Stadium/Arena Saga Omnibus

[Dilbert]

https://ballparkdigest.com/2021/09/22/as-to-narrow-field-of-vegas-sites-after-playoffs-three-sites-cited-by-locals/

 

At this point to me its not an if but when the A's move to Las Vegas. Supposedly according to local insiders and politicos there are three sites mentioned for a possible ballpark: South end of strip near Mandalay Bay, Las Vegas Festival Grounds, and The Rio Hotel & Casino.

 

Though they havent officially named any sites specifically, the A's should announce potential sites after the postseason

 

 

[kolob]

18 hours ago, Dilbert said:

https://ballparkdigest.com/2021/09/22/as-to-narrow-field-of-vegas-sites-after-playoffs-three-sites-cited-by-locals/

 

At this point to me its not an if but when the A's move to Las Vegas. Supposedly according to local insiders and politicos there are three sites mentioned for a possible ballpark: South end of strip near Mandalay Bay, Las Vegas Festival Grounds, and The Rio Hotel & Casino.

 

Though they havent officially named any sites specifically, the A's should announce potential sites after the postseason

 

 

 

I think my favorite plan is the Mandalay Bay site, because of it's easy access from I-15 and 215. The Rio isn't bad. But, the Festival Grounds has potential, especially if A's ownership wants to develop the area. There's a lot of need near the Festival Grounds. 

 

I am excited. I hope the A's make the jump.

[MilSox]

Vegas is one of my favorite cities, but I don't think it'll be the slam dunk that MLB thinks it is.

The Knights work because they were the first major franchise in Vegas.  They also play on an ice plant which I would imagine the locals find to be a nice change of pace from what they normally deal with.  Last time I was in Vegas (a few months before COVID), I was honestly taken aback by how much Knights paraphernalia I saw around town. They've really embraced that team.

The Raiders work because of all NFL teams, they probably have they fanbase that's the least affected by geography.  They also play their games on the weekend in a tourist destination, so even when they have lean years, they can rely on the other team's fans to fill the seats.

The only way I see Las Vegas working for MLB is if they somehow manage to build a ballpark on the strip and make it an absolute uniquely Vegas novelty/monstrosity that has to be experienced.  I don't see too many locals wanting to spend a summer evening in Vegas baking in the desert sun. The  only thing I can think to compare them to is the Diamondbacks, who may not even break a million fans for the entire season. 

[DustDevil61]

19 hours ago, Dilbert said:

https://ballparkdigest.com/2021/09/22/as-to-narrow-field-of-vegas-sites-after-playoffs-three-sites-cited-by-locals/

 

At this point to me its not an if but when the A's move to Las Vegas. Supposedly according to local insiders and politicos there are three sites mentioned for a possible ballpark: South end of strip near Mandalay Bay, Las Vegas Festival Grounds, and The Rio Hotel & Casino.

 

Though they havent officially named any sites specifically, the A's should announce potential sites after the postseason

 

 

 

44 minutes ago, kimball said:

 

I think my favorite plan is the Mandalay Bay site, because of it's easy access from I-15 and 215. The Rio isn't bad. But, the Festival Grounds has potential, especially if A's ownership wants to develop the area. There's a lot of need near the Festival Grounds. 

 

I am excited. I hope the A's make the jump.

Between this, the higher prices for attendance (and apparently $30 parking!), and the political climate in Oakland/Alameda County, I think it’s a foregone conclusion that Fisher and Co. Athletics are going to be playing somewhere else—in the realm of 99.5% that it’s  Las Vegas—within the decade.

 

My biggest concern is that the Las Vegas market will become too saturated too soon, going from 0 to 3 teams in the space of a decade—notwithstanding the stigma of gambling preventing teams from going to Vegas or its “destination city” reputation.

 

Sure, if I had my way, they’d at least give Portland or Salt Lake a glance or two (cities with a baseball history, the latter of which IMO is still close enough to tap into Las Vegas), but I think all of us, myself included, knew it was either “stay in Oakland” or “move to Las Vegas.”

 

Edited September 23, 2021 by DustDevil61
IMO

[bosrs1]

51 minutes ago, DustDevil61 said:

 

Between this, the higher prices for attendance (and apparently $30 parking!), and the political climate in Oakland/Alameda County, I think it’s a foregone conclusion that Fisher and Co. Athletics are going to be playing somewhere else—in the realm of 99.5% that it’s  Las Vegas—within the decade.

