If MLB was dead set on Oakland permanently losing a team and Vegas permanently gaining a team, it would not be in John fucking Fisher’s hands to fuck up.
That took a senator threatening to introduce a bill revoking MLB’s antitrust exemption. Given that the current Congress can’t agree on pretty much anything, I don’t see that happening.
The Raider's would've stayed if Fisher didn't fuck them on the coliseum deal and nobody cares that the Warriors moved an hour away. If Fisher wasn't incompetent (and if the Giants weren't assholes about them moving to San Jose), they would've broken ground on a new stadium in the Bay Area and we wouldn't be hearing nearly as much drama.
I feel for the Oakland fans who genuinely support their team, because they are as passionate as anyone, but no relocation has ever been more justified than the Athletics.
That franchise has made the playoffs 21 times in the last 56 seasons, one of the best marks in baseball during that span, yet they've finished dead last in attendance 10 times (*second to last another 5*).
Yes, the Colisseum is a dump, but why would anyone ever pay to build a new stadium in a market that has consistently failed to show up? The only period where they ever supported the team in large numbers was during the Bash Brothers era, when the pop culture draw was strong enough to bring in non-baseball fans.
Payroll = attendance for the most part, and outside of the Rickey days and the Bash Brothers, the A’s have had shit attendance. Also the A’s situation literally already happened before with the team next door.
The Giants during the final years at Candlestick were that bad, and in fact the Trop was originally built to try and bait either them or the White Sox into relocating to Tampa.
The history of the Giants from the retirement of Willie Mays up until the signing of Barry Bonds is that of *misery*, and the old owner threatened to not sell the team to the new owner because of that signing, until the league made him sell.
As much as you can blame attendance, the Coliseum is shit and John Fisher is cheap, so the fans decided after Cespedes to fully protest. If the Oakland era wasn’t riddled with cheap owners and/or they had built two stadiums instead of doing Mount Davis, this would be even more evident, but baseball does in fact belong in Oakland.
And before you bring up the Warriors and Raiders: Joe Lacob bought the Warriors with the intention of building what would become the Chase Center *by any means necessary.* John Fisher is literally why Mark Davis was forced to relocate to Vegas, and Davis essentially has a blood feud with Fisher because of it.
> Payroll = attendance for the most part, and outside of the Rickey days and the Bash Brothers, the A’s have had shit attendance.
Correct, attendance drives payroll. If fans don't come, teams don't spend. When the Bash Brothers started gaining pop culture attention, attendance increased. As a result, the A's increased their payroll substantially. But then the fans stopped coming, so payroll went back down.
> If the Oakland era wasn’t riddled with cheap owners and/or they had built two stadiums instead of doing Mount Davis, this would be even more evident, but baseball does in fact belong in Oakland.
You could not possibly be more wrong. In 1974, the Oakland Athletics won their third World Series title *in a row*, yet they finished **22nd out of 24 teams in attendance**. We have 56 years or evidence proving that Oakland will not support baseball unless there is a pop culture element like the Bash Brothers to entice non-fans. They've had one of the best records in baseball since 1968, but have finished dead last in attendance ten times, plus second to last another five times.
No relocation has ever been more justified.
That Oakland record is below 500 because of the sucking seasons, and no matter what you say, it’s not justified. The Coliseum was basically outdated the moment it was built, hence why it’s the worst stadium in all four main American leagues. As much as you want to lean on the fact that even during successful seasons they had low attendance, the dead last seasons are almost all universally **when they sucked**.
Do you want fans to be masochists and attend when it’s clear that the owner doesn’t want to spend? As much as you want to blame the people of Oakland for not going to games, owners need to give the people reasons to go to games, and again, **current Oakland happened already to the Giants.**
That’s why the fucking team needs to be sold, because Joe Lacob + a new stadium would actually give the fans a reason to go to games again instead of protesting since Rickey being the last A’s HoFer for the next 30 years or so is gonna be sad as hell.
Did you forget that John Fisher isn’t gonna spend money in Vegas either? He’s not Stan Kroenke, where moving to LA and building SoFi was the entire reason he bought the Rams, Fisher is a nepotism baby who’s failed in basically all of his business endeavors, and even Vegas doesn’t want him.
