Stadium/Arena Saga Omnibus

[Red Comet]

1 hour ago, Red Wolf said:

 

It's so ridiculous that it's almost like it's some sort of negotiating gambit where they don't actually expect to get two stadiums.

 

Even if it is a gambit (and it appears to be), it's still a very stupid gambit. Usually when teams try to demand a taxpayer-funded palace that 90% of the aforementioned taxpayers will never be able to afford to go to, they usually use a separate city exclusively as a proverbial gun to the head of local/state governments. This is the equivalent of painting a banana to look like a gun while pretending its a gun.

[GDAWG]

A two city solution might work if the two cities are next to each other, but this solution involves another country.

[mjrbaseball]

26 minutes ago, 63Bulldogs63 said:

 

Hell it doesn't even have to be green and gold that potentially moves. The name and logos really fit any color scheme. As long as they keep the elephant and white shoes theyre set.

 

The Athletics' colors were red and blue for the first 62 years of their history. It wasn't until Charlie Finley changed the colors in 1963 that green and gold appeared.
 

[JayMac]

13 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

A’s jacked. 

 

Gotta admit, I admire the civic pride Vet’s showing, still salty about the A’s leaving Philly. That’s dedication. 

I'm with Vet. I'm trying to avenge the loss that my then 30 year old grandfather had to endure. Long live the Philadelphia Athletics!

[JayMac]

14 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Sounds like a solid business plan.

This has been their business plan for the last 20+ years.

[Gothamite]

This is the best take yet on yesterday’s farcical press conference. 

 

 

[Gothamite]

20 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

I'll pop in here to mention that, while the talk along the lines of "why should Atlanta fans care about the Boston Braves?" is very interesting, the important issue with relocated teams is not fans' perceptions but the official records. And, on the question of records: Washington Senators and Winnipeg Jets = the right way; Cleveland Browns and Charlotte Hornets = the wrong way.

 

But in the case of the Yankees and the 1901-02 Orioles, what exactly is the point?  How is the club, the city, or the sport benefited by incorporating those 118 wins into the over all total? 

 

I used to think the way you do, but the whole thing seems kind of silly to me now. Stories end. Histories can stop and new ones can start. 

[PrimalCookie]

Honestly? If I had to choose between this proposal and them moving to Montreal permanently, I’m choosing Montreal for good. If you’re going to relocate, at least have the decency to call it what it is. A relocation.

 

As long as this team is the Tampa Bay Rays, I will support it. The second it becomes the Montreal Expos, it may as well not exist.

[SFGiants58]

2 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

But in the case of the Yankees and the 1901-02 Orioles, what exactly is the point?  How is the club, the city, or the sport benefited by incorporating those 118 wins into the over all total? 

 

I used to think the way you do, but the whole thing seems kind of silly to me now. Stories end. Histories can stop and new ones can start. 

 

I’m in the same boat. I used to be far more hardcore about this before I realized, it’s just sports. It’s just the stories of the games we play, and as long as independent accounts say what really happened, teams and leagues can do whatever the heck they want. The stakes are fairly low and localized.

 

Still, dumping the A’s identity with a Portland move is stupid, even if the A’s have spent nearly as much time in Oakland as they have in Philadelphia.

[Sport]

RE: The Browns Deal and the reason I've never had a problem with it - The Ravens never played a single game under the lineage of the Browns. It was understood by everyone that mattered that the franchise in Baltimore was a new line and it was understood how records were to be kept from that point forward. Art Modell agreed to forfeit his franchise in order to take over a new one, the Browns players' contracts were shifted to a different franchise the same way they would be in a trade, and the Browns franchise was put on hold until the time when a new group could get the franchise back on the field. That's exactly what happened and that's exactly as it was recorded. That is the official record. They didn't "leave their history in Cleveland" so much as the franchise stayed in Cleveland and took a break while a new one started in Baltimore. Clean. No lie ever took place, no historical revisionism ever took place. There's no "pretending" the Ravens aren't the Browns because the Ravens aren't and have never been the Browns. Their origin is rooted with the Cleveland Browns, yes, but that's where the connection ends. 

 

Really the argument is based on precedent. The only reason the Cleveland deal rankles people is because it wasn't the usual procedure, but because everything was so cleanly spelled out, agreed upon, and took place in real-time, it's not any less "real" or valid a history. 

But even if everyone wants to go back after the fact and pull a Bobcats-Hornets-Pelicans, which will happen whenever the Seattle Sonics are returned to the NBA, what does it even matter? People in Charlotte care more about the Charlotte Hornets history than do New Orleans Pelicans fans. It's fine to me if they want to bundle all of that into their current Bobcats franchise. It doesn't hurt anything or anyone. Why do people in Arizona care about Dale Hawerchuk? Why do people in Winnipeg have to think about Laine breaking Ilya Kovalchuk's Thrashers records and how is that a better system? Even if some post-move revisionism with the Browns had taken place - It's just sports. None of this is real. Isn't it right that people in Cleveland get to cheer for the same team as their parents/grandparents? Wouldn't it feel weird and sad that Jim Brown and all those Browns would be tied to some purple bird team in Baltimore? Wouldn't Baltimore rather still have the same franchise tied to the Johnny Unitas Colts if they had a choice? 

 

Just write down what happened and call it a day. 

[spartacat_12]

8 hours ago, GDAWG said:

A two city solution might work if the two cities are next to each other, but this solution involves another country.

 

I think if the MLB is actually serious about having a two city team (which I doubt they are), it would make the most sense to move the Rays to Montreal full time, and to have the Marlins split their home games between Miami & the Tampa Bay area.

 

These are the two worst markets when it comes to attendance, so in theory they'd both draw better with half as many games to sell, plus the logistics would be much simpler (players live in the same state all season, no tax/tv/radio complications).

