https://twitter.com/randyrenner/status/621069677351964672

RandyRenner: Wow, MLB Commish Rob Manfred says #OKC could be considered for MLB franchise, expansion or relocation

Here's the article: Rob Manfred sees expansion in MLB's future (http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13256319/rob-manfred-sees-expansion-mlb-future)

It's pretty cool for OKC to be mentioned, but that's some pretty stiff competition for a team. I've always thought OKC would struggle to support both MLB and NBA teams. Most studies indicate a city needs a million people for each pro franchise to be successful. OKC falls well short of that mark, and baseball might be the most demanding sport for a city to support - 30,000 for 81 games?!?

I've always thought OKC could handle a MLS team or maybe even an NFL team with only 8 home games (but that could really hurt OU and OSU). Just remember, sometimes cities names are thrown out there as threats more so than legitimate destinations for a franchise.

I'd absolutely love that. Like you said though, I don't really think OKC could support an MLB team until the city approaches 2 million. Even then, a lot of cities with millions of people have problems filling the stands regularly.

I think OKC being mentioned as a potential expansion city (legitimate or not) is kind of cool, though.

Yea, i think it's cool, not sure how relastic in the next 5 years but maybe in 10 years who knows.

I know Tampa built there dome before they got a team. I wonder if we built a cool 30k seat stadium would they guarantee us a team?

The OKC metro area is projected to add about 500K people in the next 25 years, it could certainly be a possibility then.

While highly unrealistic now, it's still pretty badass that we are even being mentioned by people so high up in MLB. Really shows this area's growing status.

I'll add if you think Mark Cuban threw a tantrum when the Thunder moved to OKC, just wait to see the reaction of the Rangers, Cardinals, and Rockies if this ever happened.

The cardinals would flip out. You forgot the royals too wouldn't be happy

That will be cool if we can get a MLB team here, I'll go to these games.

duplicate

Right now MLB has 2 "leagues"( the concept of separate leagues was done away with in 2000, and interleague play is now the norm). Each league has 3 divisions with 5 teams in each division. This is quite a balanced set up and I don't see MLB expanding to 36 teams to keep this balance.

I think a relocation would be more practical but you never know. If they could add 2 more teams and charge those teams a 750 million expansion fee a piece (the nhl might get a 500 million expansion fee from Vegas and the Houston Texans had to pay $700 mil) the owners might not pass that up. Each owner could get a cool $50 million in that scenario. Wouldn't have to share any of that money with the players.

Two thoughts. First, regarding population, I suspect that a MLB team would draw really well from around the state and especially Tulsa. Maybe that helps bridge the population gap, especially if part of relocation required rail connections to Tulsa and the suburbs. Secondly, could the Bricktown ballpark be expanded to around 35,000 or would a whole new stadium be needed?

As much as I have enjoyed going to Dodger games, I just don't see OKC being able to host MLB baseball. I would rather see a focus on MLS.

The least likely of all would be the NFL.
The proximity to markets such as Dallas, Denver, and Kansas City make it so. Oklahoma draws the most fans for those three organizations and it would by all means saturate this part of the country with Football. Secondly, we have the Sooners... And Cowboys of OSU.

MLS would probably be the next logical for both the league and the city. It doesn't require an absurd amount of ticket sales to be considered successful, for one. Oklahoma is still a Football state, but Soccer is certainly taking up interest every where rather quickly.

But, I just don't see the MLB taking this seriously. I would put this at the same level of seriousness as the Pittsburgh Penguins relocating to Tulsa - and yes, those talks seriously happened, but ultimately Tulsa was never really in the running as it was competing with the likes of Kansas City, and the host city, Pittsburgh itself. I think Oklahomans are content with the Cardinals and Rangers, and perhaps the Rockies to an extent. I don't mention the Royals because I don't count one or two seasons of bandwagoners.

OKC will need some good years of major population growth coming ahead, which will really only be driven by the economy, for it to really pop up (as in being a serious contender) on the radar for entities such as these. It's really cool though that OKC was mentioned, it's on the leagues radars for sure, but I think it's more of a tease. And here Tulsa is about to sell the Shock off to Dallas...

Oakland and Tampa are the two teams that come to mind for relocation. Both have aging stadiums and reluctance from local leaders to find a solution.

Here's the article: Rob Manfred sees expansion in MLB's future (http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13256319/rob-manfred-sees-expansion-mlb-future)

It's pretty cool for OKC to be mentioned, but that's some pretty stiff competition for a team. I've always thought OKC would struggle to support both MLB and NBA teams. Most studies indicate a city needs a million people for each pro franchise to be successful. OKC falls well short of that mark, and baseball might be the most demanding sport for a city to support - 30,000 for 81 games?!?

I've always thought OKC could handle a MLS team or maybe even an NFL team with only 8 home games (but that could really hurt OU and OSU). Just remember, sometimes cities names are thrown out there as threats more so than legitimate destinations for a franchise.

On top of this, while any new pro team could be nice to have, MLB is structured in a way that generally puts teams from smaller markets at the worst competitive disadvantage from any of the other major leagues. Which makes supporting 30,000 for 81 games even harder than it would be supporting the attendance possibility of other leagues.

Nope

Surprise to see OKC (1,336,767) among cities on the MLB radar list. Love the attention we received; it made me laugh & blush. Now, just how realistic this is makes me wonder if OKC & the state could support a MLB franchise in Oklahoma.

