Commish Rob Manfred broke from tradition a bit yesterday, refusing to threatmonger Oakland and Tampa Bay and instead politely expressing his patience, support, and hope for new stadiums in two of baseball's most-challenging markets.
But he didn't miss a chance to remind everyone that Montreal won't be getting a team until the league can successfully use the threat of relocation to get new stadiums in Oakland and Tampa Bay:
Manfred said any move to add teams beyond the current 30 must wait because of the stadium searches.
"Both of those clubs need new major-league-quality facilities," he said, "and until that's resolved, I think expansion has got to be on the back burner for us."
Of course, if Montreal relocation threats weren't bad enough in Tampa Bay, some observers really want to crowbar Las Vegas into the mix too.
But as the nation's 40th-largest media market (Tampa Bay is 11th), Las Vegas would be the league's smallest, and a serious drain on big-markets' television revenues. Plus, Vegas is about to get its first big-league franchise (hockey), so there wouldn't seem to be nearly enough disposable income in the most transient of towns to add another big-league team to the mix. After all, the blackjack tables will always come first.
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Twitter
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Facebook
You know what my key takeaway was from yesterday's Manfred presser? That he went deliberately out of his way to gush about what a great market Oakland is, and how MLB was in Oakland for the long-term. Interestingly, did you hear him invoke the same love for the Tampa-St. Pete market? Nope. He never has, and I doubt he ever will.
ReplyDeleteMy take is that Rays fans should stop worrying about perceived threats from Vegas and Montreal. Just focus on getting your own shit together and building a ballpark. I don't think Manfred's comments yesterday are a "threat". They're simply good business. Why would the league expand knowing that they have 2 problem cases that need to be resolved? It's good business to have contingency plans. That's what Montreal is. That's not a threat. It's a reality. And if Tampa-St. Pete baseball fans start showing up to ballgames and get behind the construction of a new ballpark, "threats" are meaningless, whether real or perceived.
If the Rays 'need' a new ballpark, they and/or MLB can easily afford to pay for 100% of it.
DeleteNewsflash Scott, the Rays are not owned by the MLB, MLB is basically a overseeing, policing, a leasing company, how ever else you want to put it, like Ferman is for automotive manufacturers...
DeleteNot entirely true, Dufala. MLB is considered one business - not 30 businesses.
DeleteIf they were individual businesses, Montreal could just form their own franchise and compete against the other leagues. MLB effectively acts as a cartel, controlling all 30 franchises.
Duh, though MLB doesn't dictate what players teams sign, draft, where & when to build a stadium, and though may approve, but doesn't dictate logos, colors, ticket sells, advertising, and everything else. Again, MLB is like a leasing company, the umbrella. So it's not MLB's responsibility to buy team's stadiums...
DeleteThat's never gonna happen. And frankly, can't say that I blame either party for not wanting to front hundreds of millions of dollars in a market that is over-saturated with pro sports teams and has not shown any sort of consistent support for its baseball team (even when they were winning).
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThen the Rays can say bye-bye after the 2027 season.
DeleteMost upside of any market is Tampa area. Especially from a long term standpoint. Not much upside in Montreal from a long term standpoint. The growth in Florida will continue to be exponential.
ReplyDeleteGrowth is most definitely one of Tampa Bay's greatest selling points to a MLB team.
Deleteyou mean ageing population of Tampa?
DeleteDon't blame MLB, blame Vinik for dragging his feet with Channelside...
ReplyDeleteSigh. Barely any comments on the last article. The one that actually attempted to tackle one of the larger issues, the transit problem. Better dust off the Montreal issue again.
ReplyDeleteNot that Manfred said anything that is new. Obviously MLB needs to take care of TB and Oakland before anything can happen. I've been saying that forever. But just for fun, let's play with the whole "MLB can pay for it themselves" dream for a moment. Looking at the attendance numbers through the All-Star break, we have TB in last place, averaging 16,614 fans per game. Why would MLB break precedent for the lowest drawing team? Market upside can be awesome in Tampa Bay, but if that can't translate into people actually showing up after nearly two decades, it is irrelevant.
Hi Matt,
DeleteMLB and the Rays can pay for the stadium themselves as you state. That they will pay is a long shot. If they think local TV market plus potential increase in attendance is not worth going after, then in 2027 they can go elsewhere.
Hi Matt,
DeleteMLB and the Rays can pay for the stadium themselves as you state. That they will pay is a long shot. If they think local TV market plus potential increase in attendance is not worth going after, then in 2027 they can go elsewhere.
I agree that MLB/team can pay for stadiums as long as cites/states invest in mass public transportations and other infrastructures (along with private investments in real estate in the neighbourhood) that will put all the conditions in place for a successful project.
DeleteSo that means TB need to take the lead and propose a massive project of public transportation in conjunction with the Rays/MLB.
Just arguing that MLB/team should pay for their stadium is just wrong without all the surroundings infrastructures.
But such integrated investment and development plan require a vision.
This is San Diego before and after the new stadium.
https://twitter.com/SD_Sports19/status/751198881216536576
The whole result is not 100% related to the stadium but no one can argue that the stadium did not contributed to the change. And don't tell me the city/county did not collect taxes from such development boom over the years.
Each city must find the right mix based on the right conditions. It's not one size fits all and MLB/team must pay for everything, everywhere.
Especially if the cities/state are using the Land Value Capture (LVC) methods related to the new stadium construction.
Of course, Charlotte (without MLB) had a similar renaissance in a shorter amount of time:
Deletehttp://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental-market/the-changing-face-of-charlotte/
Noah, of course cities renaissance is not limited to MLB stadium construction. In Montreal, downtown renaissance was driven by may other initiatives: Multimedia city, Electronic Commerce city, Festivals Place, Bell Center, ...
DeleteMy point is that lots of these initiatives were funded by governments (local, provincial, federal) and those governments were able to collect more taxes.
Even if the Bell Center was mostly funded with private funds, City of Montreal is getting way more money because the Bell Center is downtown. Asking that all these renaissance initiatives must be 100% privately funded is not realistic.