 

My biggest concern is that the Las Vegas market will become too saturated too soon, going from 0 to 3 teams in the space of a decade—notwithstanding the stigma of gambling preventing teams from going to Vegas or its “destination city” reputation.

 

Sure, if I had my way, they’d at least give Portland or Salt Lake a glance or two (cities with a baseball history, the latter of which IMO is still close enough to tap into Las Vegas), but I think all of us, myself included, knew it was either “stay in Oakland” or “move to Las Vegas.”

 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we get a preliminary announcement during the off season and next year is their last year in Oakland. Attendance is going to tank with the in some cases 70% increase in ticket prices. The A's were already far pricier than they had any business being given their team and stadium. Now... they're going for Expos or worse levels of attendance to make their situation in the Bay Area untenable. And now that they're opening up avenues to pay for the stadium in Vegas that won't involve public funding, I'd say it's a foregone conclusion they're already out the door. It's really just a matter of to which specific Vegas site and when do they make the official announcement. 

[GDAWG]

2 hours ago, DustDevil61 said:

 

Between this, the higher prices for attendance (and apparently $30 parking!), and the political climate in Oakland/Alameda County, I think it’s a foregone conclusion that Fisher and Co. Athletics are going to be playing somewhere else—in the realm of 99.5% that it’s  Las Vegas—within the decade.

 

My biggest concern is that the Las Vegas market will become too saturated too soon, going from 0 to 3 teams in the space of a decade—notwithstanding the stigma of gambling preventing teams from going to Vegas or its “destination city” reputation.

 

Sure, if I had my way, they’d at least give Portland or Salt Lake a glance or two (cities with a baseball history, the latter of which IMO is still close enough to tap into Las Vegas), but I think all of us, myself included, knew it was either “stay in Oakland” or “move to Las Vegas.”

 

 

 

When they are done with trying to move the A's to Oakland, Las Vegas will make phone calls and write emails to Adam Silver about Las Vegas being the 32nd NBA team.  Also three prospective ownership groups, one of them being the Golden Knights are trying to get the MLS to come to Las Vegas.  

[DoctorWhom]

So are The Raiders & A's just attached at the hip at this point or what?

Since it seems like once again they'll be moving to the same city. 

[Cujo]

A postseason game. For the defending AL Champs. Versus a team that travels incredibly well.

 

[Ridleylash]

47 minutes ago, Cujo said:

A postseason game. For the defending AL Champs. Versus a team that travels incredibly well.

 

And a team in the midst of trying to pull off one of the most blatant relocation ploys in recent memory playing in one of the worst ballparks in the MLB. At the end of the day, this is pretty decent for a team that's both as historically unsuccessful as the Rays have tended to be and are in the midst of trying to fulfil a loudly-broadcasted and massively-unpopular dual city setup.

 

Plus, MLB attendance going down across the board doesn't help matters, either; even markets like NY are seeing declining numbers, so it's really a baseball problem in general.

[DG_YouKnowWhatThatMeans]

They were home

30 minutes ago, Ridleylash said:

And a team in the midst of trying to pull off one of the most blatant relocation ploys in recent memory playing in one of the worst ballparks in the MLB. At the end of the day, this is pretty decent for a team that's both as historically unsuccessful as the Rays have tended to be and are in the midst of trying to fulfil a loudly-broadcasted and massively-unpopular dual city setup.

 

Plus, MLB attendance going down across the board doesn't help matters, either; even markets like NY are seeing declining numbers, so it's really a baseball problem in general.

 

Seattle would have sold out a playoff game. Even it it were against the Seahawks playing next door.

[See Red]

Don't know how anybody can look at the Lightning and not realize that if you gave the Rays a stadium that wasn't a pain in the dick to get to and an owner that was halfway likeable, people would show up. 

[DG_YouKnowWhatThatMeans]

33 minutes ago, See Red said:

Don't know how anybody can look at the Lightning and not realize that if you gave the Rays a stadium that wasn't a pain in the dick to get to and an owner that was halfway likeable, people would show up. 

 

Counterpoint: it's the playoffs.

 

Tampa isn't a baseball market. If it were, people would show up for the playoffs.

[Ridleylash]

11 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

Counterpoint: it's the playoffs.

 

Tampa isn't a baseball market. If it were, people would show up for the playoffs.

Counter-counterpoint: that successful season sure as hell didn't help the Senators' attendance in the 2017 playoffs, and Ottawa's about as traditional a hockey market as one could expect.