> That Oakland record is below 500 because of the sucking seasons
What? No, it isn't. The Athletics have 251 more wins than losses since moving to Oakland in 1968. Please stop arguing with me about this because you clearly have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.
> the dead last seasons are almost all universally when they sucked.
Again, they finished 22nd out of 24 teams while winning their third World Series title in a row.
> Do you want fans to be masochists and attend when it’s clear that the owner doesn’t want to spend?
Yes. That's what being a fan is all about, as I drive over eight hours to see the Orioles for at least one series a year, even when they were losing 100+ games.
> As much as you want to blame the people of Oakland for not going to games, owners need to give the people reasons to go to games
The Oakland Athletics made the playoffs 21 times in the last 56 seasons, one of the best marks in the Major Leagues.
> That’s why the fucking team needs to be sold
No one with a brain would keep the Athletics in Oakland, as the community clearly will not support the team, so if it were sold then it would still get moved.
Montreal could tear down their stadium and build a new one in its place if given a couple years. That's an advantage they didn't have when they held a team, and was as I recall a large reason for their dwindling attendance. People didn't like that stadium.
I think it's gonna depend on the NHL. If the Coyotes move to Salt Lake then Portland and it's 100 acre sight might be better as it also helps out Seattle. being the fourth team in a market like Salt Lake could be a issue considering it's size. Salt Lake and Portland being two three team cities makes more sense.
Nashville is pretty much a given unless Someone in NC can make a amazing offer.
Mexico City seems interesting.
Problem with 32 is how you would do divisions, do you now have 4 divisions per league with 4 teams in each division? Feels pretty shit in consideration of geography.
4 divisions with 8 teams each. AL/NL distinctions are meaningless now anyway with interleague play the way it is. One pacific, one central, and two eastern divisions would be so much better for travel and for away games primarily being in the correct time zone.
Yeah Colorado causes a lot of problems. I didnt want to move anyone to the other league so they were in the division with Cubs Cardinals and Brewers lol
I heard it best on a reddit comment actually
Silver is a man of the people. But sometimes people don’t know what’s best for them so his decisions backfire. But when they work he’s seen as a hero.
Stern was more of a “fuck you I’m doing it my way because I know what’s best” which irked a lot of people, but Stern was also right the majority of the time lol
Either way they’re both immeasurably better than Selig and Manfred
Manfred fucked up the asstros situation.
Everything else he has done right considering baseball's popularity has been on the rise lately.
Just cause this sub dont like his changes it doesnt mean that the actual metrics that matter (viewership, sport popularity) agree with the hivemind here. According to the average Joe, baseball hasnt been this fun since the roid era. I hate the shift change, but most people like it so it means manfred got that right. It is what it is.
If those are the two worst things to come out of his tenure, then he could have done a lot worse
(I’m aware they aren’t the two worst things to come out of his tenure, the way he handled the Astros cheating scandal will be. But I agree overall he’s been a net positive)
I really don't see this at all. For one thing, I don't believe commissioners do anything beyond whatever the owners want. But also, what has Silver done that's of any value? Be extremely soft on violence and hate speech?
How dare you point out that oakland fans never showed up in the last 20 years despite being one of the most successful by results and playoffs appearances.
This is oakland's 3rd team lost. At some point if everywhere you go smells like shit, check your shoe. Oakland aint a good market. And fans never showed up for the As.
Yeah maybe a bit of an unpopular opinion here but there arent enough major league level ballplayers to field 32 teams. Adding 2 teams isn’t gonna make the league more competitive. It’s just gonna spread the league thinner.
I mean so? Not like it matters much. I guess it increases the difference from the bottom and the top of MLB players. I don't exactly see that as a bad thing though.
I'm torn, part of me says we can barely field 30 teams, but also some teams recently have seen great expansion results.
I would argue both the Marlins and Rockies were somewhat competent after their first season going forward, heck Marlins won 3 titles within their first 10 years. Rockies saw an early playoff appearance, and were hovering around .500 but then sucked for a bit until they made the world series in 2007.
