coco1997

Campaign to bring MLB to Raleigh, North Carolina

Recommended Posts

I don't think we should have expansion until at least the 2030's. 

Share this post


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

MLB needs to resolve stadium issues in Tampa, Oakland, Los Angeles (Angels) and I think Arizona before thinking of expansion. 

 

Tampa and Oakland have stadium situations that genuinely need to be worked out. Tropicana is gross and is in a miserably bad location. They may be better off being the team that moves to the Carolinas as that seems to make WAY more sense than granting another expansion team to that area. Oakland's stadium is in absolute disrepair and is in a city that's time has kind of passed it by. Get the current dopes out of ownership and work something out with the Giants to get that San Jose move rolling. It's going to take some cash (which the A's have even if they try to lie and say they don't), and maybe a few consessions on their part, but I still think it's doable. Or they could move them to, I dunno spitballing here, say, Sacramento? (No bias there whatsoever I pinky swear). Anaheim has a few somewhat advantageous options and a decent amount of time left I think before it really becomes a major problem. Their stadium isn't much to write home about, but it's perfectly serviceable for now and I've always had an enjoyable time there.

 

The Diamondbacks, on the other hand, can go pound sand. :censored: them. That park is perfectly fine, and what's become an issue they should be responsible for footing the bill for. I'd rather see them contract the Diamondbacks than extort Maricopa County for another park that they absolutely do NOT need. The truth is, the D Backs are in the lower half of teams when it comes to needing a new stadium and even the idea of them talking about this is absurd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Wings said:

I don't think we should have expansion until at least the 2030's. 

That's not even a real year. We'll all definitely be dead by then.

 

5 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

Or they could move them to, I dunno spitballing here, say, Sacramento? (No bias there whatsoever I pinky swear)..

Well if we're not being biased at all in any way, shape, or form, then Memphis, Tennessee is a perfect option. The promo video I saw when I went to a minor league game there like four years ago had some Cardinal guy saying they had a major league caliber stadium and there's no way they were pandering to the crowd. Sacramento A's and Memphis Rays for 2030 when we've all been killed by a nuclear holocaust confirmed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had no idea Arizona was already looking for a new park.  That honestly makes me hate them.

As far as Raleigh... I really don't see any reason why things would work out any better there than they have in Tampa, Miami, or any other sunbelt market that has struggled to support pro sports.  Even the Braves only get by on being the biggest TV market in the southeast.  

If anything, baseball should be talking contraction, not expansion.  But that horse left the barn a long time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contraction was, and is, never going to happen. Frankly MLB was stupid for even bringing it up as a suggestion in the first place - there was no way the PA was ever gonna agree to cutting 50 full-time jobs and 30 part-time jobs (in fact I'm surprised they're apparently agreeing to do the latter now) - much less that one of the teams on the chopping block was an Original Sixteen franchise.

Share this post


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

Their stadium isn't much to write home about, but it's perfectly serviceable for now and I've always had an enjoyable time there.

And what I don't understand is why it won't continue to be. Short of typical ownership simply wanting more taxpayer money for new stadiums, Angel Stadium has been around for almost a half century. No reason it can't continue to be with regular maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I see one more person post the Raleigh Fingers joke on twitter.....

 

 

 

 

 

Raleigh would have the same problem in MLB as it does in the NHL. It's just enough populated to trick people into thinking it's big enough for big league sports, but it's heavily populated with transplants who wouldn't give a flying flip about the Raleigh baseball team unless they're playing, like, the Tigers. Cities of their size work in baseball, but only if it's like Cincinnati where zero transplants live and the city has 100 year relationship with the team. 81 dates in a stadium is a lot to fill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, the admiral said:

No, there's nothing exciting about it, only the fact that there's no major-league team between Atlanta and DC, but an awful lot of people. North Carolina is stealthily a really populous state: you have all these mid-sized towns like Raleigh, Charlotte, Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Asheville, and Greenville, and they all just about add up to Illinois, which is Chicagoland and precious little else.

