Toggle sidebar

Oakland A's and Tampa Bay Rays Potential Relocation Thread

Will the A's/Rays have to relocate?

  • Total voters
    141
KevFu

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,184
3,413
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
Mightygoose said:
From what I recall under this mayor's term, they did negotiate a buyout that was valid for 3 years as long but could look only in Pinellas and Hillsborough Counties.

It was during that time the Ybor City plan came about but couldn't reach a funding agreement. As it was not going to be in St. Petes, Kresiman had no incentive to extend it. Hence this saga is going nowhere until after this fall's election
Click to expand...

You are a wise man. The Rays can't get anything done because their lease extends beyond the terms of the current politicians. So there's no reason for the politicians to cave and do whatever it takes to keep the Rays, it won't be their fault politically if they're not in office. So they are going to strong-arm the team with "the taxpayers shouldn't buy a stadium for a $2 billion business to make money in" ...

... until they are re-elected, then it's "We want to work together to keep the team here where they belong. We're hopeful they'll be reasonable and we can make a deal that makes sense for the taxpayers." And then it will be "We did it!" OR "The rich billionaire owners wanted too much."

There's a reason the Rays are making noise about moving NOW, and that's to set the tone for the election because they want the candidate most likely to pony up to win.


Cacciaguida said:
If the As relocate what are the chances of the Oaks making a return?
Click to expand...

Zero. Unless you mean a minor league team, but they'd need a stadium, too.

(BTW, it astounds me that municipalities and teams don't make long-term plans to seize more long-term certainty out of the situation. Like the San Francisco Giants, Oakland A's, San Jose Giants and Sacramento RiverCats are all pro baseball teams in Top 40 metro areas. If those cities basically worked together and made a rotation so that the two MLB teams had a state of the art brand new stadium every 25 years in one of the four cities, and the two minor league team played years 26-50 in the last built MLB parks, then each city has to build a stadium once every 50 years instead of 30, and no one has to build a minor league stadium ever, and both minor league teams would be guaranteed Triple A status forever and the four owners are extremely happy and the taxpayers have the same tab for eternity, and everyone is an hour drive from MLB team and at worst has a Triple A team. I feel the same way about the Phoenix metro area.)
 
KevFu

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,184
3,413
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
oknazevad said:
So apparently some form of Ybor City ballpark is back on the table:

It’s back: Rays revive Ybor City ballpark plan

though it needs to be mentioned that this is in conjunction with the idea of a split season with Montreal. Which will never happen as the Players Association will never go for it.
Click to expand...

So a political ploy of "Why would we do this without a guarantee the Rays are HERE, in the Tampa Bay - St. Petersburg market full time? / Okay, build and we'll be here full time."

And once that happens, Montreal loses the relocation possibility, and their government is told "Build this stadium and we get Expos 2.0, don't and MLB will expand to Nashville and Portland."

MLB has two expansion teams to award, two teams looking at relocation, and five cities saying they're not going to commit until they have to. And with 4 teams to get and two cities not moving, two medium to small markets seeming not totally serious, and Montreal not seeming totally serious, all five governments feel they can win musical chairs.


Oakland is the Lynch Pin. They can threaten Vegas (doubt that happens, but the money in that city makes it real, and it also scares the Oakland politicians to cave because the Warriors have moved to SF, and the Raiders moved to Vegas and ANOTHER team moving to Vegas?)

If the A's get a deal in Oakland or the Bay Area, or Vegas.... The dominoes fall into place and MLB teams and league have the power.

Portland looks at EIGHT West Coast cities, for a 32-team league and they HAVE to act.
Tampa, Montreal, Nashville look at the landscape and see FOUR cities for three teams and Portland getting serious and THEY go from wait it out to we might miss out and get it in gear.
 
LadyStanley

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,473
19,513
Sin City
A’s brass set for 3rd Las Vegas visit as Oakland ballpark vote looms

Paywall
A's management and ownership to visit Las Vegas a third time this week. Will talk to elected officials and casino operators/companies; and look at potential sites (again). In resort corridor, they'd just be building stadium (as the amenities can come from adjacent/nearby resorts). But in other areas, they'd be building up infrastructure (restaurants, bars, housing, etc.) as other stadiums have done. Would also tap into the "entertainment" experience to hype team/players more.