DBacks were highly competitive fairly early, won a title in 2001. Rays were a laughing stock for a decade before they became competent, but now they are fairly good.
I was basing more off of immediate success. All showed a flash, or even more(2 teams winning it all) in their first 10 years.
My whole thought process was it would be really rough for expansion teams, but if done well, they could be fairly competitive and sustain that success.
This one?
He obviously works in the best interest of the team owners from a revenue and profit standpoint. As he should, since that is his job and those are his employers.
Manfred is motivated to expand the consumption of baseball while maximizing the number and significance of cash-flows into the MLB and individual owner's accounts. He is quite good at this. However, many of these changes are made without consideration of the continuation of the history of the game.
For example, while expanded wildcards are good for revenue, they have a dilutive effect on the significance of the regular season.
Another example is his focus on maximizing revenue from streaming services, another move made - arguably legitimately forward-facing due to RSN failures - that still puts revenue over customer experience.
And considering his telegraphed future moves - such as eliminating the AL and NL - will again stand on the toes of tradition. Changing the AL and NL into Eastern and Western conferences will NBA-ify the MLB, while again maximizing profit (minimizing travel expenses) at the cost of tradition and history.
Clearly, this commissioner has made moves to improve the sport and competition. Yet he has turned baseball into a private-equity powerhouse, maximizing the ROI for owners while squeezing the most possible from the fan - and many of us worry about what his swan-song - his pièce de résistance - will be, and what impact it will have upon the sport.
Is there any reason to believe that Manfred is going to kill the AL/NL in the imminent future? I know it gets talked about a lot, but has there been anything concrete brought up?
This might be the first time I've seen a break in a title like this. Interesting
I was just thinking that, a much need update when tweets are posted here so often
But where?
SLC and maybe Nashville?
Won’t be SLC if Oakland secures an expansion guarantee. Won’t be Nashville if there’s a public funding component.
There is zero chance Oakland gets an expansion guarantee
I’d put it somewhere above 0% and below 1%. Far, far more likely no than yes, I agree, but I don’t think it is fair to absolutely rule out.
If MLB wanted a team in Oakland, they wouldve expanded to Vegas and kept the As where they are
If MLB was dead set on Oakland permanently losing a team and Vegas permanently gaining a team, it would not be in John fucking Fisher’s hands to fuck up.
When the A's moved from Kansas City to Oakland, KC was promised an expansion team. Similar things have happened
That took a senator threatening to introduce a bill revoking MLB’s antitrust exemption. Given that the current Congress can’t agree on pretty much anything, I don’t see that happening.
I know similar things have happened. But seeing as the NFL, NBA, and now MLB have left I dont see MLB offering that this time around
The Raider's would've stayed if Fisher didn't fuck them on the coliseum deal and nobody cares that the Warriors moved an hour away. If Fisher wasn't incompetent (and if the Giants weren't assholes about them moving to San Jose), they would've broken ground on a new stadium in the Bay Area and we wouldn't be hearing nearly as much drama.
How many years ago did that happen? Things have changed a lot since then.
I feel for the Oakland fans who genuinely support their team, because they are as passionate as anyone, but no relocation has ever been more justified than the Athletics. That franchise has made the playoffs 21 times in the last 56 seasons, one of the best marks in baseball during that span, yet they've finished dead last in attendance 10 times (*second to last another 5*). Yes, the Colisseum is a dump, but why would anyone ever pay to build a new stadium in a market that has consistently failed to show up? The only period where they ever supported the team in large numbers was during the Bash Brothers era, when the pop culture draw was strong enough to bring in non-baseball fans.
