February 22, 200620 yr The total income support required for baseball is so high that no new markets could support an expansion or relocating team. But the study found two existing markets that could support additional teams. Northern New Jersey (part of the New York City market) and San Bernardino-Riverside (part of the Los Angeles market), when considered on their own, would have sufficient total personal income for MLB franchises. A team isn't moving to LA or NJ. It also says something when Orlando, (no malice intended) has a larger capacity than Charlotte, Portland and Las Vegas.
February 22, 200620 yr A team isn't moving to LA or NJ. Why not? The article portrays both those markets as viable options, even though they already have teams. Not saying it's a certainty, but it is a possibility.
February 22, 200620 yr Author Beetle, with the matches in New York/Philly between the Mets, Yankees, and Phils (SportsNet NY, YES, and Comcast SportsNet Philly) & the Dodgers (FSN West 2/KCAL 9) and Angels (FSN West)...a team in either location would be 4 times more work for MLB than the Nationals were because the Nats move only dealt with the Orioles and briefly the Braves.
February 22, 200620 yr Beetle, with the matches in New York/Philly between the Mets, Yankees, and Phils (SportsNet NY, YES, and Comcast SportsNet Philly) & the Dodgers (FSN West 2/KCAL 9) and Angels (FSN West)...a team in either location would be 4 times more work for MLB than the Nationals were because the Nats move only dealt with the Orioles and briefly the Braves. Good enough for me. Let's hope that's the case.
February 22, 200620 yr I don't particularly buy the results of that study. I have little to no doubt that a baseball franchise would succeed here. I doubt we'll ever get the chance to prove it though.
February 22, 200620 yr Should the team move, a Jersey location would not be bad if it was near PA... make a helluva rivalry between the Phillies
February 22, 200620 yr I dont think NJ would work out. They have alot of trouble with the devils and nets as it is. NJ is similar to south florida in which people have to drive from all areas to get the arena.
February 22, 200620 yr It's clear the Marlins' best opportunity is in South Florida. It's also equally clear they have botched their opportunities at many levels. First and foremost is failing to hire experienced professionals to represent them in negotiations.
February 22, 200620 yr It's clear the Marlins' best opportunity is in South Florida. It's also equally clear they have botched their opportunities at many levels. First and foremost is failing to hire experienced professionals to represent them in negotiations. You don't think David Sampson's "I know you are, but what am I?" approach is professional??
February 22, 200620 yr There's a good number of cities that with a new ballpark would be better hosts to the Marlins franchise than South Florida is presently. And if you think MLB will save you, you are underestimating them. South Florida's decade long resistance to building them a stadium has been a thorn in their side. The steps towards revenue sharing has made the pain even worse. They don't give a damn about the market unless it's profitable and playing by their rules, no matter its potential. That potential has been unrealized and could just as easily explored at a later date when potential has a better chance of becoming reality.
February 22, 200620 yr The methodology is mentally retarded. They list Tampa-St. Pete as the most overextended market, with not enough personal income to support its sports team. They also happen to list Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice as a market with some of the most available personal income for a new sports team, with a surplus of $55.5 billion annually. That's just one gem. There are tons more in there.
February 22, 200620 yr Author The methodology is mentally retarded. They list Tampa-St. Pete as the most overextended market, with not enough personal income to support its sports team. They also happen to list Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice as a market with some of the most available personal income for a new sports team, with a surplus of $55.5 billion annually. That's just one gem. There are tons more in there. As someone who lives in that region, Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice should not be part of Tampa Bay. Geographically they are close, but travel times and income-producing jobs are mostly within the counties in each market. Most Sarasotans do not work in Tampa.
February 22, 200620 yr The methodology is mentally retarded. They list Tampa-St. Pete as the most overextended market, with not enough personal income to support its sports team. They also happen to list Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice as a market with some of the most available personal income for a new sports team, with a surplus of $55.5 billion annually. That's just one gem. There are tons more in there. As someone who lives in that region, Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice should not be part of Tampa Bay. Geographically they are close, but travel times and income-producing jobs are mostly within the counties in each market. Most Sarasotans do not work in Tampa. ...Bradenton. next. oh, and their LA market is a good 100 miles long.
February 23, 200620 yr I am getting tired of reading this guys sutff. I mean both Charlotte and Norfolk are much better options then this guy says. To say that the Norfolk area cant support a team is down right retarded as the area is loaded, also with Charlotte he is saying that MLB will be lower then the Nba and stuff, well mlb in charlotte would be just as big as the NFL is there
February 23, 200620 yr Don't underestimate Norfolk/Va Bch or Orlando in this process. Dirt has spoken.
February 23, 200620 yr if i have to block the marlins moving van like that man blocked the tank in tienemen square then consider it done...not having a baseball team in south florida is just retarded and eventually the light bulb will go off
February 23, 200620 yr Not having a team in 1958 New York or 1972 Washington is stupid as well, but let's face it, this market's not as great as advertised and the lease severely limits the Marlins owners from being a real major league club. Being secure and profitable in a small to mid-sized market is a lot better than butting your head against the wall and leaking cash in an above-average market.
February 23, 200620 yr Author Marlins will not lose money this year, if they lost it in any of the previous years. This year they will be printing money because they will be swimming in it.
February 23, 200620 yr Author If they cannot get the deal done here, and they cannot get one done anywhere else, they will stay.
February 24, 200620 yr Of course, because there's more certainty here than some new market. In South Florida, they know the market enough, know their revenues and expenses and how to manage for the present. South Florida knows they might lose the team someday if another market shows up so they should act toward a new stadium. The Marlins know little to nothing about the new market, although a huge part of their meetings is not just to receive offers or take any step towards a move, it's to scout out the market and available sites. They don't know what changes they would need to make or not to their organization to stay in the black. Additionally, as witnessed by the DC affair, you run the risk of allowing the new home forgetting its temporary position and the debt they owe to permanently host the team. A major part of that, of course, is finding support to improve the temporary stadium and build a brand new one. Not that we should be rooting for that to happen. I imagine ALL of us are rooting for the Marlins to get a new stadium in South Florida. However as a second choice, unless you don't give a crap about the level of baseball you see, the security of your club or market and the prospective success of baseball in South Florida [with the Marlins or expansion club], you should be wishing for the Marlins to move on before committing themselves and you into decades of mediocrity and the continued threat of relocation. As we've all said before, Miami's a solid if not great market under the right circumstances. But these are not the right circumstances. They regularly produce the lowest amount of revenue in the league according to Forbes and MLB. Without any change, there's absolutly no point to anyone to keeping them around. It's leeching money from the rest of MLB. It's not a profitable venture for any prospective owner or investor. While that wide-eyed 8-year old might enjoy watching a live MLB game a bit more than Spring Training, can you really enjoy those games knowing that your team is an unfair position and that there is a serious prospect that they may not be your team any more? No.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.