We want to catch Tampa but if not - we want the Yankees to catch Tampa

[UtahSox]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

I wouldn't bet on any place until I know wo is paying who and how much.

My own opinion is that Sacramento could fill the void the A's left behind.

San Antonio or Austin seem as viable as Nashville, if not more so.

NC seems right to me, but people are too spread out among cities just barely too small to support a MLB team. However,

Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia has 2.9M +10% growth in 5 yrs

San Antonio- New Braunfels 2.8M +10%

Austin-Round Rock 2.6M +15%

Portland-Vancouver 2.5M +1%

Sacramento 2.5M +3%

(Las Vegas at 2.4M had less but got the A's.)

2.2M Indianapolis +6%

2.2 Nashville +9%

1.9 San Jose -1%

1.5 Raleigh  (+13%) & OKL City (+6%)

1.4 Louisville +3%

1.3 Memphis (0%) & SLC +4%

 

 I’ve written on here you’re wrong on all your Salt Lake data 7% growth you’ve only taken Salt Lake City. You haven’t taken any of the other municipalities and Salt Lake City has a lot more municipalities than other places. There’s four counties that are all linked to Salt Lake. very close there’s 2.61 million people here there today and 7% growth. 
 

they won’t go to San Antonio or Austin because they already have two baseball teams and that would be cutting into those fan bases and they want a team out West. 
 

[moonslav59]

58 minutes ago, UtahSox said:

 I’ve written on here you’re wrong on all your Salt Lake data 7% growth you’ve only taken Salt Lake City.

No. My research was Metropolitan areas.

You should see the growth here in Texas.  I'm from Portland, ME- the biggest "city" in Maine at about 80K, with a "metro area"of about 500K.

Suburbs of Houston are these, to name just a few:

120K Sugar Land (my city), 150K Pasadena, 120K Woodlands, 100K Conroe, 90K Baytown, 75K MO City, 50K Galveston, 40K La Porte, 35K Deer Park and dozens more $10-30K large,

San Antonio is about 1.6M large with suburbs of 120K New Braunfels, 80K San Marcos, 75K Kyle, 44K Seguin, 43K Schertz, 33K Converse, 21K Universal City

SLC has some pretty big suburbs and satellite cities, but's it's not 1.5M in the city- not even close.

Thats not to say they dont pay off more $$$ than SA offers.

 

 

[UtahSox]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

No. My research was Metropolitan areas.

You should see the growth here in Texas.  I'm from Portland, ME- the biggest "city" in Maine at about 80K, with a "metro area"of about 500K.

Suburbs of Houston are these, to name just a few:

120K Sugar Land (my city), 150K Pasadena, 120K Woodlands, 100K Conroe, 90K Baytown, 75K MO City, 50K Galveston, 40K La Porte, 35K Deer Park and dozens more $10-30K large,

San Antonio is about 1.6M large with suburbs of 120K New Braunfels, 80K San Marcos, 75K Kyle, 44K Seguin, 43K Schertz, 33K Converse, 21K Universal City

SLC has some pretty big suburbs and satellite cities, but's it's not 1.5M in the city- not even close.

Thats not to say they dont pay off more $$$ than SA offers.

 

 

Love having you tell me how many people live in SLC metro. Lol bro you had SLC at 1.3m it’s 2.6m I don’t know what to tell you…… there are 2.6m that could be at stadium within a typical metro drive.
 

Also get ready for the most aggressive I told you so when SLC gets a team in the next year or so.

[moonslav59]

8 minutes ago, UtahSox said:

Love having you tell me how many people live in SLC metro. Lol bro you had SLC at 1.3m it’s 2.6m I don’t know what to tell you…… there are 2.6m that could be at stadium within a typical metro drive.
 

Also get ready for the most aggressive I told you so when SLC gets a team in the next year or so.

I'm not saying they won't get it, so be aggressive all you want.

Yes:

220K city

1.3M Metro

2.7M combined statistical area.

That is big enough to support a MLB team. My point is only that other areas are larger, especially if you go by the number you choose for "combined statistical area." Do that and you have to count San Antonio and Austin together and it's double your 2.7M.

That's still not saying I think Texas gets another team. It's just giving some facts.

San Antonio's metro area is 2.8M, which is bigger than the combined area you give for SLC.

Austin's metro is 2.6M.

The combined "metroplex" of the two cities is 5.1M.

Charlotte's is 2.8 Metro and 3.5M "combined"

If SLC pays more and gets one, great!

 

[JoeBrady]

1 hour ago, UtahSox said:

Also get ready for the most aggressive I told you so when SLC gets a team in the next year or so.

LMK when they open up the bidding.  I want a piece of this.

[moonslav59]

I would think with OAK gone, SFG would have little support for making Sacramento pay to squeeze their market.