Stadium/Arena Saga Omnibus

[Fowler]

Just leave it at 30 teams. Expansion is nice for the owners, 2 billion in their greedy pockets. Even if it happens, we are looking at 2030 at the earliest with the bidding process, the owners voting on it and the winning groups getting the ballparks built. 

[GDAWG]

3 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Probably not (almost definitely not). Jobs would be maintained in name only. Those extra players on the rosters wouldn't be playing.

 

That is why contraction will never be an option for the MLB.  The MLBPA is said to be the most powerful players union in sports.  They would support expansion all the way because it's 52 new jobs and 52 players playing (As we know, per team 9 starters in the field and one starting pitcher, but also a DH, which is ten, and whatever bullpen and bench moves the manager makes).

[Fowler]

Nashville 

Charlotte

Portland

Orlando

Salt Lake City

Montreal

Mexico City

Raleigh 

San Antonio 

 

So who wins?

 

[The_Admiral]

2 hours ago, Fowler said:

Nashville 

Charlotte

Portland

Orlando

Salt Lake City

Montreal

Mexico City

Raleigh 

San Antonio 

 

So who wins?

 

 

I've never seen so many impressive craft brewing scenes in one place!

[GDAWG]

Unlike NBA expansion, where there are two cities that are locks (Seattle and Vegas), MLB expansion is wide open.  

[Sec19Row53]

15 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

Unlike NBA expansion, where there are two cities that are locks (Seattle and Vegas), MLB expansion is wide open.  

That's in part because it's theoretical. Until MLB says it is happening, it's just message board fodder.

[McCall]

11 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

That's in part because it's theoretical. Until MLB says it is happening, it's just message board fodder.

In theory.

[gosioux76]

9 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

That's in part because it's theoretical. Until MLB says it is happening, it's just message board fodder.

To be fair, Rob Manfred has addressed the likelihood of expansion about as often as Adam Silver has. Both commissioners have said their leagues would explore expansion. Manfred has been saying as much since at least 2018, and even mentioned six likely markets at that time: Las Vegas, Portland, Montreal, Charlotte, Nashville and Vancouver, and even suggested Mexico as a possibility.

 

He's addressed the topic so often that I don't really think you can call it theoretical. 

 

[tBBP]

At this point, the only way any other city is getting another club is the same way Vegas just got theirs: some club uproots and moves.

 

Imma echo @FiddySicks on this point: MLB baseball has a serious issue to solve, and that's hemorrhaging fans. Some of that doesn't even have to do with the sport itself, but with the growth/advent of other sports options (Major League Soccer, anyone?) drawing away potential fans, not to mention just more entertainment options out there period even beyond sports.

 

As for the game itself, I highly doubt I'm the only one who feels this way, but no matter the level of league, baseball is a game best seen at the park...it really just does not translate well on TV. Not enough actual action. I think the pitch clock might help with that, but then there are so many other things to look at, many beyond the control of the clubs, like people's real-life work/life schedules preventing them from partaking in weekday day games or even night games. Plus, there's so many games in a season in the first place, so it ain't like, unless it's a high-profile club visiting a smaller market (think Yankees visiting the Twins), many people feed the "need" to attend a game the way they would of there were less games and on only certain days. 

 

Actually, and I ain't the one to do this because I don't have the business acumen to draw all this out much less deep-dive into it, but I'd like to see/know the operating margins of all these clubs, to see how many are in the black versus those that are in the red, and by how much. (Shoot, what are MLB's margins, for that matter?) Certainly someone on here knows how that would factor into expansion if it ever were to happen, but I just don't see how the numbers would make it make sense. But I'll disengage at this point and let the smarter guys have it from here...

[who do you think]

On 9/21/2023 at 7:16 PM, FiddySicks said:

All you really have to do is look at the two most recent rounds of expansion to let you know how it’ll probably go in places like Nashville, Portland, or (lol) Orlando. 
 

1993: Denver and Miami

 

1998: Phoenix and Tampa/St. Pete

 

You could very easily make the argument that at least three of those are the three weakest markets and most precarious situations in MLB 

 

They're also probably the three most unpleasant locations on the MLB map in terms of outdoor conditions from June to August/September. Bit of a deterrent for getting people to the park in the first place, and also forces home games to take place in crappy airplane hangars.

