http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/132563...mlb-future

Don't really see many compelling cities for MLB to expand. Montreal as an AL team might work this time and Mexico City might work as an NL west team. Other than those, think Austin would be a better pick than San Antone. Maybe a NC team would work. Indianapolis has too many teams at drivable distances and too many existing allegiances.

My initial thought was they should add 2 west coast teams because no team in the central time zone wants to play in the west division. But that problem could also be solved by realigning into divisions based on time zones and getting rid of NL and AL.

west division-8
SD, LAD, LAA, SF, Oak, Sea, Ariz, Col

Central division-8
Tex, Hou, KC, STL, Minn, Mil, CHC, CHW

American division-7
Det, Cle, Tor, NYY, Bos, Balt, Tampa

National Division-7
Cincy, Pitt, Philly, NYM, Wash, Atl, Mia

This lineup could easily handle any east coast additions.

Every team then could play every team in its division 12 to 15 tines and everybody else 3 times.

Then have 4 division winners and 8 wildcard teams.

(07-14-2015 10:12 PM)NoDak Wrote:  http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/132563...mlb-future

Don't really see many compelling cities for MLB to expand. Montreal as an AL team might work this time and Mexico City might work as an NL west team. Other than those, think Austin would be a better pick than San Antone. Maybe a NC team would work. Indianapolis has too many teams at drivable distances and too many existing allegiances.

Quote:Montreal, Charlotte, North Carolina, San Antonio, Portland, Oregon, Las Vegas, Oklahoma City, northern New Jersey, Mexico City or Monterrey, Mexico

I forgot, why did the Expos leave Montreal? Was it a devalued money issue along with stadium deal?


Personally I can't believe NC doesn't have a pro baseball team but only really Charlotte and the RDU area could house one and I am not sure how they would compete with other sports in the area for attendance considering Charlotte has the Panthers and the Hornets... and now Charlotte having a FBS football team. The RDU area has the NHL Hurricanes but also Duke, State, and UNC sports to compete with for money. I heard rumors of either also looking into landing a MLS team.

Considering the player populace in baseball, I am not shocked a city or two south of the border would be entertained for expansion.

Portland would be interesting.... Granted Baseball, does have its season arguably opposite the NBA.

Montreal with a proper stadium is a great baseball city; they had some of the best fan support in all of baseball when they were good in the 80's. If you expand there put them in the NL though, that way there will be a balance in Canada between leagues. However, I think they're the perfect place for the Rays to go if they can't get anything solved in Tampa Bay.

Austin is a fantastic choice that is never talked about. It's the fastest growing city in the country with a population that'll be north of 5 million within a couple of decades; couple that with a booming economy and young workforce, and it's a prime candidate. The presence of the Rangers and Astros prevent the region from being too heavily oriented towards one existing team, they'd draw a TV audience from San Antonio, and they would have zero competition from other sports teams until Longhorns football starts (which would be around playoff time when fan interest peaks anyway). San Antonio is a good option as well, but they have to deal with Spurs during playoff season and a theoretical NFL team down the line, which Austin will never have to worry about because of UT.

Charlotte is already Braves territory, Indy is already divided between a few teams like you said, baseball won't go to Vegas with the gambling factor and such a transient population, the Mets/Yankees won't allow a northern NJ team to happen, OKC is too small to support a baseball team on top of NBA, and I don't know if the income levels and corporate presence of any Mexican city is high enough to sustain a franchise (although the fan interest is definitely there). I can see Portland maybe, although Vancouver is the next best choice after Montreal and Austin/San Antonio imo.

(07-14-2015 10:49 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  I forgot, why did the Expos leave Montreal? Was it a devalued money issue along with stadium deal?

You got that right about the Expos. Stadium was a dump in a weird location, the Canadian dollar was awful compared to the US in the 90's (one of the reasons so many Canadian NHL teams moved away), and the provincial government didn't want to help fund a new ballpark (which I don't necessarily blame them for doing). Selig also screwed the city over when he let Loria 'trade' the Expos for the Marlins.

I would personally divide a 32-team MLB into eight divisions of four, with the top three division winners in each league advancing to the playoffs with the winner of a wildcard game (between the weakest division winner and best team otherwise). If the MLB wants to really integrate interleague play and permanently add the DH (something I would hate), they could just break down the league structure and do everything by geography.

Could see Orlando having a team, perhaps even on Disney property, but not before the Devil Rays issues are resolved. St Pete is a bad location for a team due to access and older age people there, but Tampa could be much better.

Maybe Salt Lake City. Fills in a large gap between Seattle and Denver.

(07-14-2015 10:49 PM)goofus Wrote:  My initial thought was they should add 2 west coast teams because no team in the central time zone wants to play in the west division. But that problem could also be solved by realigning into divisions based on time zones and getting rid of NL and AL.

west division-8
SD, LAD, LAA, SF, Oak, Sea, Ariz, Col

Central division-8
Tex, Hou, KC, STL, Minn, Mil, CHC, CHW

American division-7
Det, Cle, Tor, NYY, Bos, Balt, Tampa

National Division-7
Cincy, Pitt, Philly, NYM, Wash, Atl, Mia

This lineup could easily handle any east coast additions.

Every team then could play every team in its division 12 to 15 tines and everybody else 3 times.

Then have 4 division winners and 8 wildcard teams.

Selig floated this divisional split as a trial balloon once. The western teams liked it because it would greatly reduce their travel. Don't think the other clubs supported it, though.

What Manfred said is, "I'm open to the idea that there will be a point in time where expansion may be possible." In other words, don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen soon.

I can't see it. Baseball has 81 games. That is a lot of dates. They are already concerned about Oakland and Tampa Bay.

