The owner's statement might as well said, "I'm selling." He lost all goodwill with St. Pete. And MLB will withhold revenue sharing if he doesn't.

Nashville sort of ironically is becoming what Tampa-St. Pete was 30-35 years ago. The threat of relocating there probably already got the Brewers upgrades to AmFam Field, and will probably wind up getting the Rays and Sox new stadium deals to stay put. But ultimately they're not going to be able to resist the expansion cash grab, and "more jobs" can be a bargaining chip in the labor war that's coming.

What I've learned in the 5 months I've lived in FL is that downtown St. Pete kicks ass. The stadium is not far from a vibin' downtown scene. If the Rays are staying in the area, it's the correct location. Much to my surprise, the team appears to be well supported in terms of merch....not easy, given the volume of transplants here.

The stadium deal that was in place had milestone deliverables required along the way. It appears Stu didn't have the cashflow to meet was due now and dragged his feet announcing he can hold up the Rays end of the deal. Curious is correct, though, he's hired competent baseball people to operate well with little money. I like the comparison to the "East Coast A's". I wish the Marlins were a decent team, as that might provide an indication as to what attendance would like in a new stadium with a quality product on the field. Maimi sure appears to be very White Sox in a nature that no one is showing up with a garbage team.

_________________

From what I can tell, the Marlins never really recovered from the one-two punch of that weird Ozzie Guillen season and their books leaking, which showed that while they were begging for a new stadium, they were pocketing revenue sharing. They totally botched the landing in downtown Miami and destroyed the entire notion of the New Stadium Bump.

_________________

Bingo. It's filtered everywhere. I think even Las Vegas might collapse. This A's guy is just a big of a pain in the ass as the Tampa guy.

You live there and I don't, but the line on why the Rays have had such poor attendance even in the good times has always been that St. Petersburg is too inconvenient to drive to for most people on the Tampa side of the water. Maybe that's true, maybe it's not, but the gate numbers against the surprisingly solid TV ratings would certainly bear that out. I don't think it's the right spot. I think it might have to be Orlando, where the Rays were farming out home games for a few years in the late 2000s.

_________________

Sounds like another fun weather event down south tomorrow that will fuck up insurance companies some more.

They have reinsurance.

_________________

It is inconvenient to get there. A friend who used to live in Orlando (now lives in St. Pete) hated the drive so he rarely went to games.

Should they move?

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins

Insurance companies?

It is inconvenient from the North and from Inland, but from the south where I live, it's a great location. Buccaneers and Lightning play in downtown Tampa and that probably serves as a better overall location. But for me....it's worse.

I was just at the downtown Tampa Riverwalk area over the weekend and it's a nice spot. Not sure if the Rays had any land opportunity there I do suppose that would serve them better than St. Pete.

I don't know enough about Orlando other than it being a big convention area and then Disney.....I hate Orlando. No idea if they could support the Rays any better than Tampa / St. Pete. I think Tampa / St. Pete is a better option, but that's just my opinion.

_________________

The plan was for them to build on some industrial blight between the Channel District and Ybor City. 4th/Channelside, I think. Then, it just didn't happen for some reason, probably Sternberg not having the money.

If they can get that back on track, that would probably be the best option. The Bolts have no trouble drawing.

_________________

I agree with this take. And I agree that St. Pete is an awesome city. Actually heading that way this weekend for a friend's 60th birthday.

Orlando is a soulless expanse with almost St. Louis-level humidity. I don't particularly care for it. But it'd probably be better than building a brand-new publicly funded stadium in St. Pete.

Some of that Spanish-influenced architecture around Tampa is pretty neat. I'd love to see a park incorporate some of that.

_________________

I enjoyed the Cubs in Tampa (St Pete) last year. The stadium sucked, but we were walking distance from it and found lots of fun places to hang out.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

I will definitely go to a Rays game this year with them playing at George Steinbrenner field....rarely get a chance to see MLB at such a small stadium.

Near the Channel district is a total win....in the end it would have come down to St. Pete offering more public money. That's dead. I am pretty sure they're going to strong-arm Stu to sell the team. He is Michael McCaskey level egg on his face for screwing up stadium deals.

_________________

I went to a Rays game in 2010 and the stadium power went out in a thunderstorm before first pitch and it started late. Welp, there's my Rays story.

How was it?

Watching a game on TV there was like watching a game years ago in the old Kingdome, just awful.

_________________

As a one time stadium visit it was okay. Easy to get to, close parking, reasonably priced, and good views. If I was a Rays fan I'd be disappointed with it though. It's got that dome thing where even with all the lights it never seems bright enough. It reminded me of when I was in college and our team was playing in the Metrodome. We got there before the game and University of Minnesota was finishing their game. As a college kid it looked amazing, like it did on TV with the hefty bags in the outfield and you could visualize Jack Morris going up against Smoltz in game 7 of the WS. Their game ended and they literally turned off half the lights for our crappy NAIA team's game and it was far less magical. Tropicana Field felt like a game with 1/2 the lights off.

Like the McCaskeys, he just doesn't have the money, but unlike the NFL, doesn't have mammoth national revenue streams.

He bought the team in, what, 2007, I think? Maybe late 2006? I'm going to look it up now: okay, $200MM for a 48% stake in May '04. I didn't realize it was that long before the rebrand. Good that I did all that stream-of-consciousness so you didn't think I knew it without googling. The point is that he's a relic of when Some Guys could get together and buy a low-end professional sports team at what is now considered a modest sum. (The owner of the Lightning straight-up got away with robbery.) The Rays' value has almost sextupled since then, but I doubt the rest of his portfolio has, which even I know must present some problems when he needs money to build a stadium. He's B.C.: Before Clippers.

Basically, you need to be an oligarch to own a team these days. Or just inherit ione. Not that I'm saying "pity the mere multi-millionaire" here, but it's clear that Some Guys can't keep up anymore.

_________________

Also reminds me of the dome in St. Louis that became the most depressing and dull place in the world to watch a game from as soon as Warner, Faulk and Bruce were gone.

To wit: the Celtics, who are a tenant of the Bruins, just sold for $6.1 billion.

_________________