MLB Off-Topic
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
In the case of Arizona, even though their ballpark is in no way as shabby as Oakland's or St. Pete's, it may still be easier depending on them already owning territorial rights to anywhere around Phoenix (thus avoiding Oakland's issue) and depending on if their lease has been violated by another party (thus potentially avoiding the Rays' issue).
If it's simply a matter of fundraising, that greatly simplifies the process of getting a new park.
Personally, I kinda like their park and hope the issue gets resolved with some funds for maintenance, but we'll see.Chicago Cubs | Chicago Bulls | Green Bay Packers | Michigan WolverinesComment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
In addition to this, if I'm not mistaken, I believe the owners also have to approve of relocation bids (3/4 majority in NL and simple majority in AL for an NL club to move), but this is, again, only when relocation to another market occurs (for example, the Braves didn't have to get MLB approval to go to Cobb County and build SunTrust Park).
MLB doesn't give new stadium funds to teams directly (although there is revenue sharing); the most MLB can do is saber-rattle and help lobby for taxpayer $$$ not being put up by the team's ownership. So in some ways, follow the money to its source to figure out where the 'control' really is with new stadiums. Oftentimes, it's state and local governments pulling the levers of power there.
There are also specific codes that an MLB ballpark needs to conform to (which is standardized according to best engineering practices and amenities to some degree), and the building codes are set by all kinds of different regulatory entities, but each team has a lot of leeway to build the ballpark the way they want it, when they want it and so forth without oversight by MLB.
So to summarize, the D'Backs aren't looking to relocate so the MLB voting process for relocation wouldn't apply to them. All they need to do is find a billion dollars on the side of the road to build a totally new stadium if they want to.Last edited by WaitTilNextYear; 03-25-2016, 02:47 PM.Chicago Cubs | Chicago Bulls | Green Bay Packers | Michigan WolverinesComment
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
MLB has *some* say over stadiums, but for the most part this 'say' is only exerted when teams relocate from one market to another along with getting a new stadium. Clubs have been known to police each other over territorial infringement (i.e. when the Expos changed into the Nats and moved into Baltimore's "turf", an agreement that satisfied Peter Angelos...O's owner...had to be made) and MLB can really only help facilitate in making a deal to avoid litigation here.
In addition to this, if I'm not mistaken, I believe the owners also have to approve of relocation bids (3/4 majority in NL and simple majority in AL for an NL club to move), but this is, again, only when relocation to another market occurs (for example, the Braves didn't have to get MLB approval to go to Cobb County and build SunTrust Park).
MLB doesn't give new stadium funds to teams directly (although there is revenue sharing); the most MLB can do is saber-rattle and help lobby for taxpayer $$$ not being put up by the team's ownership. So in some ways, follow the money to its source to figure out where the 'control' really is with new stadiums. Oftentimes, it's state and local governments pulling the levers of power there.
There are also specific codes that an MLB ballpark needs to conform to (which is standardized according to best engineering practices and amenities to some degree), and the building codes are set by all kinds of different regulatory entities, but each team has a lot of leeway to build the ballpark the way they want it, when they want it and so forth without oversight by MLB.
So to summarize, the D'Backs aren't looking to relocate so the MLB voting process for relocation wouldn't apply to them. All they need to do is find a billion dollars on the side of the road to build a totally new stadium if they want to.
Sent from my LG G2 using TapatalkMilwaukee Brewers | Green Bay Packers | North Carolina Tar Heels | Wisconsin BadgersComment
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
Holy deal that never happened...did anyone else see the story in the Boston Globe today? According to the Globe back in 1997 Jeffrey Loria offered the Yankees Pedro and Vlad for Jeter straight up. New York declined and the rest is history...but can you imagine if that actually happened?
What would Jeter's legacy be toiling away in the obscurity of Montreal? Pedro and Vlad as Yankees? Good heavens..."People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring." - Rogers HornsbyComment
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
Holy deal that never happened...did anyone else see the story in the Boston Globe today? According to the Globe back in 1997 Jeffrey Loria offered the Yankees Pedro and Vlad for Jeter straight up. New York declined and the rest is history...but can you imagine if that actually happened?
What would Jeter's legacy be toiling away in the obscurity of Montreal? Pedro and Vlad as Yankees? Good heavens...Boston Red Sox
1903 1912 1915 1916 1918 2004 2007 2013 2018
9 4 1 8 27 6 14 45 26 34
Comment
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
Holy deal that never happened...did anyone else see the story in the Boston Globe today? According to the Globe back in 1997 Jeffrey Loria offered the Yankees Pedro and Vlad for Jeter straight up. New York declined and the rest is history...but can you imagine if that actually happened?
What would Jeter's legacy be toiling away in the obscurity of Montreal? Pedro and Vlad as Yankees? Good heavens...Member of the Official OS Bills Backers Club
"Baseball is the most important thing that doesn't matter at all" - Robert B. ParkerComment
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
I mean, how much scarier could it really be? This was supposed to happen in 1997? With Jeter they won 1998-2000 and lost on the final at-bat of a Game 7 in 2001. How much more would they have been able to do anyway? Not like they really missed out on opportunities lolComment
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
I mean, how much scarier could it really be? This was supposed to happen in 1997? With Jeter they won 1998-2000 and lost on the final at-bat of a Game 7 in 2001. How much more would they have been able to do anyway? Not like they really missed out on opportunities lol"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring." - Rogers HornsbyComment
-
-
Re: MLB Off-Topic
I mean, how much scarier could it really be? This was supposed to happen in 1997? With Jeter they won 1998-2000 and lost on the final at-bat of a Game 7 in 2001. How much more would they have been able to do anyway? Not like they really missed out on opportunities lol
I guess it's just scary for me to think of seeing those guys 14 or so times a year as a Blue Jays fan.Member of the Official OS Bills Backers Club
"Baseball is the most important thing that doesn't matter at all" - Robert B. ParkerComment
Comment