 

The difference is that baseball relies more on tickets than, say, the NFL.  You can have an NFL team in a loosely-dispersed, but MLB really needs an urban core.  Unless we think one of those cities can support a big-league club on its own, an the others merely add some support, it'll be a failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, GDAWG said:

MLB needs to resolve stadium issues in Tampa, Oakland, Los Angeles (Angels) and I think Arizona before thinking of expansion. 

I would be in favor the Dbacks moving to Portland with a new stadium in place.  The Dbacks don't have a very good track record with people down here in Arizona since that buffon took over ownership from Jerry Colangelo.  Once they started griping about Chase Field that really turned the community off since Chase Field is still a very serviceable park.  The support is terrible for the Dbacks even when they are in the playoffs.  I went to the Brewers x Dbacks series back in 2011 and the entire upper deck was empty for games 3 and 4.  Alot of Brewer fans flew down and scooped up cheap tickets compared to what they would have payed in Milwaukee.  

Share this post


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

Raleigh would have the same problem in MLB as it does in the NHL. It's just enough populated to trick people into thinking it's big enough for big league sports, but it's heavily populated with transplants who wouldn't give a flying flip about the Raleigh baseball team unless they're playing, like, the Tigers. Cities of their size work in baseball, but only if it's like Cincinnati where zero transplants live and the city has 100 year relationship with the team. 81 dates in a stadium is a lot to fill. 

It's all true.

 

Regarding the profile of Cincinnati, that's why I've thought it would have been a good NHL town, if only they were working with something newer than a carbon copy of the Met Center. Cincinnati may have avoided some of the the hiccups Columbus had with the Ohio State arena down the street and a general dearth of winter sports.

 

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

The difference is that baseball relies more on tickets than, say, the NFL.  You can have an NFL team in a loosely-dispersed, but MLB really needs an urban core.  Unless we think one of those cities can support a big-league club on its own, an the others merely add some support, it'll be a failure.

This is also very true, and why the pitch for the Twins to play at an exurban complex equidistant to Greensboro and Winston-Salem would have been a boondoggle on top of another boondoggle.

Share this post


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

Raleigh would have the same problem in MLB as it does in the NHL. It's just enough populated to trick people into thinking it's big enough for big league sports, but it's heavily populated with transplants who wouldn't give a flying flip about the Raleigh baseball team unless they're playing, like, the Tigers. Cities of their size work in baseball, but only if it's like Cincinnati where zero transplants live and the city has 100 year relationship with the team. 81 dates in a stadium is a lot to fill. 

 

It would be an interesting strategy to market specifically to the transplants who seemingly dominate the sports scene in that town.  But I admit that I cannot think of a nickname that accomplishes this positioning.  I can think of words such as "Upstarts" or even "Arrivistes"; but to imagine those as Major League nicknames is difficult. Is there is a nickname that implies "new arrival", but not so explicitly as to alienate longtime residents?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, GDAWG said:

MLB needs to resolve stadium issues in Tampa, Oakland, Los Angeles (Angels) and I think Arizona before thinking of expansion. 

Just Tampa Bay and Oakland, really. Angels aren't leaving the LA market and no other team is moving in, so it has no effect on any other teams relocating or future expansion. Arizona, as far as I'm concerned, is low on the list. I'm not in the area, so from an outsider's opinion, it seems more posturing from the team's part to get a new ballpark or at least massive upgrades with the city footing the bill. Correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Share this post


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

 

It would be an interesting strategy to market specifically to the transplants who seemingly dominate the sports scene in that town.  But I admit that I cannot think of a nickname that accomplishes this positioning.  I can think of words such as "Upstarts" or even "Arrivistes"; but to imagine those as Major League nicknames is difficult. Is there is a nickname that implies "new arrival", but not so explicitly as to alienate longtime residents?

I'd probably call the team the Raleigh Explorers for that reason and the other reason of Raleigh being named after Sir Walter Raleigh who was, well, an explorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Arrivistes, geez, why not call them the Raleigh Nouveau-Riche McMansion Scum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, the admiral said:

The Arrivistes, geez, why not call them the Raleigh Nouveau-Riche McMansion Scum

 

Well, I admitted that that's not a good name!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 11:58 AM, the admiral said:

No, there's nothing exciting about it, only the fact that there's no major-league team between Atlanta and DC, but an awful lot of people. North Carolina is stealthily a really populous state: you have all these mid-sized towns like Raleigh, Charlotte, Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Asheville, and Greenville, and they all just about add up to Illinois, which is Chicagoland and precious little else.

