Tulsa?

(09-03-2023 12:33 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Tulsa?

No. Tulsa is the 47th largest city and the 54th largest metropolitan area in the US. Oklahoma City would be a better choice even within Oklahoma, and still would be at best a marginal candidate for MLB expansion as it is the 20th largest city and 42nd largest metro area in the US. The Rangers, Royals, and Cardinals would also scurry up a few friends to vote against expansion to Tulsa or Oklahoma City.

Tulsa needs to focus on moving up to AAA, although I would have a hard time seeing them beat out San Antonio for a new team in the Pacific Coast League's East Division. Colorado Springs, which was previously a AAA market, may also be in the running, especially if Salt Lake were to put their AAA team in Ogden; it would be less disruptive for the Pioneer League to lose two teams instead of one.

The most important requirement is to have an owner who can afford it. Salt Lake has that in Gail Miller, the former owner of the NBA's Utah Jazz. That's not to say someone from Tulsa or OKC could step up, but it would likely not be a wise investment to bring MLB to Oklahoma.

(09-02-2023 02:30 AM)C2__ Wrote:  Umm, you do realize how big (and growing) Texas is, don't you? It's not even Florida, which is a large state, it's much bigger. There's plenty of room for a third and even fourth team. Houston and especially Dallas are getting to the point where they can support 2 teams (Dallas because there's no team on the Dallas side of the metro). San Antonio and Austin are growing by leaps and bounds and other than the Spurs there's no pro sports competition on the I-35 corridor (A freeway that cuts through Austin and San Antonio).

I say Austin has bigger potential to have a team because there's more people with more disposable income than San Antonio, whose fewer people with disposable income is tied down to a team already (granted, UT is like a pro sports franchise).

So you think the Rangers and Astros owners are going to accept another team in Texas? I don't see how there isn't A's to San Jose type pushback.

The Astros will likely want a payment for concession of their territory for an Austin or San Antonio team. Even the Rangers may seek some extra cash from it.

(09-05-2023 09:23 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-02-2023 02:30 AM)C2__ Wrote:  Umm, you do realize how big (and growing) Texas is, don't you? It's not even Florida, which is a large state, it's much bigger. There's plenty of room for a third and even fourth team. Houston and especially Dallas are getting to the point where they can support 2 teams (Dallas because there's no team on the Dallas side of the metro). San Antonio and Austin are growing by leaps and bounds and other than the Spurs there's no pro sports competition on the I-35 corridor (A freeway that cuts through Austin and San Antonio).

I say Austin has bigger potential to have a team because there's more people with more disposable income than San Antonio, whose fewer people with disposable income is tied down to a team already (granted, UT is like a pro sports franchise).

So you think the Rangers and Astros owners are going to accept another team in Texas? I don't see how there isn't A's to San Jose type pushback.

The difference being that San Jose is on the San Francisco side of the bay (approximately anyways, it's really more due south of the bay). Austin and San Antonio are vacant markets that have no team. Even if they get some compensation for losing some revenue, it won't be much.

Now, a team moving to Dallas (County proper or close enough besides Tarrant, where the Rangers play) or a new team in Greater Houston would be all but off the table and an example of what you're talking about.