 

(Although a possible counterpoint is that Houston, DFW, and Atlanta aren't far behind in terms of total ballsweat produced per summer, but they get by okay. Maybe we're just back to the sad fact that nobody cares and full-time teams shouldn't have ever existed in spring training sprawls where more famous teams have had a flag planted for far longer and nobody who lives there is actually from there.)  

 

9 hours ago, GDAWG said:

Unlike NBA expansion, where there are two cities that are locks (Seattle and Vegas), MLB expansion is wide open.  

 

Those cities are only "locks" because they're obvious holes on the NBA map relative to the bevy of smaller markets that the league already successfully operates in. MLB expansion is only "wide open" because all available US markets are in the same glut of uninspiring, replacement-level whatevervilles. MLB Columbus is the top end of what any of them can be. Why does that need to exist?

[GDAWG]

All of the MLB expansion sites have serious flaws, and contraction is out of the picture, so it should remain at 30 teams.  

[FiddySicks]

12 hours ago, who do you think said:

 

They're also probably the three most unpleasant locations on the MLB map in terms of outdoor conditions from June to August/September. Bit of a deterrent for getting people to the park in the first place, and also forces home games to take place in crappy airplane hangars.

 

(Although a possible counterpoint is that Houston, DFW, and Atlanta aren't far behind in terms of total ballsweat produced per summer, but they get by okay. Maybe we're just back to the sad fact that nobody cares and full-time teams shouldn't have ever existed in spring training sprawls where more famous teams have had a flag planted for far longer and nobody who lives there is actually from there.)  

 

 

Those cities are only "locks" because they're obvious holes on the NBA map relative to the bevy of smaller markets that the league already successfully operates in. MLB expansion is only "wide open" because all available US markets are in the same glut of uninspiring, replacement-level whatevervilles. MLB Columbus is the top end of what any of them can be. Why does that need to exist?

Yes. 100%. All of this. The last four markets MLB added were basically the last four “holes” they had left, and all of them had extenuating circumstances for why they were holes in the market in the first place (as you said, inclement weather, transplant population, Spring Training, etc). Now, 25-30 years down the line, we’re seeing the consequences of those risks play out in real time. It was already stretching things too thin to add all four in the first place. Now people want to take markets that have all of those same issues, yet a third of the population at best, and give them expansion teams? That’s insane. It’s NHL levels of stupid. And the scary thing is that Manfred is probably somehow even more of a moron than Bettman is, so of course he’s going to throw his weight behind this stupid idea

[The_Admiral]

DC was still a hole at the time, albeit one that the Orioles were able to plaster over well enough at the time because they were still rolling up through '97 or so. (Of course, it's still a hole! hey heeeeey!) It was a Baltimore/St. Louis NFL situation where they were keeping it set aside for relocation, in this case for the Astros. This line of thinking has yielded not only baseball's problem children but also the Jacksonville Jaguars, so maybe leagues should stop doing that.

[spartacat_12]

On 9/21/2023 at 6:25 PM, FiddySicks said:

Lol no it doesn’t, because truth of the matter is there isn’t ANY city left that fits that category. This is a sport that’s been actively hemorrhaging fans for around the last four decades. We really don’t need any more MLB teams. Especially when the only “viable” (and I use that term loosely) locations left are places like Nashville and Portland. 

On 9/22/2023 at 4:12 PM, tBBP said:

Imma echo @FiddySicks on this point: MLB baseball has a serious issue to solve, and that's hemorrhaging fans. Some of that doesn't even have to do with the sport itself, but with the growth/advent of other sports options (Major League Soccer, anyone?) drawing away potential fans, not to mention just more entertainment options out there period even beyond sports.

 

This year MLB has seen its biggest jump in attendance since '98, and that season had the benefit of two expansion teams being added. More than two thirds of the clubs have seen an increase in attendance, and about half of them have had attendance boosts of at least 10%. The median age of ticket buyers has gone down as well, so there's been an influx of younger fans going to games. Regional broadcasts have also seen a rise in viewership, despite the fact that these networks have been steadily losing subscribers.

 

Obviously we need to see how long things keep trending in the right direction, but MLB has been pretty aggressive in trying to improve their product and fans have clearly taken notice.