 

3 hours ago, the admiral said:

This is also very true, and why the pitch for the Twins to play at an exurban complex equidistant to Greensboro and Winston-Salem would have been a boondoggle on top of another boondoggle.

 

5 hours ago, McCarthy said:

Raleigh would have the same problem in MLB as it does in the NHL. It's just enough populated to trick people into thinking it's big enough for big league sports, but it's heavily populated with transplants who wouldn't give a flying flip about the Raleigh baseball team unless they're playing, like, the Tigers. Cities of their size work in baseball, but only if it's like Cincinnati where zero transplants live and the city has 100 year relationship with the team. 81 dates in a stadium is a lot to fill. 

 

Quoting all for truth.

 

North Carolina's population geography is a conundrum. The state is more populated than a lot of people think (9th in the US, just over 10 million), and in a sneaky way, the state is almost bigger in size than it looks. Drive an hour (or even 30 minutes) out of any decent-sized metropolitan core and things get real rural, real quick - but it's somehow also the 15th-most densely populated. It makes no sense. My point here is that I think people tend to look at the sheer numbers and think "potential for expansion!" but I don't see it as being feasible.

 

The Raleigh-Durham metro area is just above 2 million, but it's incredibly spread out. Not necessarily "sprawling" (because I think "sprawling" infers endless mostly-residential development) but the counties included in that combined statistical area are up to an hour outside of what urban core Raleigh does have. I hate even having to use the hyphenated "Raleigh-Durham" because that suggests they're a dual metro, which they're not. The two cities are more than 20 miles apart! And once again, outside of that spread-out metro, the next-closest urban cores are: Fayetteville (65 miles, an hour's drive, ~375k metro population), Greensboro (75 miles, 90 minute drive, ~725k metro population), and Winston-Salem (100+ miles, nearly 2 hour drive, ~700k metro population). Nobody, nobody is going to drive from Charlotte (150+ miles and a 3 hour drive away) to come to a game, and the other "mid-sized towns" that admiral mentioned like Wilmington (280k), Greenville (180k), Rocky Mount (150k), and Jacksonville (175k) are a combination of too small and too far to make a dent in attendance.

 

Let's pretend people were moving from Raleigh to Buffalo and not the other way around (shout-out to WiB) - it would be like a Buffalo MLB expansion candidate expecting significant attendance draws from Syracuse, Rochester, and Erie.

 

The only thing this proposal has going for it is the potential Raleigh and surrounding areas have to keep growing. If we're looking at a metro area of 3-4 million by 2035, there might be something there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sc49erfan15 said:

North Carolina's population geography is a conundrum. The state is more populated than a lot of people think (9th in the US, just over 10 million), and in a sneaky way, the state is almost bigger in size than it looks. Drive an hour (or even 30 minutes) out of any decent-sized metropolitan core and things get real rural, real quick - but it's somehow also the 15th-most densely populated. It makes no sense. My point here is that I think people tend to look at the sheer numbers and think "potential for expansion!" but I don't see it as being feasible.

 

Southern population density came up on one of the wrestling podcasts a while ago. Crockett was a grueling but lucrative territory because there were so many towns to make, few of them huge but big enough to draw crowds, like Anderson, South Carolina. But guys liked working the AWA because you could run Minneapolis and Chicago on one weekend and go back home. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By 2030 or 2035 we could have other markets in play besides Portland, Raleigh & Montreal. Possibly Nashville, Charlotte, Sacramento & San Antonio, depending on their growth plus who would be willing to build a ballpark. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Wings said:

By 2030 or 2035 we could have other markets in play besides Portland, Raleigh & Montreal. Possibly Nashville, Charlotte, Sacramento & San Antonio, depending on their growth plus who would be willing to build a ballpark.  

 

I'm not convinced Major League Baseball will matter very much in 2030.

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.