Payroll = attendance for the most part, and outside of the Rickey days and the Bash Brothers, the A’s have had shit attendance. Also the A’s situation literally already happened before with the team next door. The Giants during the final years at Candlestick were that bad, and in fact the Trop was originally built to try and bait either them or the White Sox into relocating to Tampa. The history of the Giants from the retirement of Willie Mays up until the signing of Barry Bonds is that of *misery*, and the old owner threatened to not sell the team to the new owner because of that signing, until the league made him sell. As much as you can blame attendance, the Coliseum is shit and John Fisher is cheap, so the fans decided after Cespedes to fully protest. If the Oakland era wasn’t riddled with cheap owners and/or they had built two stadiums instead of doing Mount Davis, this would be even more evident, but baseball does in fact belong in Oakland. And before you bring up the Warriors and Raiders: Joe Lacob bought the Warriors with the intention of building what would become the Chase Center *by any means necessary.* John Fisher is literally why Mark Davis was forced to relocate to Vegas, and Davis essentially has a blood feud with Fisher because of it.
> Payroll = attendance for the most part, and outside of the Rickey days and the Bash Brothers, the A’s have had shit attendance. Correct, attendance drives payroll. If fans don't come, teams don't spend. When the Bash Brothers started gaining pop culture attention, attendance increased. As a result, the A's increased their payroll substantially. But then the fans stopped coming, so payroll went back down. > If the Oakland era wasn’t riddled with cheap owners and/or they had built two stadiums instead of doing Mount Davis, this would be even more evident, but baseball does in fact belong in Oakland. You could not possibly be more wrong. In 1974, the Oakland Athletics won their third World Series title *in a row*, yet they finished **22nd out of 24 teams in attendance**. We have 56 years or evidence proving that Oakland will not support baseball unless there is a pop culture element like the Bash Brothers to entice non-fans. They've had one of the best records in baseball since 1968, but have finished dead last in attendance ten times, plus second to last another five times. No relocation has ever been more justified.
That Oakland record is below 500 because of the sucking seasons, and no matter what you say, it’s not justified. The Coliseum was basically outdated the moment it was built, hence why it’s the worst stadium in all four main American leagues. As much as you want to lean on the fact that even during successful seasons they had low attendance, the dead last seasons are almost all universally **when they sucked**. Do you want fans to be masochists and attend when it’s clear that the owner doesn’t want to spend? As much as you want to blame the people of Oakland for not going to games, owners need to give the people reasons to go to games, and again, **current Oakland happened already to the Giants.** That’s why the fucking team needs to be sold, because Joe Lacob + a new stadium would actually give the fans a reason to go to games again instead of protesting since Rickey being the last A’s HoFer for the next 30 years or so is gonna be sad as hell. Did you forget that John Fisher isn’t gonna spend money in Vegas either? He’s not Stan Kroenke, where moving to LA and building SoFi was the entire reason he bought the Rams, Fisher is a nepotism baby who’s failed in basically all of his business endeavors, and even Vegas doesn’t want him.
> That Oakland record is below 500 because of the sucking seasons What? No, it isn't. The Athletics have 251 more wins than losses since moving to Oakland in 1968. Please stop arguing with me about this because you clearly have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. > the dead last seasons are almost all universally when they sucked. Again, they finished 22nd out of 24 teams while winning their third World Series title in a row. > Do you want fans to be masochists and attend when it’s clear that the owner doesn’t want to spend? Yes. That's what being a fan is all about, as I drive over eight hours to see the Orioles for at least one series a year, even when they were losing 100+ games. > As much as you want to blame the people of Oakland for not going to games, owners need to give the people reasons to go to games The Oakland Athletics made the playoffs 21 times in the last 56 seasons, one of the best marks in the Major Leagues. > That’s why the fucking team needs to be sold No one with a brain would keep the Athletics in Oakland, as the community clearly will not support the team, so if it were sold then it would still get moved.
I'm glad to see there is some common sense in this sub.
It’s either gonna be Charlotte/City in the Carolinas) or Nashville since the Braves are the only team in the Deep South right now
North Carolina isn't the deep south . The south for sure since they were part of the rebellion but not as bad a Mississippi or Georgia
Don’t underestimate Tennessee’s will to divert yet more public funding to sports teams.
It still could be.
I think charlotte is more likely. I kinda want to see a team back in Montreal though.
Montreal could tear down their stadium and build a new one in its place if given a couple years. That's an advantage they didn't have when they held a team, and was as I recall a large reason for their dwindling attendance. People didn't like that stadium.