 

They could either revert back to being the Florida Marlins, or come up with something new that would still appease both fanbases.

[mjrbaseball]

3 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

But in the case of the Yankees and the 1901-02 Orioles, what exactly is the point?  How is the club, the city, or the sport benefited by incorporating those 118 wins into the over all total? 

 

I used to think the way you do, but the whole thing seems kind of silly to me now. Stories end. Histories can stop and new ones can start. 

I count records the way I think they should be counted, not the way someone (even the league) tells me to. The '01-'02 Orioles are part of the Yankees. The old Cleveland Browns are the Ravens, and the new Cleveland Browns are an expansion team. The records of the Denver Nuggets, Indiana Pacers, Brooklyn Nets and San Antonio Spurs count their ABA time as much as their NBA time, and indeed so do the records of defunct ABA teams. As do the  BAA, the NBL, AAFC, the three earlier AFLs, the Federal League, and the National Association. As you said, it's just sports; I can count it the way I want.

As the joke goes, If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it one.

[BBTV]

The regional Florida team is probably the best solution, though it’s impossible considering what Miami did for the Marlins in exchange for rebranding themselves as “Miami’s team”. 

[Marlins93]

I don't think the Marlins splitting their time between Tampa and Miami would work at all. It's as outlandish and defeatist as the Tampa/Montreal proposal. As soon as you start splitting the season between two different cities (even what the Expos were doing in Puerto Rico), you signal that the franchise is floundering with the writing on the wall for relocation/contraction. Neither Miami nor Tampa would embrace a shared team.

 

And why would the Marlins be better off playing half their games in the Trop, which we've all concluded is poorly located and provides a subpar baseball experience?

 

I'm still baffled why people want to relocate, contract, split a team that is playing in a brand new, state of the art ballpark.

[Survival79]

1 hour ago, spartacat_12 said:

I think if the MLB is actually serious about having a two city team (which I doubt they are), it would make the most sense to move the Rays to Montreal full time, and to have the Marlins split their home games between Miami & the Tampa Bay area.

 

These are the two worst markets when it comes to attendance, so in theory they'd both draw better with half as many games to sell, plus the logistics would be much simpler (players live in the same state all season, no tax/tv/radio complications).

 

They could either revert back to being the Florida Marlins, or come up with something new that would still appease both fanbases.

 

1. Give Sternberg an expansion team.

2. Merge the Rays and the Marlins. Rename the team the Florida Largemouths (the state freshwater fish). Largemouth bass logo with sun rays. The shared history serves as a foundation for the new team.

3. Hold an expansion/merger draft with the former Rays and Marlins players. The Florida team and Sternberg's expansion team rotate picks.

4. This is all no more ridiculous than Sternberg's Tampa Bay/Montreal model.

 

14 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

As soon as you start splitting the season between two different cities (even what the Expos were doing in Puerto Rico), you signal that the franchise is floundering with the writing on the wall for relocation/contraction.

 

Both franchises are floundering.

 

14 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

Neither Miami nor Tampa would embrace a shared team.

 

I'd totally embrace a team shared among Florida locales.

 

14 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

And why would the Marlins be better off playing half their games in the Trop, which we've all concluded is poorly located and provides a subpar baseball experience?

 

Under this scenario, a new stadium would be built in St. Petersburg/Tampa just like the proposed Tampa Bay/Montreal model.

[Marlins93]

Both teams are floundering attendance wise for slightly different reasons, but the common denominator is a general lack of enthusiasm in their respective cities. This could probably be attributed to the number of transplants or also the overall lack of a strong baseball culture. Regardless, splitting a team between two cities in very different markets that have both demonstrated attendance issues and a lack of fan enthusiasm is a recipe for a disaster. It simply won't work because it would only exacerbate the current conditions that lead to lackluster ticket sales.

 

And the whole premise of building a new multi hundred million dollar ballpark for only 41 home games is a total joke. Tampa or St. Pete would never publicly fund something like that. Regardless, it makes little sense to play only half a season in Marlins Park when the attendance issues they've been facing have little to do with the ballpark and more to do with the culture of distrust and frustration regarding ownership.

 

The Marlins don't need to play half their games in the Tampa area to succeed, they just need competent ownership and they will be fine.

 

[Brian in Boston]

You know who I see being inspired by Stu Sternberg's truly visionary two-market, bi-national, split-season proposal? Arte Moreno. Hell, if Tampa Bay-Montréal works for the Rays, imagine how the Angels would thrive splitting their season between Anaheim and Edmonton! After all, 12 of the Trappers' 24 seasons were spent as the Halos' top farm team. And to prove that he's really thinking outside-the-box, Arte could take things further and opt to have the Angel-Trappers play the Edmonton half of the schedule against Pacific Coast League teams. The club might not contend for the AL West crown, but the PCL Pacific Northern Division should be within reach, right?  

[Sec19Row53]

15 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

I blame Abudadein’s machinations. He used a Bostonian carpetbagger (that term gets thrown around A LOT with Stu) to bring his devilish machinations to Florida!

 

 

Florida Championship Wrestling was a fairly overlooked-yet-influential territory, BTW.

 

???, Kevin Sullivan, Oliver Humperdink, and Woman, correct?

[SFGiants58]

18 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

???, Kevin Sullivan, Oliver Humperdink, and Woman, correct?

 

Jeff "Snakemaster Abudadein" Gardner is the name you're looking for here. Also, Woman/Nancy Toffoloni was going by the name "Fallen Angel" at the time. 

[Sec19Row53]

3 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Jeff "Snakemaster Abudadein" Gardner is the name you're looking for here. Also, Woman/Nancy Toffoloni was going by the name "Fallen Angel" at the time. 

I have never seen her as Fallen Angel. Wow - my eyes