(03-06-2020 10:34 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(03-04-2020 11:53 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-03-2020 03:06 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-02-2020 12:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-01-2020 11:26 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Braves rule the South, man. Works best for all. Nashv and western Tenn belongs to the Cards. Rays need to move out and leave one team only down in Miami to have a go at it--bring back the FLA marlins.

But why should they?

When the south had a smaller population, it made sense. But why should Tennessee, North Carolina, etc be forced to support a far away Georgia team just because they were there first?

Because baseball IMO doesn't want to further dilute an already shirking fanbase

Having their own teams would increase the fan base.

Exactly.

Consider the Southeast (south of DC and East of the Mississippi, New Orleans counts). MLB has Atlanta, Miami, and Tampa Bay, 3 teams. The NBA has Orlando, Miami, Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte, and Memphis, twice as many. The NFL has 7 teams, Miami, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, Atlanta, Carolina, New Orleans, and Tennessee. We're not even counting the SEC, home of college football, and the ACC, home of men's college basketball. MLB has a much smaller presence than the NFL/NBA and college sports.

Atlanta is 245 miles from Charlotte and 248 miles from Nashville. If the Yankees could block every team within a 248 mile radius, forget no Mets, say goodbye to the Phillies, Orioles, Nationals, and even the Red Sox (Boston is 220 miles from the Big Apple).

MLB seems to care more about pleasing the Atlanta Braves than doing what's in the best interests of baseball. If there's a MLB team in Charlotte, MLB would gain many more fans in Charlotte than the Atlanta Braves would lose in Charlotte/the Carolinas. Same with Nashville. To a lesser degree, how about the A's and San Jose? San Jose has twice as many people as Oakland and you also have Santa Clara and a lot of the South Bay. The A's play in a sewage dump ... literally. But the A's playing in San Jose is bad for the Giants and they can block it because they have territorial rights. When owners are greedy, the fans (or potential fans) lose.

Expansion, as we've seen, leads to a talent dilution. Talent dilution leads to a LOSS of fan interest. How do the fans gained in smaller markets compare to the fans lost nationwide because the game is even more unwatchable?

(03-06-2020 10:34 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(03-04-2020 11:53 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-03-2020 03:06 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-02-2020 12:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-01-2020 11:26 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Braves rule the South, man. Works best for all. Nashv and western Tenn belongs to the Cards. Rays need to move out and leave one team only down in Miami to have a go at it--bring back the FLA marlins.

But why should they?

When the south had a smaller population, it made sense. But why should Tennessee, North Carolina, etc be forced to support a far away Georgia team just because they were there first?

Because baseball IMO doesn't want to further dilute an already shirking fanbase

Having their own teams would increase the fan base.

Exactly.

Consider the Southeast (south of DC and East of the Mississippi, New Orleans counts). MLB has Atlanta, Miami, and Tampa Bay, 3 teams. The NBA has Orlando, Miami, Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte, and Memphis, twice as many. The NFL has 7 teams, Miami, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, Atlanta, Carolina, New Orleans, and Tennessee. We're not even counting the SEC, home of college football, and the ACC, home of men's college basketball. MLB has a much smaller presence than the NFL/NBA and college sports.

Atlanta is 245 miles from Charlotte and 248 miles from Nashville. If the Yankees could block every team within a 248 mile radius, forget no Mets, say goodbye to the Phillies, Orioles, Nationals, and even the Red Sox (Boston is 220 miles from the Big Apple).

MLB seems to care more about pleasing the Atlanta Braves than doing what's in the best interests of baseball. If there's a MLB team in Charlotte, MLB would gain many more fans in Charlotte than the Atlanta Braves would lose in Charlotte/the Carolinas. Same with Nashville. To a lesser degree, how about the A's and San Jose? San Jose has twice as many people as Oakland and you also have Santa Clara and a lot of the South Bay. The A's play in a sewage dump ... literally. But the A's playing in San Jose is bad for the Giants and they can block it because they have territorial rights. When owners are greedy, the fans (or potential fans) lose.

The league isn't any more worried about making the Braves happy than they are any other team.

The Braves have a regional fan base and always have since they moved to Atlanta. Most franchises aren't in that boat. That being the case, the Braves would be more concerned about teams encroaching, but that's not really relevant.

What's most relevant is market size, the average income, and the number of corporations that would buy tickets/boxes. An MLB franchise is the most expensive to maintain and so they are more selective with where their teams are located because economic factors need to line up.

Reality is that most Southern markets don't really fit the bill. Even some that do...Miami and Tampa...haven't been great hubs for building baseball cultures. A team might very well do fine in NC between Raleigh-Durham and Charlotte, but those places also have to be interested in dumping tons of money into state of the art stadiums. They have to have ownership groups willing to pony up the cash to make it all work.

You're confusing the thoughts of some Braves fans on this board with the idea that MLB is primarily concerned with making the organization happy. Heck, the Braves are owned by Liberty Media which isn't even based in Georgia...who knows if the owners even care enough to communicate what they want or don't want to the powers that be in MLB.