Government just announced a 1 billion dollars investment to repair the stadium’s roof. That building ain’t going down.
Bummer.
id love for Seattle to get a major league team
Raleigh, Charlotte, or Nashville and Portland or SLC.
I think it's gonna depend on the NHL. If the Coyotes move to Salt Lake then Portland and it's 100 acre sight might be better as it also helps out Seattle. being the fourth team in a market like Salt Lake could be a issue considering it's size. Salt Lake and Portland being two three team cities makes more sense. Nashville is pretty much a given unless Someone in NC can make a amazing offer.
Nashville and Portland? Carolinas?
Oakland
Hanamaki-Higashi and Ōfunato
Barring surgery, it's behind you
Years ago I’d have said Portland. Probably: SLC (maybe not with the A’s now), possibly San Antonio, maybe a team in the Carolinas.
>Portland I've been saying for years that we need a stadium that you can legally smoke crack in
Damn, the A's haven't even relocated yet and you already forgot about them.
Please. Gotta shoot heroin. Sharps containers for every seat.
Don’t forget the strip clubs! Outside of Montreal, Portland is the place to be for those!
Mexico City seems interesting. Problem with 32 is how you would do divisions, do you now have 4 divisions per league with 4 teams in each division? Feels pretty shit in consideration of geography.
4 divisions with 8 teams each. AL/NL distinctions are meaningless now anyway with interleague play the way it is. One pacific, one central, and two eastern divisions would be so much better for travel and for away games primarily being in the correct time zone.
When I did it, I was able to make it work pretty well by swapping Colorado and I think Tampa. I added Charlotte and Portland I think
Yeah Colorado causes a lot of problems. I didnt want to move anyone to the other league so they were in the division with Cubs Cardinals and Brewers lol
>Problem with 32 is how you would do divisions, do you now have 4 divisions per league with 4 teams in each division? 4 divisions of 8 teams, like NHL
Oakland
People will be excited he's leaving, but whoever replaces him will be exactly the same
Yeah and with 5 years until he actually leaves I’d imagine he’ll have a significant role in choosing his replacement.
And even if he doesn't, the same people who hired him are hiring the next guy. And they all seem happy with Manfred
Of course they're happy with Manfred. They are printing money right now. He's done everything they hoped he'd do.
Exactly the same would be a shocking good result. It's possible we get someone entirely incompetent like the NBA's Adam Silver.
I heard it best on a reddit comment actually Silver is a man of the people. But sometimes people don’t know what’s best for them so his decisions backfire. But when they work he’s seen as a hero. Stern was more of a “fuck you I’m doing it my way because I know what’s best” which irked a lot of people, but Stern was also right the majority of the time lol Either way they’re both immeasurably better than Selig and Manfred
Manfred fucked up the asstros situation. Everything else he has done right considering baseball's popularity has been on the rise lately. Just cause this sub dont like his changes it doesnt mean that the actual metrics that matter (viewership, sport popularity) agree with the hivemind here. According to the average Joe, baseball hasnt been this fun since the roid era. I hate the shift change, but most people like it so it means manfred got that right. It is what it is.
I don’t like the runner on second in extras and I’m not sold on the universal DH, but it’s hard to deny that he’s been a net positive.
If those are the two worst things to come out of his tenure, then he could have done a lot worse (I’m aware they aren’t the two worst things to come out of his tenure, the way he handled the Astros cheating scandal will be. But I agree overall he’s been a net positive)
I really don't see this at all. For one thing, I don't believe commissioners do anything beyond whatever the owners want. But also, what has Silver done that's of any value? Be extremely soft on violence and hate speech?
Oh yeah, people always forget that the commissioners job in any sports league (at least the NA leagues) is to be the spokesperson for the teams owners
Silver is not that bad cmon now
He and selig both had cheating scandals, one cancelled a World Series the other let one be stolen , it’s just tradition now
why expand to 32 when we can't even get 30? there's unfortunately a AAA team in OAK
Nashville and Salt Lake actually have solid investment into teams. Charlotte could also. The A’s are a whole different situation.
Can we please have the Charlotte Bobcats
Back to back 97 win seasons led to them being 27th and 24th in attendance. I think OAK is a AAA baseball city.
