raysfan24

Which past professional sports team would you bring back?

Recommended Posts

Montreal Expos

Yeah, hmm, I think it was in 2001 that an average of 16.5% of their stadium was filled up during their games.

Seattle SuperSonics, Quebec Nordiques for sure should come back. Kentucky Colonels, as they had the sixth-best attendance in all of basketball when they were playing during the 1970s. There is probably a lot more that I can think of, though.

And the USFL should come back too, though I already heard a new 8-team, 14-game "new USFL" is going to play in spring next year. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Montreal Expos

Yeah, hmm, I think it was in 2001 that an average of 16.5% of their stadium was filled up during their games.

Yeah, when MLB is actively trying to destroy the market, attendance numbers like that tend to pop up. Baka.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely the Montreal Expos for me. It still doesn't feel right without them in the league, even though the Washington Nationals exist today. I wish MLB would have tried harder to secure the stadium deal in Montreal. And as much as I love the Brewers, and their umm, rather lackluster history is implanted here now. I wonder what it would be like had the Braves stuck it out here in Milwaukee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd take it a step further and bring back the...... Milwaukee Brewers.

Moving the Braves to Milwaukee was a huge mistake in retrospect... it should've been the St. Louis Browns in the 1940s like Bill Veeck planned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Montreal Expos

Yeah, hmm, I think it was in 2001 that an average of 16.5% of their stadium was filled up during their games.

Yeah, when MLB is actively trying to destroy the market, attendance numbers like that tend to pop up. Baka.

Montreal is a hockey town. The Alouettes would be somewhere else without Anthony Calvillo. The Expos are gone. Basketball COULD work, I guess.

The point is, hockey is the only thing Montreal follows. Putting a team in Montreal in 1969 was foolish of the MLB. Plus they weren't trying to destroy the market. The strike was a total coincidence, unlike most people think. The contraction rumors were there because nobody ever even showed up to Olympic Stadium, even in the 1970s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Montreal Expos

Yeah, hmm, I think it was in 2001 that an average of 16.5% of their stadium was filled up during their games.

Yeah, when MLB is actively trying to destroy the market, attendance numbers like that tend to pop up. Baka.

Montreal is a hockey town. The Alouettes would be somewhere else without Anthony Calvillo. The Expos are gone. Basketball COULD would, I guess.

The point is, hockey is the only thing Montreal follows. Putting a team in Montreal in 1969 was foolish of the MLB. Plus they weren't trying to destroy the market. The strike was a total coincidence, unlike most people think. The contraction rumors were there because nobody ever even showed up to Olympic Stadium, even in the 1970s.

*Not sure if trolling or just an idiot image goes here*

Montreal was very much a viable market right up until MLB went and tried to actively kill it in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Granted you're probably too young to remember or know this, but that is indeed the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting a team in Montreal in 1969 was foolish of the MLB.

That's just a completely false statement. Montreal is a perfectly fine baseball market with plenty of history, even before the Expos: Pete Rose got his 4000th hit in Montreal as an Expo, Dennis Martinez pitched the 11th perfect game in the modern era of baseball as an Expo, Jackie Robinson was a Montreal Royal before he was a Dodger.

The reason why Montreal ultimately failed is because Claude Brochu, Jeff Loria, and Bud Selig made it fail by selling everything but the floorboards. Brochu either traded or didn't resign Larry Walker, Marquis Grissom, or Pedro Martinez. Loria let Vlad Guerrero walk. Selig traded Brandon Phillips, Grady Sizemore, and Cliff Lee for Bartolo Colon, then traded Colon. On top of that, there was the embarrassing (failed) attempt to move the Expos to Fenway, followed by the independent league-esque "San Juan Expos". Why on Earth would any fan put their trust in and give their money to an organization that failed on purpose due to their desperation to move out of town or contract the team?

When the Expos actually had people in the front office that cared and were trying to win, they usually had one of the better teams in the NL. If the wildcard was around at the time, they would have made the playoffs more often. Plus they got decent attendance after they moved into Olympic Stadium, being top-three in the NL in attendance from 1981-1983.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bad stadium + anglophone exodus + Jeff Loria + MLB working hard to kill what was left = no baseball ever again in Montreal. sry

Putting a team in Montreal in 1969 was foolish of the MLB.

Montreal in 1969 was the cultural and financial capital of Canada, fool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This talk on the North Stars' name begs the question -- why the heck didn't Norm Greene rename them the Lone Stars when he moved them from Minnesota to Dallas? Talk about a missed opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OH GREAT SCOTT WE DO THIS EVERY MONTH I THINK WE JUST DID IT LIKE THREE DAYS AGO

Pluralizing "Lone Star" is silly because then that star is not alone.

~ fin ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Montreal in 1969 was the cultural and financial capital of Canada, fool

Well, that is a pretty good argument. However, during the 1970s, without amazing players on the Alouettes, the team would have disbanded earlier than 1982 because of debt. It's usually up and down attendance for the Alouettes throughout their long history, and for MOST of the Expos history. So for the late 1960s-early 1970s saying the MLB awarding the city a team was foolish was wrong of me, but everybody knew they needed to relocate in 2004 when they did. They should've done it before then. The new cultural and financial center is Toronto. Montreal was in HUGE debt at the time they went to D.C., and MLB trying to find the team a new city for almost a decade was good for the league so 16.4% of Olympic Stadium won't be filled every year.