And the pressure is on Oakland in advance of city vote July 20.
On Friday [7/2], Oakland officials released an updated counteroffer that included some changes that make the deal more appealing to the city. Many of the items included in the report are noted to be agreed upon by the A’s, but there are a few items the two sides still aren’t in agreement on.

One of those additions was a request that the A’s sign a non-relocation agreement for at least 45 years, with the A’s agreeing to only a 20-year term, according to the report. Additionally, the city added a clause calling for the team to pay for liquidated damages if it ends up relocating before the agreed period of time is up.

“There’s still some pretty big gaps that we’re dealing with, that we’re still having conversations with the city in advance of the big vote on the 20th,” Kaval said. “We’re hoping to take a positive vote on our actual term sheet, or one that’s a very close derivative. … So, I think we’re just hopeful we can get to something and at the end of the day we just need to come to a decision.”
Click to expand...

45 year non-relocate agreement vs 20. Big difference.
 
Last edited:
KevFu

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,184
3,413
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
I'm hopeful that Oakland blinks.

MLB really wants and needs the A's to be in Oakland in a new stadium.

There's way too much money in the Bay Area to leave it all to the Giants. MLB nixed the sale of the Giants to Tampa in the 1990s for the same reason.


And if MLB couldn't get the Giants to allow the A's to move to San Jose because of a mistyped translation of documents, there's no chance a second team moves into the Bay Area if the A's leave.
 

Big Z Man 1990

Registered User
Jun 4, 2011
2,566
367
Don't say anything at all
If the Lightning win the Stanley Cup it will further increase the opposition in Montreal to sharing the Rays with Tampa Bay, especially given the Lightning and Habs are usually division rivals.

Here's hoping for a miracle. The first comeback from 3-0 down to win the Finals in decades.
 
Bjorn Le

Bjorn Le

Hobocop
May 17, 2010
19,592
609
Martinaise, Revachol
Big Z Man 1990 said:
If the Lightning win the Stanley Cup it will further increase the opposition in Montreal to sharing the Rays with Tampa Bay, especially given the Lightning and Habs are usually division rivals.

Here's hoping for a miracle. The first comeback from 3-0 down to win the Finals in decades.
Click to expand...
I don't see how that changes anything. The sharing plan isn't actually serious, it's just a last ditch attempt to get a stadium built for the Rays while showing municipal officials the Rays are serious about Montreal. Politics in Montreal isn't the problem, given both the city and province are broadly supportive; Legault has outright said he supports committing public money to a stadium even though the Bronfman group says they can built the stadium with no public funds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oknazevad

oknazevad

Registered User
Dec 12, 2018
470
330
KevFu said:
I'm hopeful that Oakland blinks.

MLB really wants and needs the A's to be in Oakland in a new stadium.

There's way too much money in the Bay Area to leave it all to the Giants. MLB nixed the sale of the Giants to Tampa in the 1990s for the same reason.


And if MLB couldn't get the Giants to allow the A's to move to San Jose because of a mistyped translation of documents, there's no chance a second team moves into the Bay Area if the A's leave.
Click to expand...
I seriously doubt that anyone at MLB is thinking in those terms in 2021. It's not 1990 anymore, and the AL/NL rivalry that motivated the block doesn't exist anymore. None of the other major pro sports leagues have an issue with only one Bay Area team, and I don't think MLB does either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: generalshepherd141

oknazevad

Registered User
Dec 12, 2018
470
330
Bjorn Le said:
I don't see how that changes anything. The sharing plan isn't actually serious, it's just a last ditch attempt to get a stadium built for the Rays while showing municipal officials the Rays are serious about Montreal. Politics in Montreal isn't the problem, given both the city and province are broadly supportive; Legault has outright said he supports committing public money to a stadium even though the Bronfman group says they can built the stadium with no public funds.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the supposed sharing plan will never happen. The Players Association has already said they'll never go for it. It's just pressure to get some sort of deal done in the Tampa Bay area. Most likely in Tampa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: generalshepherd141
KevFu

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,184
3,413
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
oknazevad said:
I seriously doubt that anyone at MLB is thinking in those terms in 2021. It's not 1990 anymore, and the AL/NL rivalry that motivated the block doesn't exist anymore. None of the other major pro sports leagues have an issue with only one Bay Area team, and I don't think MLB does either.
Click to expand...

