Jump to content

MLB Stadium Saga: Oakland/Tampa Bay/Southside


So_Fla

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

Funny that in Phoenix the baseball stadium is centrally located and the hockey arena isn't and it's the opposite for Tampa and the stronger support in both cases goes to the team that is easier to get to. To me the problem and solution in both cases is pretty obvious and simple.

The problem in both cases is money. To be fair, it's a much bigger problem with the Coyotes. They have, as you've said, burnt through a lot of good will and public money. At least one of their two failed attempts to get a more centrally-located arena failed in part because people calling the shots went "you wasted how much in Glendale?"

The Rays are different because they haven't been a drain on the public coffers. The "all they need is a new stadium" argument does seem prevalent in the Tampa Bay area. It just seems like a hell of a gamble. It's a lot of public money to spend on something that could end up wasted if the stadium wasn't the problem after all. 

 

They might as well spend the money though, to be honest. There's no where else for MLB to go. So if the Rays are going to stink up the attendance standings in the Tampa Bay area? They might as well do it in a place that's pleasant to go to and spend an afternoon in.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gothamite said:

How much of that is influenced in part by the fact they play an outsized number of games against the Yankees and Red Sox, though?

 

Probably less than it seems given how many other teams they have to play and the likelihood that a lot of people are paying for the out-of-market package and watching those teams on YES and NESN all year instead of Rays games. I mean, Yanks/Sawx games not taken national add up to, what, 34 games out of 150ish local telecasts?

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

The "all they need is a new stadium" argument does seem prevalent in the Tampa Bay area. It just seems like a hell of a gamble. It's a lot of public money to spend on something that could end up wasted if the stadium wasn't the problem after all. 

 

They might as well spend the money though, to be honest. There's no where else for MLB to go. So if the Rays are going to stink up the attendance standings in the Tampa Bay area? They might as well do it in a place that's pleasant to go to and spend an afternoon in.

If this is the only con in the Rays looking to improve their stadium situation and overall situation, it's not really that much of a gamble.  Especially if the locals feel it'll be a solution and there's no real alternative for MLB to look at.

 

This is exactly why the Rays have been talking to the Braves people.  The Braves did a lot of surveys and a lot of research when it came to putting together their SunTrust Park/Battery Atlanta plan, and early numbers suggest it's been a huge success.  Traffic hasn't been the disaster Atlantans thought it'd be, and leaving the ballpark area has been much more of a breeze than Turner Field.  And there's so much to see and do around the ballpark now.  The Rays want in on that.

 

If the TV numbers are high but attendance is low, that's telling me the fans are looking for inspiration to go to the ballpark.  An unexciting building that's quite the distance to drive to with high-ish ticket prices (last time I bought tickets to a Rays game, they seemed so much more costly than Braves tickets) isn't cutting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, the admiral said:

Probably less than it seems given how many other teams they have to play and the likelihood that a lot of people are paying for the out-of-market package and watching those teams on YES and NESN all year instead of Rays games. I mean, Yanks/Sawx games not taken national add up to, what, 34 games out of 150ish local telecasts?

 

Any bump can be significant when we're talking about decent-but-not-outstanding ratings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
Quote

Under the plan, the Rays would play in new stadiums in both the Tampa Bay area and Montreal, according to sources. The ability to play games early in the season in Florida would preclude the need for a domed stadium, cutting the cost of a new building. A month ago, Bronfman -- who along with Montreal businessman Mitch Garber has expressed interest in taking a minority stake in the Rays alongside owner Stuart Sternberg -- reached an agreement with a developer on a site in Montreal's Point-Saint-Charles neighborhood to potentially build a new stadium.

We can’t get a new stadium, so we’ll build two!

  • Like 6

VmWIn6B.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tampa wouldn’t show up (before everyone makes a funny original reply to this comment, yes, there are Rays fans in Tampa and the rest of Florida and they show up for games) for a team that “left”, and Montreal wouldn’t show up because the team isn’t “fully theirs”.

 

This is quite possibly the worst solution they could’ve come up with. Either stay or leave. You can’t have both.

  • Like 6

ExJworW.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This just seems like an unworkable situation.  Teams have played parts of the schedules in other cities before (White Sox in Milwaukee, Expos in San Juan, Bullets in Baltimore, Dodgers in Jersey City). Teams have also shared/rotated among cities (Virginia Squires, Floridians, Carolina Cougars, Kansas City-Omaha Kings).  However, the latter situations all involved either one primary city (more or less) and/or teams with some regional/geographic connection (usually being within one state).  This would involve a team playing in two cities located about 1,500 miles apart with no apparent/realistic connection.

 

If you're a fan in Florida, it seems like it would be difficult to retain an attachment to a team that you know won't be in town for the home stretch of any playoff race.  Meanwhile, if you're a fan in Quebec, you know you won't be able to watch your team in person for several months of the season.

Edited by crashcarson15
MOD EDIT: Removing background info from duplicate thread, keeping opinion
  • Like 4

Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017     /////      Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008

Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005  🙃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is 100% a negotiating tactic, I think, but the idea isn't really that far from workable. If you want an outside park in Montreal and are concerned about early-season weather, just have the team play 3 or 4 home series in wherever their Spring Training park is, then have "home" Opening Day in May or whatever. Home slate of 69ish games, which is fine and balances the need to have a clear home city with scheduling concerns (and also keeping something as egregiously stupid as this from happening).

  • Like 3

6fQjS3M.png

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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