And I thought 47% of Progressive being filled average was bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you're missing the point that if the league had actually tried to make the Expos a competitive team, they wouldn't have "had to" relocate in '04. Fans would actually have a reason to go to the games, they'd long since have found a buyer, Labatt Park probably would have been built, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This talk on the North Stars' name begs the question -- why the heck didn't Norm Greene rename them the Lone Stars when he moved them from Minnesota to Dallas? Talk about a missed opportunity.

As I said above, "Lone Stars" A.) Is an oxymoron B.) Wouldn't be allowed by Dallas.

But you're missing the point that if the league had actually tried to make the Expos a competitive team, they wouldn't have "had to" relocate in '04. Fans would actually have a reason to go to the games, they'd long since have found a buyer, Labatt Park probably would have been built, etc.

The '03 Wild Card race comes to mind.

Going back to '94, the strike absolutely killed all momentum and excitement the team was building. Overall, they were averaging a respectable ~24 000 a night. However, their last two home stands averaged well over 30 000, right when they really started to heat up. I don't think it would be unreasonable to think they'd be able to sustain close to that down the stretch drive. Unfortunately, the owners had to cut salary after the season, leading the team to dismantle its roster very quickly. I'm confident a playoff run would've convinced them to commit money to that team, giving fans a big reason to visit games.

And man oh man were those jerseys beautiful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've long maintained that the Expos were inherently doomed for reasons far beyond their control:

You can't understate the effect of the language charter (Loi 101) on baseball in Montreal. I'd say the wheels really started turning when the province made it unpleasant to speak English in Quebec. Baseball was always more of an anglophone game, which isn't to say that that francophones didn't like the Expos, just that culturally speaking, as it were, baseball isn't very French. Remember that it was Montreal, not Toronto, that was the largest city in Canada when the Expos were established. Part of the reason it isn't anymore is that so many anglophones, about 300,000 I believe, were de facto expelled from the province and moved to Ontario. Montreal's not the same. Vancouver is a more intriguing Canadian destination now.

Add this to the Stade Olympique money pit precluding any sort of baseball-specific construction and you barely even need Jeff Loria or the '94 strike to make Montreal baseball untenable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd take it a step further and bring back the...... Milwaukee Brewers.

Moving the Braves to Milwaukee was a huge mistake in retrospect... it should've been the St. Louis Browns in the 1940s like Bill Veeck planned.

In retrospect, yeah it was, but wasn't. The reason it wasn't was the players that came through the area and really made Milwaukee a Major League town, not to mention the only World Series Championship this town has seen, and almost another one. But to defend your argument, that is another huge what if... From my knowledge and your link the original Milwaukee Brewers franchise is the current Baltimore Orioles, which coincidentally is the team the Crew had to beat in the one game playoff to get to the ALCS in 82. Wow, that could have changed the history of the game as we know it. We here in the city could have one of the longest and maybe most storied franchises in the history of pro sports had that move went down. Bill Veeck wouldn't have gone all psycho and had a midget batting on his team, and he wouldn't have taken over the White Sox, thus no Disco Demolition Night, oh my illwauk, you might have opened a wormhole on this one. Had the Brewers come back, the Braves never move to Milwaukee, they might have looked farther west or towards Missouri or Minnesota. Wow, the possibilities. That move really could have changed the landscape of MLB as we know it. Now there's a project! Mind is blown now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brooklyn Dodgers.

Los Angeles can have the Mets.

THIS.

Or move the Giants back to New York and give them the Mets. Either or the Giants or Dodgers need to be back in NY where they belong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The train's rounding the bend on the Dodgers and Giants being in California longer than they were in New York (at least as far as the modern era goes). What's done is done. It turned out well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be for the Dodgers staying in Brooklyn and just giving LA an NL expansion team. But that's providing it was 1957, not 2012.

Did the move work out for the better? I don't know. Its one of things where you have imagine a world where the Dodgers stayed in Brooklyn in order to get a fair evaluation of that, and that's just not possible to do. It will say all things considered it did work out well. The biggest downside in my opinion to that is when Giants and Dodgers left, it was the end of NYC having three teams. And that's an area I feel that could and still can easily support three teams, but it will never happen because of all the politics and ego stroking that would come with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of wish the PCL had been absorbed under the MLB umbrella. Sure, we have San Diego Padres and Los Angeles Angels (sort of), but I really wish we also had San Francisco Seals, Oakland Oaks, Seattle Rainiers, and Hollywood Stars (especially the Hollywood Stars). It doesn't help that there's something inherently unsettling about a pair of California teams having names that are so tied into New York (the Dodgers more so than the Giants) in what is supposed to be an idyllic pastime in our culture.

Also, am I the only one whose noticed that the Dodgers and Giants names would make more sense if it were applied to the other team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.