The Rays "Exploring" Montreal is just the beginning of massive movement.

SJ24

SJ24

New member
We all know what this announcement today means. Cut the crap about two cities. The Rays will be renamed the "Expos" and be playing in Montreal full-time at a nice new stadium in 5 years.

The Athletics will either get funding for a new stadium in Oakland, or they'll "transition" to Portland or Vegas.

Then we'll get two new expansion teams, probably 2/3 of Nashville/Charlotte/ and either Portland/Vegas (if As don't move there)

Then there will be 32 teams, 8 divisions of 4. Montreal restored. The American South further tapped into. And 4 or 5 sparkling new ballparks.

This stuff has happened for 100 years. Hell, the Yankees were originally in Baltimore.

Baseball is a business.

Exciting times, IMO.
 
Now nsacpi won't give me **** for wearing an old school Expos hat with my Bravos shirt.

Also funny, is whenever I wear the Expos hat to Suntrust I get casual fans tell me how much they like the hat. I tell them it's a throwback hat and the M stands for Milwaukee. Never fails.
 
Now nsacpi won't give me **** for wearing an old school Expos hat with my Bravos shirt.

Also funny, is whenever I wear the Expos hat to Suntrust I get casual fans tell me how much they like the hat. I tell them it's a throwback hat and the M stands for Milwaukee. Never fails.
 
nsacpi said:
leverage
Click to expand...

Meh. I just don't see a stadium deal getting done in Tampa. They will either "explore" this and move in 5 years anyway, or they will actually implement this, see Tampa attendance crumble even more, and then have further justification for a full-time move to Montreal.

My intuition tells me powerful people don't tell stuff like this to reporters without being absolutely sure of what's going on behind the scenes. Of course this assumes MLB is run even close to as well as the NFL.

There's even less of a chance for a stadium in Oakland, IMO. See the Raiders.


BTW, Stu's statement is absolutely hilarious. I will post it real quick . . .
 
D9hfxjGXUAA7Vbu.jpg:large





Hahahahahaha.
 
SJ24 said:
Meh. I just don't see a stadium deal getting done in Tampa. They will either "explore" this and move in 5 years anyway, or they will actually implement this, see Tampa attendance crumble even more, and then have further justification for a full-time move to Montreal.

My intuition tells me powerful people don't tell stuff like this to reporters without being absolutely sure of what's going on behind the scenes. Of course this assumes MLB is run even close to as well as the NFL.

There's even less of a chance for a stadium in Oakland, IMO. See the Raiders.


BTW, Stu's statement is absolutely hilarious. I will post it real quick . . .
Click to expand...

intuition eh
 
Tampa tax payers should say **** it and fork over a couple extra tax dollars to keep the team.

Tampa is a beautiful area and a well-located ballpark would be glorious.

Then MLB could expand to Montreal.

I just don't see it happening, as the opposition is steep. Hope I'm wrong.
 
Counterpoint: tax dollars shouldn’t be used to subsidize profitable, billion-dollar corporations—and municipalities/counties/states should especially not allow themselves to be held hostage by these perfidious anti-trust-exempt corporations trying to use geography as leverage.
 
SJ24 said:
A $2 million dollar a year after 2023 (when their new stadium in Montreal will be ready) penalty seems like peanuts if a city like Montreal gifts them a $750 million stadium (just spitballing that number)
Click to expand...

I would think a collegiate brainiac would have better reading comprehension skills.

Perhaps try again?

If you need help let me know and I'll pull out some quotes...
 
jpx7 said:
Counterpoint: tax dollars shouldn’t be used to subsidize profitable, billion-dollar corporations—and municipalities/counties/states should especially not allow themselves to be held hostage by these perfidious anti-trust-exempt corporations trying to use geography as leverage.
Click to expand...

So how do you propose MLB and the Rays improve their business and get a new stadium? Stu Sternberg's entire net worth is basically tied up in owning the Rays. He can't afford a stadium.
 
Enscheff said:
I would think a collegiate brainiac would have better reading comprehension skills.

Perhaps try again?

If you need help let me know and I'll pull out some quotes...
Click to expand...

They can't move out of Pinellas or Hillsborough w/o that penalty. That could be a reason for this transition/2-cities nonsense. They're not "technically" moving.

Yet.
 
SJ24 said:
So how do you propose MLB and the Rays improve their business and get a new stadium? Stu Sternberg's entire net worth is basically tied up in owning the Rays. He can't afford a stadium.
Click to expand...

They’re businesses operated by business-people; I’m certain they’ll figure something out. But it’s not the tax-payers’ problem to solve for them—the tax-payers who are, coincidentally, also the customer-base from whom MLB and the Rays expect to extract profit—and there are much better uses of the commonweal’s collective coffers than subsidizing an already-profitable non-essential corporate-scale business.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top