The issue is that once the A's leave, the Giants have the rights to anyone moving in, which makes the cost of moving in too exorbitant for anyone to actually put a new team there again.

It's not about an AL/NL rivalry, it's about money. Specifically TV money.

The Bay Area CSA is the #5 CSA in the US with 9.6 million people at last estimate, and growing while #4 is shrinking. The Sacramento market is #23 CSA, and Fresno is #45. The northern half of California would give the Giants a TV market size that's double any single-team market in baseball at about 15 million people.

No one in baseball wants the A's to leave the the Bay Area, but if they can't get a new stadium in the Bay Area, they have no choice.

The other leagues don't have a problem with a single team? The NBA has two teams in that territory: Golden State and Sacramento. The NFL (a) doesn't have local TV deals, so it's less of a concern, but (b) fought in court with Al Davis to prevent the Raiders from moving the first time, and winning that lawsuit is what lets them leave the second time. Yeah, the NHL doesn't care, but the Sharks don't have a massive TV deal compared to everyone else.


The Giants -- who won 3 of the last 11 World Series and are in first with a team of dumpster diving guys now -- are the 5th most valuable franchise in baseball NOW, and they're going to have their competition leave, essentially doubling their TV territory.
 

oknazevad

Registered User
Dec 12, 2018
470
330
Sacramento is not the Bay Area, it's a separate market. And the NFL owners ha e direct permission for the Raiders to move to Vegas, no lawsuit needed. They had no problems with leaving the Bay Area to the Niners. Considering how much of an afterthought the A's already are in the market (surveying behind the Giants across the whole area, even in the East Bay), they're already considered wasted potential.
 
KevFu

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,184
3,413
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
oknazevad said:
Sacramento is not the Bay Area, it's a separate market. And the NFL owners ha e direct permission for the Raiders to move to Vegas, no lawsuit needed. They had no problems with leaving the Bay Area to the Niners. Considering how much of an afterthought the A's already are in the market (surveying behind the Giants across the whole area, even in the East Bay), they're already considered wasted potential.
Click to expand...

1. The team's TV territory is what matters to their TV deal. Not the "DMA" or "Metro Area." Sacramento is a different market for network affiliates; but the RSN is on in their entire TV territory. And that's what sets the price of the TV contract.

2. The Raiders could move to Vegas because they ALREADY WON the court case vs the NFL to move from Oakland to Los Angeles 35 years ago establishing the precedent.
3. The NFL is moot anyway because the Niners don't sell a TV contract to RSNs, the NFL is national TV rights only.

4. The A's being an afterthought NOW doesn't matter at all. Sports are cyclical. The fandom of two-team markets trends by fan age. The Mets and A's fanbases have the same spikes upward at the same time. The A's fanbase is smaller than the Giants only because the Giants just won 3 world series not too long ago, have a gorgeous "new" stadium that isn't that new anymore, and the A's are still playing in the same dump they've always played in. The A's LOOK like an afterthought, but their fans are sitting at home watching on TV because no one wants to go to that dump very often. The A's have been a good team more often than not. Put them in a brand new Oakland ballpark, and the place would be packed.

5. Fans are actually the least important part of the equation. The Giants revenue will increase drastically if the A's move, because every business with a suite or advertising for Oakland baseball for the summer is going to have to go to the Giants, so demand will go up and the Giants will be able to charge more.
 
PCSPounder

PCSPounder

Stadium Groupie
Apr 12, 2012
2,876
574
The Outskirts of Nutria Nanny
(1) Oakland’s RSN contract, from what I’ve seen, is only 75% of the Giants’ contract value. And the A’s are likely overvalued with it. YET… it’s still more than they’d pull in Vegas or Portland.

(2) If you think A’s fans automatically become Giants fans [SUDDEN OUTBURSTS OF MANIACAL LAUGHTER]…

(3) What goes up must come down. The price of land already limits disposable income. California actually lost population… if you believe the census, and I have reasons not to, but the stories of large numbers of people moving to less expensive locales while WFH just since the pandemic started are legion. So there’s money leaving the state.

I really don’t think the A’s have anywhere to go. But I don’t think the effects of the A’s leaving are that drastic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom