamondbacks wanted more control of the building, like when they could occupy the building, what repairs to make, and be in charge of booking outside events. And money from outside event bookings would go to the repair fund, which the county hadn't been doing a good job of booking events from my understanding. Diamondbacks were totally in the right for wanting that control, but I believe they went about it in a very poor way.

 

Since gaining control of the stadium over a year ago they've hardly spent near the amount that they claimed was necessary to spend before this season began. It appears that their claims of the 22 year old Chase Field falling apart before our eyes weren't as drastic as it seems.

 

But you're absolutely right, it's in a great location. Especially with the revival and grow in downtown Phoenix.

 

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/02/14/arizona-diamondbacks-have-made-almost-no-repairs-chase-field/2817491002/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marlins aren’t gonna relocate because it’s not in the best interest of the league. It’s such a hassle, and what better market is there besides Miami? New Orleans and Portland are the only two I can see that could support the team. But Nola ran the Babycakes out of town, so maybe they aren’t even a good destination. Unless you want to add another team to a city that already has one, but even that wouldn’t work, a) all the big markets have two teams, LA, NYC, Chicago. b)adding another team to those markets is ridiculous. 

 

So if the Marlins did relocate it would be worse than anything that happens in Miami. Making it the worst intrest for the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

 

To be perfectly honest with you? No, they haven’t. The amount of taxpayer money they’ve already hemorrhaged in just two decades is one of the biggest reasons they’re having such an issue with the current ballpark, and one of the main sticking points when it comes to future public funding. The team itself has had some good years, no doubt. But it’s only masked the true depth of some of their problems. Their overall low attendance numbers and cost of maintaining facilities in a climate that’s about ten miles from the surface of the sun make them pretty much unsustainable in the long run. 

 

 

I’ll even go this far. Don’t be terribly surprised if the next team to move out of their market entirely isn’t the Rays, but the D Backs. Maricopa County is one of the most shortsighted local governments in the country, and taxpayers are sick of funding these kind of frivolous endeavors. 

 

What?

I'm sorry, how have they not worked out? Yeah, they wanted more money from the county but ultimately it was about control of the stadium. And what professional sports team hasn't asked or demanded more money from the public? I fail to see how that situation is different from any other city in America.

 

I doubt the costs of maintaining Chase Field are astronomically more than many other professional sports stadiums. All buildings need upkeep and maintenance. And the hot and dry climate of Phoenix creates wear and tear on buildings, just like any other climate and weather conditions can cause wear and tear on a building located on planet Earth. The point is, the climate in Phoenix isn't that unsuitable for maintaining structures. Otherwise, 5 million people wouldn't live here.

 

Also, since 2000 the Diamondbacks have ranked on average 17.4 for league attendance. And many years ranking above 'traditional' baseball markets. Seems like their attendance isn't an issue, they're middle of the pack. \

 

Where would they go? Montreal? Good stadium situation there. Nashville? Charlotte? Portland? I would seriously doubt that. All those markets are smaller than Phoenix and I would strongly doubt their local tv contract would compare. The Diamondbacks aren't moving anywhere, and if they are, it will very likely be in the Scottsdale area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don’t disagree with you on a lot of what you’re saying about all of this. I lived in Tempe/Phoenix for several years and had season tickets to the Diamondbacks during an absolutely :censored: season. Chase Field’s issues were overblown by the club, but that’s because they know that they can hold Maricopa County hostage like basically every other team down there has. I’m simply saying that the club doesn’t generate nearly as much revenue as they should, and it’s going to become an issue sooner rather than later. The cost of keeping Chase Field operational is generally quite a bit higher than other parks due to, yes, the climate. It’s a HUGE problem trying to keep a building like that cool every day in mid July/August. Given the history of how the county has been bent over in the past? Don’t be shocked if they just let the club walk. In a perfect world, it’d be great if they could build a privately funded yard on one of the reservations. Problem is, that’s not usually how owners in these kind of leagues operate, and it’s not nearly that easy. If the Diamondbacks keep trying to force the issue and bluffing that they’re going to leave without public dollars, Maricopa County is going to eventually call that bluff. That’s how San Diego and Seattle lost their teams, and both of those situations were probably more tenable than anything in Phoenix is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BellaSpurs said:

Marlins aren’t gonna relocate because it’s not in the best interest of the league. It’s such a hassle, and what better market is there besides Miami? New Orleans and Portland are the only two I can see that could support the team. But Nola ran the Babycakes out of town, so maybe they aren’t even a good destination. Unless you want to add another team to a city that already has one, but even that wouldn’t work, a) all the big markets have two teams, LA, NYC, Chicago. b)adding another team to those markets is ridiculous. 

 

So if the Marlins did relocate it would be worse than anything that happens in Miami. Making it the worst intrest for the league.

What about Charlotte? It's been proven with how mediocre the Knights are that Charlotteans will show up for a bad team (they just have to build a stadium, I guess. Pretty big hurdle).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, QueenCitySwarm said:

What about Charlotte? It's been proven with how mediocre the Knights are that Charlotteans will show up for a bad team (they just have to build a stadium, I guess. Pretty big hurdle).

I forgot ab Carolina ig, wasn’t it already a failure of a relocation? But so has Nola and Portland. Still Miami is better than anything of those fiascos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, BellaSpurs said:

I forgot ab Carolina ig, wasn’t it already a failure of a relocation? But so has Nola and Portland. Still Miami is better than anything of those fiascos


Perhaps you're thinking of the Twins proposed move to North Carolina.  But that was a nonsensical location in the middle of nowhere.