 

When a team consistently ends up rebuilding after getting close, it's naturally understandable fans wouldn't necessarily be flocking to the stands, especially with how many of them the owner's probably pissed off by this point with all of his antics. Combine those two factors with an decrepit and out of the way arena and attendance is bound to suffer for most teams.

 

"Terrible owner, decrepit arena located way out of the way and low record of consistent success causing dwindling attendance" are the three key ingredients that caused the Expos to move out of La Belle Province, and consensus generally is that Montréal is still a viable baseball market.

[See Red]

43 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

Counterpoint: it's the playoffs.

 

Tampa isn't a baseball market. If it were, people would show up for the playoffs.

 

If I were dying and my only chance of survival was getting life saving treatment on the other side of that bridge on a Thursday night, I'd have to think about it.

 

They have the lowest population within 30 minutes of the stadium in the league and the team that has the second lowest has 2x as many people.  There's also, as you can imagine, a direct correlation between that and attendance.  Particularly weeknight attendance. 

[LMU]

14 hours ago, Ridleylash said:

And a team in the midst of trying to pull off one of the most blatant relocation ploys in recent memory playing in one of the worst ballparks in the MLB. At the end of the day, this is pretty decent for a team that's both as historically unsuccessful as the Rays have tended to be and are in the midst of trying to fulfil a loudly-broadcasted and massively-unpopular dual city setup.

 

Plus, MLB attendance going down across the board doesn't help matters, either; even markets like NY are seeing declining numbers, so it's really a baseball problem in general.

That's not a valid excuse.  This is a team that has made the playoffs 50% of the time since 2008 and has two World Series berths in the most competitive division in the sport (and is on a three-year postseason streak).  You can blame the location but you can't blame the team's success when they're being outdrawn constantly by the dregs of the league.

[Waffles]

The Wall Street Journal has a good piece (paywalled) summarizing where things stand right now with the Montreal/Tampa snowbird scenario. It even has a logo mashup as awkward as the arraignment it describes:

And here's are the key paragraphs:

Quote

Now the Rays are approaching a crossroads. Their lease at Tropicana Field expires after 2027, meaning they are running out of time to set a course for their future. It has led to a bizarre juxtaposition: a juggernaut baseball team dominating the competition, while its executives desperately try to convince the community to let it spend its summers in Canada.

“We’re not missing by a few thousand people a night. We’re less than half from where we need to be with an absolutely incredible team,” Auld said in his speech. “The sister city plan deserves a chance to be heard by open minds.”

The idea, as the Rays envision it, would require the construction of two relatively small open-air stadiums, one in Montreal and the other either in Tampa or St. Petersburg. Combined, they would cost less than the $1 billion-plus a retractable roof stadium in Florida would run.

The Rays would spend spring training and the first few months of the season in the Tampa Bay area, before jetting up to Montreal when the Florida weather becomes unmanageable, like classic snowbirds. The two cities would alternate hosting postseason appearances. Montreal’s former MLB franchise, the Expos, relocated to Washington and became the Nationals in 2005 after years of dismal attendance. (No word on whether a Tampa Bay/Montreal team would be called the ExRays.)

 

 

And SportsNet has this interesting speculation:

Quote

My gut reaction? The Rays will be a Montreal-based team — full-time, not shared — by 2027 after extricating themselves from their lease at the Trop. They won’t play in the American League East, though: rather, the Rays will be a National League team as a peace offering to the Blue Jays.

[McCall]

1 hour ago, Waffles said:

The Wall Street Journal has a good piece (paywalled) summarizing where things stand right now with the Montreal/Tampa snowbird scenario. It even has a logo mashup as awkward as the arraignment it describes:

And here's are the key paragraphs:

 

And SportsNet has this interesting speculation:

If they were to move to the NL East, who would switch to the AL East? Miami? Still the same travel for the rest of the division, maybe even farther.

[goalieboy82]

1 hour ago, McCall said:

If they were to move to the NL East, who would switch to the AL East? Miami? Still the same travel for the rest of the division, maybe even farther.

now we can have this if that happens:

[Red Comet]

If Texas can handle two teams in the same league, then Canada can do the same. Would actually be nice to see a regular north of the border rivalry. 

[BBTV]

Washington or Miami make the most sense to move.  Nobody cares about the Marlins so it would be break-even for the AL East (expect they'd get a bad team to beat on) and Washington hasn't really developed any rivalries in the NL East and I doubt the other teams are realizing any money that's in line with its market size, so unless Baltimore would object (which is likely) they could go.