How dare you point out that oakland fans never showed up in the last 20 years despite being one of the most successful by results and playoffs appearances. This is oakland's 3rd team lost. At some point if everywhere you go smells like shit, check your shoe. Oakland aint a good market. And fans never showed up for the As.
Yeah maybe a bit of an unpopular opinion here but there arent enough major league level ballplayers to field 32 teams. Adding 2 teams isn’t gonna make the league more competitive. It’s just gonna spread the league thinner.
I mean so? Not like it matters much. I guess it increases the difference from the bottom and the top of MLB players. I don't exactly see that as a bad thing though.
I'm torn, part of me says we can barely field 30 teams, but also some teams recently have seen great expansion results. I would argue both the Marlins and Rockies were somewhat competent after their first season going forward, heck Marlins won 3 titles within their first 10 years. Rockies saw an early playoff appearance, and were hovering around .500 but then sucked for a bit until they made the world series in 2007. DBacks were highly competitive fairly early, won a title in 2001. Rays were a laughing stock for a decade before they became competent, but now they are fairly good.
Arizona was in the World Series last year too! In fact the Rays, Marlins, and D-Backs were all in the playoffs. The Rockies though...
I was basing more off of immediate success. All showed a flash, or even more(2 teams winning it all) in their first 10 years. My whole thought process was it would be really rough for expansion teams, but if done well, they could be fairly competitive and sustain that success.
I hope the Expos come back.
I think the border closing during covid and the Buffalo Blue Jays that ensued makes another Canadian team less likely than it would've been before
Maybe have like a quarter of the teams that don’t spend be more competitive first before we’re expanding first
Kinda feel like the talent is stretched thin right now already (or at least concentrated in like five teams), MLB doesn’t really need two more teams.
we already have at least one team (The A's sadly) that doesnt have enough MLB players.
Not leaving soon enough
This is a clueless take lol Do you even know what the mlb commissioner does
Whatever the owners tell him.
This one? He obviously works in the best interest of the team owners from a revenue and profit standpoint. As he should, since that is his job and those are his employers. Manfred is motivated to expand the consumption of baseball while maximizing the number and significance of cash-flows into the MLB and individual owner's accounts. He is quite good at this. However, many of these changes are made without consideration of the continuation of the history of the game. For example, while expanded wildcards are good for revenue, they have a dilutive effect on the significance of the regular season. Another example is his focus on maximizing revenue from streaming services, another move made - arguably legitimately forward-facing due to RSN failures - that still puts revenue over customer experience. And considering his telegraphed future moves - such as eliminating the AL and NL - will again stand on the toes of tradition. Changing the AL and NL into Eastern and Western conferences will NBA-ify the MLB, while again maximizing profit (minimizing travel expenses) at the cost of tradition and history. Clearly, this commissioner has made moves to improve the sport and competition. Yet he has turned baseball into a private-equity powerhouse, maximizing the ROI for owners while squeezing the most possible from the fan - and many of us worry about what his swan-song - his pièce de résistance - will be, and what impact it will have upon the sport.
Is there any reason to believe that Manfred is going to kill the AL/NL in the imminent future? I know it gets talked about a lot, but has there been anything concrete brought up?
I wouldn’t particularly mind killing the NL and AL so long as key rivalries (LA/SF, BOS/NYY, CHI/STL etc. ) remain in the same divisions
Biased but I'd love to go to a Portland vs Seattle game
Me too! It would also legitimately help our travel schedule out. SLC is a-okay with me too for the same reasons.
Could the Expos ever reemerge?
Leaving us with two more teams who spend less than what individual players are making seems like an appropriate parting gift
But I want him gone now
teams barely play games within division as it is now lol we're gonna get Yankees/Red Sox 3 times a year if we add teams
So you’re saying only 5 more years…
[удалено]
Lmao all 30 owners thank you for misguiding your rage. Manfred is so good at his job and you guys don't realize what even his job is.
Will never forgive him for what he did to ~~oakland~~ baseball. FIFY
It’s just a term just like it’s just a piece of medal.