I don't think baseball needs two more cities, but I think they are running out of reasons not to put a team in Las Vegas. I would not be surprised if New Jersey were to legalize sports gambling so A.C. could better compete with Vegas. What would MLB do? N.J. does not have any MLB teams in their borders and would MLB really take away the Yankees, Mets, AND Phillies to punish NJ? Don't make me laugh!
The real reason for MLB to worry about putting a team in Vegas is this. Nevada would have to build an air-conditioned dome before MLB could play there, and it's too hot to play baseball at an interim ballfield like a minor league park. So it would be the same deal with Arizona, and you know they would write an iron-clad lease that would keep baseball there for at least 40-50 years. Which means that if Nevada turns out to be like Florida---too many transients have loyalties to out-of-town teams to root for an LV team---MLB won't be able to get out once they found out they made a mistake.
I think Vancouver could support a team if Van City isn't considered too close to Seattle and there are enough fans in the area to support two teams. Don't see Montreal getting a team unless there is local committment to building a new stadium.
Until Canada becomes part of US (and it will happen) no chance of another team watching dollars vanishes into paperwork.
I did consider Nashville; however, not the kind of place that seems to be able to support 81 games a year, like Jacksonville, FL - just plain low-budget place for a majority of the population, like Tampa - a lot of big money and a lot of no money and nothing in the middle (bush's dream!). Charlotte may have seen their best days come and go; but, other than San Antonio (does anyone really want ANOTHER team in that foreign country?) Charlotte looks to be ahead of Memphis.
As baseball moves closer to the Monopoly plan the NFL uses (to make A LOT of money) 32 teams is destiny, watered-down is irrelevant, like playing in 30 degree weather.
you obviously know little about Nashville or memphis Memphis is the economically depressed NOT nashville
It doesn't matter because ther eis no expansionon the horizon
For the first 60 years of orgainized ML baseball there was no expansion then it about doubled ove rthe next 30-35 years . Now it will settle in with no expansion for a looooong time
To pacify toad Angelos, who opposed the move to Washington, Selig gave him our TV rights. Angelos founded MASN. The Nationals will never own more than 33% of their TV rights. Angelos and MLB own the rest. Some of us cannot forgive or forget this sellout._____
Let's go Nationals!
"I'm sorry, I missed the memo. Why do we hate MASN?"
"To pacify toad Angelos, who opposed the move to Washington, Selig gave him our TV rights. Angelos founded MASN. The Nationals will never own more than 33% of their TV rights. Angelos and MLB own the rest. Some of us cannot forgive or forget this sellout." ....
....That.... and in addition, a single network for two teams, where the fans of the two teams dislike one another intensely, is a flawed concept. Every time I hear an advertisement that treats the Nationals and Orioles as a single entity I want to puke.
And I am occasionally someplace where the cable system has only MASN1 and not MASN2 - for example at the gym, when I want to run on a treadmill and watch the game - and the Nats and Os are playing at the same time; usually they are showing the Os on MASN1 and I can't see the Nats game.
To be clear, I don't have a problem with MASN's coverage of the Nats, when they are covering the Nats.
"The Nats are treated like second-class citizens (behind the Orioles) "
I wanted to say that too, because it certainly feels that the Os get better treatment. I didn't say it because I haven't done or seen any research to back that up, but yes it certainly does feel that way.
There is NO valid reason to hate MASN if mlb doesn't make a deal with Angelos there are 29 teams and no team here
MASN does a good job with Nats broadcasts I have never missed a game I wanted to see
If they weren't whinning about MASN they would find something else
OK, thanks for the info. I did a search for Peter Angelos and Nationals and came up with this history, of which I was totally unaware. Wow, what a toad that guy is. Very enlightening.
On a side note, my sister and her husband had season tickets to the Orioles for years and years...I wasn't aware until last year that they had stopped even going to games quite some time ago. It took a lot for them to give up their fandom.
Now if someone can just explain why this board is largely populated by good-looking women in very flattering attire....
"There is NO valid reason to hate MASN"
I didn't say I hate MASN, I don't. What I hate is the Orioles organization. The reason I hate it (among other reasons, primarily that they kept baseball out of DC for 30+ years) is their meddling in our business. It just so happens that MASN is the embodiment of their meddling.
Oh like DC kept football out of Baltimore
now I see the logic
if they didn't cut the deal with Angelos we would still be basebell-less
cost of doing business
The Redskins are notthe Dc team
You can rationalize anything
>>if they didn't cut the deal with Angelos we would still be basebell-less<<_____
That's just wrong, Rich. There is no way that the other owners would scuttle a deal just for him and there was no way there's contraction. There was nowhere else viable for the espos to go. Selig wanted a complete consensus and sold us out._____
"If they weren't whinning about MASN they would find something else"
That's funny...coming from ther biggest whiner on the board.
I can't believe you're defending MASN.
"You can rationalize anything"
You probably think of the Giants as a New York team.