There are only 5 franchises in metro areas of less than 2.7 million people-Pittsburg (2.4 million) who is struggling, Kansas City (2.1 million), Milwaukee (1.6 million), Cincinnati (2.1 million) and Cleveland (2.1 million). And when you look at their real markets, Cincinnati with Dayton (.8 milliion) and Cleveland with Akron (.7 million), those two are close to 3 million. Milwaukee is much larger when you consider Madison and southern Wisconsin which is officially in the Chicago metro.

So going below 2.7 million is risky. And the only Canadian or US markets that large are Montreal and Riverside-San Bernadino (which is basically LA which already has 2 teams). Then you get down to Charlotte, Portland, San Antonio and Orlando, all around 2.3 million. Then Las Vegas, Columbus and Indianapolis around 2.0 million. San Antonio would probably be the best bet of those because Austin (1.8 million) is only 80 miles away.

(07-14-2015 11:01 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Maybe Salt Lake City. Fills in a large gap between Seattle and Denver.

Sports Executives today no longer think of Utah as just the Saudi Arabia of the American West.

NHL or MLB could work in that market but its not the type of market that can go 3 professional franchises deep, IMO.

I would expand into Nashville Tennessee.

I think MLB should just cut the bottom 6 all time performers and force them into minor leagues.

Phillies .473 76-86 1883
Marlins .470 76-86 1993
Rockies .469 76-86 1993
Mariners .468 76-86 1977
Padres .464 75-87 1969
Rays .462 75-87 1998

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-base...-standings

24 MLB teams is plenty enough IMO. Go back to a 2 division setup in both leagues that is easier to follow.

Cities aren't entitled to the MLB. They have to earn it.

(07-15-2015 02:12 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would expand into Nashville Tennessee.

Wasn't there a plan to build an MLB stadium shaped a guitar once!

Think tourist laden locale like Nashville, Orlando, Las Vegas, and Austin/San Antone have a rationale for teams.

(07-14-2015 11:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  I can't see it. Baseball has 81 games. That is a lot of dates. They are already concerned about Oakland and Tampa Bay.

There are only 5 franchises in metro areas of less than 2.7 million people-Pittsburg (2.4 million) who is struggling, Kansas City (2.1 million), Milwaukee (1.6 million), Cincinnati (2.1 million) and Cleveland (2.1 million). And when you look at their real markets, Cincinnati with Dayton (.8 milliion) and Cleveland with Akron (.7 million), those two are close to 3 million. Milwaukee is much larger when you consider Madison and southern Wisconsin which is officially in the Chicago metro.

So going below 2.7 million is risky. And the only Canadian or US markets that large are Montreal and Riverside-San Bernadino (which is basically LA which already has 2 teams). Then you get down to Charlotte, Portland, San Antonio and Orlando, all around 2.3 million. Then Las Vegas, Columbus and Indianapolis around 2.0 million. San Antonio would probably be the best bet of those because Austin (1.8 million) is only 80 miles away.

How are the Pittsburgh Pirates "struggling"? They are doing great on the field and are having very good attendance at PNC Park.

I can see Louisville, Charlotte, Indianapolis,Nashville, New Orleans as great expansion Markets . Thes are very Ripe markets for MLB. Louisville is a strong Baseball town and for Years set AAA attendance records and It's AAA Ballpark easily can expand upwards if needed near YUM! Center by the Riverfront.

I'm too lazy to google it but some time back there was a study of MLB attendance and the best non-performance factor that was a reliable predictor of attendance was population within five miles of the stadium.

Want a successful team find a city with good population density near the stadium site.

(07-15-2015 07:49 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  I can see Louisville, Charlotte, Indianapolis,Nashville, New Orleans as great expansion Markets . Thes are very Ripe markets for MLB. Louisville is a strong Baseball town and for Years set AAA attendance records and It's AAA Ballpark easily can expand upwards if needed near YUM! Center by the Riverfront.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisville_Colonels

Louisville once had a team. Honus Wagner along with 3 other HoF played here. It would be nice to see their return.

Just move Tampa Bay and Oakland.

(07-14-2015 11:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  I can't see it. Baseball has 81 games. That is a lot of dates. They are already concerned about Oakland and Tampa Bay.

There are only 5 franchises in metro areas of less than 2.7 million people-Pittsburg (2.4 million) who is struggling, Kansas City (2.1 million), Milwaukee (1.6 million), Cincinnati (2.1 million) and Cleveland (2.1 million). And when you look at their real markets, Cincinnati with Dayton (.8 milliion) and Cleveland with Akron (.7 million), those two are close to 3 million. Milwaukee is much larger when you consider Madison and southern Wisconsin which is officially in the Chicago metro.

So going below 2.7 million is risky. And the only Canadian or US markets that large are Montreal and Riverside-San Bernadino (which is basically LA which already has 2 teams). Then you get down to Charlotte, Portland, San Antonio and Orlando, all around 2.3 million. Then Las Vegas, Columbus and Indianapolis around 2.0 million. San Antonio would probably be the best bet of those because Austin (1.8 million) is only 80 miles away.

I wouldn't say Pittsburgh is really struggling any longer. They are averaging 29,026 fans, which is up by about 1323 per game. They have the 2nd best record in the NL. KC is averaging 32,639 per game this year- which is up by 9,973 per game(amazing what a good team can do). Of the small markets you mention, only Cleveland is really struggling at the turnstile.

(07-15-2015 08:38 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I wouldn't say Pittsburgh is really struggling any longer. They are averaging 29,026 fans, which is up by about 1323 per game. They have the 2nd best record in the NL. KC is averaging 32,639 per game this year- which is up by 9,973 per game(amazing what a good team can do). Of the small markets you mention, only Cleveland is really struggling at the turnstile.

But they are not Moving the Indians. However, would Portland work?