[SFGiants58]

14 minutes ago, spartacat_12 said:

 

This year MLB has seen its biggest jump in attendance since '98, and that season had the benefit of two expansion teams being added. More than two thirds of the clubs have seen an increase in attendance, and about half of them have had attendance boosts of at least 10%. The median age of ticket buyers has gone down as well, so there's been an influx of younger fans going to games. Regional broadcasts have also seen a rise in viewership, despite the fact that these networks have been steadily losing subscribers.

 

Obviously we need to see how long things keep trending in the right direction, but MLB has been pretty aggressive in trying to improve their product and fans have clearly taken notice.

 

Well, it would be nice to have a source on your claims and confidence that this kind of growth is sustainable.

[BBTV]

I have no idea if his claims are accurate or not, but I think the changes that have been put into place would make the game more attractive to younger people with shorter attention spans and less of a desire to sit in the same place for 4+ hours.

 

1. More WC teams makes more games meaningful even late in the season.  In the NL, there's still seven teams alive (even if only mathematically) in the final week of the season.  Given the Phillies have a large lead for the 3rd spot, there's 6 teams that would otherwise have been playing meaningless games for weeks.

 

2.  Pitch clock speeds up games and reduces dead time, so even with a short attention span, you're still seeing lots more action than before.

 

3.  Ghost runner (probalby the most controversial thing) seems to me like it would contribute to an overall reduction in time of games that go extras, but I don't have the stats to bac that up.  Personally, I love that they typically go only one or two extra innings, and every pitch is critical, and the strategic decisions are interesting.  I love it.

 

There's certainly things that aren't great, but for all the hate Manfred gets, it seems to me that they're taking more steps to attract younger fans than they ever have before.  There's still room to tweak what they've done, and maybe do more, but they're off to a good start.

 

Now let's just hope that the WS doesn't end on a pitch-clock violation!

[TBGKon]

1 hour ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Well, it would be nice to have a source on your claims and confidence that this kind of growth is sustainable.

2022 = https://www.espn.com/mlb/attendance/_/year/2022

 

2023 = https://www.espn.com/mlb/attendance

 

I know some teams aren't done with their home schedule so numbers will be more accurate year over year in a week, but this should be a decent baseline.  The top of the total attendance column doesn't change much.

 

For those who have completed their season.

- San Diego broke 3 million for 2023 and was just under 3 million in 2022. 

- Cincinnati broke 2 million in 2023, with a big increase of 642,540 total, just over 7900 per game

- Tampa Bay had an overall total increase of 312,174, just over 3800 more per game. 

- Miami was up 255,332, just over 3100 more per game.

- Pittsburgh was up 308,795, approx 3800 more per game.

- Texas was up 521,681, over 6400 more per game.

- Cubs up 158,369, over 1900 per game.

- Houston up 363,349, almost 4500 per game.

 

There were some drops so far

- Washington dropped by just under 2000 a game or 160,569 total.

- Dodgers down 24,329, about 300 per game.

[gosioux76]

3 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Well, it would be nice to have a source on your claims and confidence that this kind of growth is sustainable.

 

As @TBGKon just showed, the data wasn't terribly hard to find.  And as @BBTV noted, even anecdotally it appears that MLB has steered itself back toward a growth trajectory with this year's rule changes and made the game far more accessible and easier to enjoy.

 

I can understand why there would be skepticism about expansion considering the sport's struggles over the past decade, but it seems a a bit cynical to just dismiss it without considering the real positive direction the league has taken this year. 

 

MLB has stopped the bleeding. Now let's see where it goes next.

[TBGKon]

I can’t speak for the rest of the teams with increases, but the Rays did offer a select amount of $10 tickets (pre tax/fees) for all games.  That may have assisted in the increase in attendance 

[spartacat_12]

4 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

Well, it would be nice to have a source on your claims and confidence that this kind of growth is sustainable.

 

Well a quick google search of "MLB attendance" &  "MLB tv ratings" would have given you plenty of sources confirming the growth, but here you go.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2023/07/14/mlb-rule-changes-are-key-reason-for-increase-in-tv-streaming-and-attendance-league-says/?sh=788015747db2

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2023/08/16/mlb-attendance-headed-for-biggest-attendance-increase-since-1998-expansion/?sh=40715949444f