Markets that could support multiple teams in the same league

MMC

Global Moderator
May 11, 2014
47,802
38,361
Orange County, CA
Are there any markets that could support 2 teams in the NFL, MLB, NHL, or NBA like LA and NY do? (and Chicago and the Bay Area for baseball). Could any of these markets with 2 support a 3rd team in any of these leagues?
 
Last edited:

HisIceness

This is Hurricanes Hockey
Sep 16, 2010
40,108
70,026
Charlotte
Are there any markets that could support 2 teams in the NFL, MLB, NHL, or NBA like LA and NY do?

The next "in line" in this case would be Dallas/Fort Worth, and two of their teams play in Arlington which is more or less halfway between the two larger cities. I suppose you could make a case for an NBA team in Fort Worth but it's a longshot and the league would not approve anyways. You know Mark Cuban would have a fit and rightfully so.

So no, I think Chicago is the "line" here.

Edit: D'oh, forgot about the Bay Area.

Could any of these markets with 2 support a 3rd team in any of these leagues?

Well the Maloof brothers tried relocating the Kings to Anaheim in 2011 but ultimately were more interested in Seattle a few years later.

But to answer your question here, maybe. I'm sure Chicago for instance could support another franchise in the NFL/NBA/NHL but I'm sure the owners involved would not like it. I wouldn't be surprised if secretly some of the NHL owners would rather one of the Devils or Islanders leave for another market, even though that won't happen.
 
Last edited:

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,089
727
Chicago Could support a second NFL team. The bay area is big enough to support a second nhl team as well as the sharks.
 

IU Hawks fan

They call me IU
Dec 30, 2008
28,516
2,813
NW Burbs
Chicago could easily support a 2nd football team. Shame the Cardinals ever left, but the NFL was very different then.

Philly could still be supporting the A's and Phillies had they played in different areas. Since they shared a neighborhood and then the same park they never developed a division. Dropping an AL team in today wouldn't work.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Centrum Hockey

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,400
2,742
Btw baseball has anti-trust exemption. It only takes 1 team saying no and the whole thing is dead. Oakland a's wanted to move to SJ but the gaints said hell no. Courts says it requires congress to get rid of the anti-trust trust exemption when it wasn't even legal to begin with. It was the courts that gave MLB anti-trust exemption to begin with.
 

MMC

Global Moderator
May 11, 2014
47,802
38,361
Orange County, CA
The next "in line" in this case would be Dallas/Fort Worth, and two of their teams play in Arlington which is more or less halfway between the two larger cities. I suppose you could make a case for an NBA team in Fort Worth but it's a longshot and the league would not approve anyways. You know Mark Cuban would have a fit and rightfully so.

So no, I think Chicago is the "line" here.

Edit: D'oh, forgot about the Bay Area.



Well the Maloof brothers tried relocating the Kings to Anaheim in 2011 but ultimately were more interested in Seattle a few years later.

But to answer your question here, maybe. I'm sure Chicago for instance could support another franchise in the NFL/NBA/NHL but I'm sure the owners involved would not like it. I wouldn't be surprised if secretly some of the NHL owners would rather one of the Devils or Islanders leave for another market, even though that won't happen.
Forgot about the Bay Area also with 2 baseball teams, added them to the OP
 

MMC

Global Moderator
May 11, 2014
47,802
38,361
Orange County, CA
Chicago Could support a second NFL team. The bay area is big enough to support a second nhl team as well as the sharks.

Chicago could easily support a 2nd football team. Shame the Cardinals ever left, but the NFL was very different then.

Philly could still be supporting the A's and Phillies had they played in different areas. Since they shared a neighborhood and then the same park they never developed a division. Dropping an AL team in today wouldn't work.
Never thought about this but I suppose it makes sense. Wonder if it could be an emergency relocation spot, or if they'd need to have their own stadium instead of sharing Soldier Field with the Bears.
 

IU Hawks fan

They call me IU
Dec 30, 2008
28,516
2,813
NW Burbs
Never thought about this but I suppose it makes sense. Wonder if it could be an emergency relocation spot, or if they'd need to have their own stadium instead of sharing Soldier Field with the Bears.

It will never actually happen, but most here think it's viable. Sharing wouldn't be a problem, 2 other teams do it and Soldier Field is city property.

Essentially, the argument for it is you have the 3rd biggest market in the country and they play in the smallest stadium in the league. This leads to ticket prices being crazy inflated, even when the team is bad, since season ticket holders account for something like 70% of capacity and they'd rather go then eat money selling at a discount.

While the Bears are certainly ingrained as the main team here, you have enough people who
A) don't like them, whether they are transplants or folks from here who just never have
B) would remain Bears fans but be fine rooting for an AFC team
C) Just want to see live football and don't want to pay Bears prices

It's basically the same argument as putting a 2nd NHL team in Toronto, it's a football crazed market and most people are priced out.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
Btw baseball has anti-trust exemption. It only takes 1 team saying no and the whole thing is dead. Oakland a's wanted to move to SJ but the gaints said hell no. Courts says it requires congress to get rid of the anti-trust trust exemption when it wasn't even legal to begin with. It was the courts that gave MLB anti-trust exemption to begin with.

That whole debacle could be a 30 for 30. The Giants only have exclusive rights due to a cocktail napkin deal and a clerical error...

1989 - Giants want a new stadium and can't find a location in SF, eye San Jose. Bay Area earthquake hits. California was passing a earthquake rebuild financing plan. Giants tried to get a new stadium out of it, but they needed MLB approval for San Jose before the government deadline.

MLB was only really only a "working agreement" between AL/NL: If a team wants to move into a market, it needs to be approved by two-thirds majority of the OTHER LEAGUE so there weren't AL/NL turf wars. San Jose wasn't in the Giants designated area. The MLB commissioner had JUST died, so the Giants got the A's permission so they didn't have to do a full vote.

The San Jose deal fell apart, the Giants were sold to Tampa in 1992, but NL owners nixed the sale; new owner was found, they ended up building the new stadium downtown.

1999 - The NL and AL are operationally consolidated into MLB. They took the two league constitutions and the working agreement and combined them. That process changed the meaning of "The Giants have permission to put their stadium San Jose; but no THIRD team can move into Santa Clara county" to "no one but the Giants can be in Santa Clara county."

Both SF/OAK had new owners when Oakland wanted to go to San Jose. The Giants new owner said the league constitution gave them exclusive rights to San Jose, and Oakland ratified those documents multiple times as part of CBAs. Everyone knew it was "wrong" but there was no legal grounds to undo the clerical error.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CHRDANHUTCH

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
Huge difference between "Could support" and "can happen."

The Bay Area is number one with a bullet. Looking at MSAs, the Bay Area doesn't look THAT BIG compared to other markets. But there's really five MSAs, 3 CSAs, and other areas that are highly populated.

If you take that into consideration, it becomes both obvious that the area is underserved compared to other "Big Four" markets AND has the greatest possibility of adding teams actually happening.

If you weighted that by financial support needed for each franchise (supporting an MLS team is cheaper than an NFL/MLB team), here's some of the "big four/five" markets by "millions of people per weighted franchise..."

Phoenix: 1.11 (no MLS)
Philly: 1.03
Boston: 1.01
Seattle: 0.84
Minn: 0.76
Denver: 0.63

The Bay Area would be at 1.71

And with a 75-mile radius rule in NBA, and 50 miles in the other leagues, you'd need the Warriors permission to add one team, but could add 3 others without infringing on territorial rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CHRDANHUTCH

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->