Fact is, there are no good relocation options.  Just a bunch that maybe might work out.  The odds that it would be a lateral move, regardless of where, are probably greater than any other relocation situation in MLB history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cincinnati Reds Uniforms Throw it Back to 1912 Sunday

May 19, 2019 - 13:20 PM

The Cincinnati Reds season-long trip through time continues Sunday afternoon when they’ll wear uniforms based on the 1912 Reds during their game against the Los Angeles Dodgers. With a cream cap, jersey, and pants – the 1912 Reds uniform has […]

Read More...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, BellaSpurs said:

I forgot ab Carolina ig, wasn’t it already a failure of a relocation? But so has Nola and Portland. Still Miami is better than anything of those fiascos

Yeah the Twins tried to move to Greensboro/Winston-Salem in the 90s, but it was in an awful location, even without considering how stupid moving to the Triad area is. Charlotte hasn't gotten a fair shake with the MLB yet, but they shot themselves in the foot by building BB&T Ballpark a few years ago (non-expandable, seats only ~10,000 people). That's not to say the city wouldn't build an MLB stadium within a few years, but it's just much less likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, QueenCitySwarm said:

They'll consider relocation if not even 10,000 people can be bothered to show up for games. 7 years old isn't what I'd call "state of the art", and we're seeing stadiums get replaced quicker and quicker every year. The city can fight it all they want, if there's no prevention clause in the contract between the city and team, there's nothing legally wrong with the Marlins packing up tomorrow. Even if there's better ownership, the point is that the people of Miami don't care all that much. Other teams that are struggling just as much, like the Royals and Orioles, are still averaging much better numbers than the Marlins or Rays. I don't want to see the Marlins relocate, but it seems to be in the best interest of the MLB that they do. I hope I'm wrong, the new owners are much better, and people actually show up, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

But there's nothing obsolete about it, so I'd call it state of the art. There are certainly some design flaws but that has nothing to do with its age. If it were opening next season I doubt we would have seen much more modernization, if any. Yes, there were renovations during the offseason, but much of that was due to Jeter's desire to remove memories of Loria. They were more aesthetic changes than functional..

 

Yes, ballparks are being replaced slightly more quickly recently but I would call that more the exception than the norm. The Braves had the shortest window and Turner Field, a facility not purely designed for baseball in the first place, still endured for 20 years.

 

Given the park's suitability for baseball in rainy humid weather and the $600 million investment from county and city governments, I don't think you can expect a serious conversation about relocation for at least another 20 years. MLB us going to give Jeter all the time in the world to get the team in shape unless he first gives up on his own.

 

I am just having trouble envisioning a remotely plausible or realistic scenario where the Marlins could move before then. The stadium is the anchor; the lack of funding for a retractable roof park was the only impetus behind the relocation considerations had circa 2005-2006. If MLB is really getting impatient with Jeter, I presume they'd first try to oust him somehow from the control position especially since his personal financial stake in the franchise is quite low. The stadium is poorly located (for me at least), but the Marlins attendance since 2013 can mostly be attributed to pervasive management issues far more than anything else. They won't abandon a still new park because of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

But there's nothing obsolete about it, so I'd call it state of the art. There are certainly some design flaws but that has nothing to do with its age. If it were opening next season I doubt we would have seen much more modernization, if any. Yes, there were renovations during the offseason, but much of that was due to Jeter's desire to remove memories of Loria. They were more aesthetic changes than functional..

 

Yes, ballparks are being replaced slightly more quickly recently but I would call that more the exception than the norm. The Braves had the shortest window and Turner Field, a facility not purely designed for baseball in the first place, still endured for 20 years.

 

Given the park's suitability for baseball in rainy humid weather and the $600 million investment from county and city governments, I don't think you can expect a serious conversation about relocation for at least another 20 years. MLB us going to give Jeter all the time in the world to get the team in shape unless he first gives up on his own.

 

I am just having trouble envisioning a remotely plausible or realistic scenario where the Marlins could move before then. The stadium is the anchor; the lack of funding for a retractable roof park was the only impetus behind the relocation considerations had circa 2005-2006. If MLB is really getting impatient with Jeter, I presume they'd first try to oust him somehow from the control position especially since his personal financial stake in the franchise is quite low. The stadium is poorly located (for me at least), but the Marlins attendance since 2013 can mostly be attributed to pervasive management issues far more than anything else. They won't abandon a still new park because of that.

I’m just shocked that someone would call a 7 year old stadium old. A stadium that is the second youngest stadium in the MLB, with no plans for other teams to get new stadiums in the near future other than the rangers. And the stadium that is newer than it I’d argue isn’t even a better park. That stadium alone is what will keep the Marlins there, if they leave town no matter where they go they will get no support because they will look like a grimy organization that’ll leave at the first chance they can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, dont care said:

I’m just shocked that someone would call a 7 year old stadium old. A stadium that is the second youngest stadium in the MLB, with no plans for other teams to get new stadiums in the near future other than the rangers. And the stadium that is newer than it I’d argue isn’t even a better park. That stadium alone is what will keep the Marlins there, if they leave town no matter where they go they will get no support because they will look like a grimy organization that’ll leave at the first chance they can.

Yes, there's nothing really dated about Marlins Park at all. Some design flaws as I mentioned, but overall it's about as comfortable as pro baseball can get in South Florida. SunTrust exceeds it in terms of location by far, though. The former Orange Bowl was really not a smart choice for a site and this isn't even speaking in hindsight. Marlins Park is basically a spaceship that landed in a lower income neighborhood with not much room to be built up in the way that SunTrust has been. This is where the Marlins were particularly shortsighted in their planning. Having said that, the location issue should certainly not be enough for them to abandon a $700 million facility that is more than suitable for baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those 1950s stirrups are jarring, but other than that the Reds look great. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.