Kansas City (2,071,133) is currently the smallest MLB market in the U.S. They support MLB & NFL.

Oklahoma has produced its share of baseball's personality greats.

We're not ready for baseball on the MLB level.

I really think it's never going to happen. I really don't want us investing in bringing any additional sports here to be honest. Let's support and most importantly keep what we got. Who wants to be in the position to have to fend off a team from threatening to leave every 5 years cause they want the public to build them a new stadium when the teams make millions in revenue. I already have a feeling one of these days we will have that problem with the Thunder, so no sense in adding someone else into the mix.

Yeah this is cool from the sense of "we got mentioned and this raises the profile of our city". But I don't think it is realistic right now. Perhaps in 20 years we would be able to support them, but I don't think so today.

Wow. I think that might be the first time I've seen Laramie say "no" to something for OKC. No disrespect intended. Was just surprised to see that. :-)

The thing with Tampa Bay , if we took the tarps off the 1st base upper deck and put in outfield seats they could play in the Brick and still maintain their current average attendance.

1st. Stop with the NFL talk. The NFL has 0 need for okc whatsoever. It's not even a question of could we support it, its a matter that we bring absolutely nothing to the NFL table. That's not so much even OKC's fault as it is the fact the NFL is just pure dominance. Think of it like Georgia Tech trying to get into the SEC, sure it might work but what's in it for the SEC? 0, nada, nothing.

2. The Rays actually only average 17,000 fans a game but still turn a profit of $7.9 million in an aging stadium in a town that couldn't care less about them.

3. Expansion isn't going to happen for us. The start up costs are massive.

4. But relocation could happen, and without any shred of a doubt in my mind it would succeed. Here's why.

I'm sure we would either heavily renovate Bricktown Ballpark or just build new (along the river for splash balls, urbanists figure out how make it nice and walkable). However, at max we would build a 35,000 seat park or an intimate park as they like to call them. It would function similar to how OSU football works. We may not have a ton of seats but cost per seat is way above average. That attempts to keep our revenue in line with other Big 12 schools. So the OKC MLB team would have expensive suites, club seats, and behind home plate. The second deck and outfield would be moderately priced for the average joe. Until we see that this sports obsessed state has a limit to money they'll spend on sports I'm not to worried about the ability to sell the high dollar tickets. (Seriously, OSU has the 2nd most suites in the nation behind Michigan and they are all sold out)

5. Baseball is unique because it has no salary cap and yet small market low spending teams have been finding success. It all depends on the farm system and how you develop your talent. This is why expansion wouldn't work for us. Starting a farm system from scratch is difficult and OKC would need the baseball team to be at least decent from the start. The A's and Rays are both teams that need new homes and could be relocated here. Both are successful enough the city would latch onto them easily.

6. Is there a group in OKC that is wealthy enough and connected enough to pull it off? The thunder's group is probably the best fit but most have their wealth from oil and gas the thunder is going deep into the tax the next few years (as they should to retain talent) they may not be as flush with cash as need be. However, maybe someone like Tom and Judy Love would be interested. The other flip of the coin is the connections, MLB has to like them, the team they are buying has to like them, and they need good relationships with the city because they will want some help from the city as well.

I think it could work.

It'd put OKC stature wise into a new level too. We would be out of the Jacksonville, Salt Lake City, Portland, tier of city. And go into the San Diego, New Orleans, Cincinnati, Cleveland, St. Louis, Seattle, KC, Tampa Bay (although if we scored the rays we would be ahead), and Charlotte tier. (there's probably some others I'm not thinking of, and I'm only counting the big 3((nba, nfl, mlb)), the drop-off from 3 to 4 is large)

Question is does someone with a pile of cash and a touch of boredom want an mlb team in okc?

How many cities out there have MLB and NBA but not NFL (besides Toronto and the LA teams, which have plenty more to offer)? Milwaukee (Packers should count, or at least the Bears).

How many cities out there have MLB and NBA but not NFL (besides Toronto and the LA teams, which have plenty more to offer)? Milwaukee (Packers should count, or at least the Bears).

I believe OKC would be the only city with a two-sport combination of MLB and NBA. (Milwaukee shouldn't count, they have an NFL team...their stadium just happens to be two hours north of downtown)

Here are the cities that have an MLB team and only one other big four team (MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA). I did not include Oakland or Anaheim, because they are a part of the Bay Area and LA, respectively.

Baltimore - NFL and MLB
Cincinnati - NFL and MLB
Kansas City - NFL and MLB
San Diego - NFL and MLB
Seattle - NFL and MLB

Funny how just a few months ago people on this board were arguing that baseball was a dead/dying sport and that the Bricktown Ballpark should be adapted instead for soccer. Now folks are geeking on the idea of OKC being in the MLB discussion...

I vote to name the team The Fraccing Quakers!



No?

Funny how just a few months ago people on this board were arguing that baseball was a dead/dying sport and that the Bricktown Ballpark should be adapted instead for soccer. Now folks are geeking on the idea of OKC being in the MLB discussion...

I still think the soccer team should play at BTBP and nobody seriously thinks OKC has a chance to get a MLB team. But then again, the soccer team can't even fill up Taft Stadium, so why would we think they needed to come downtown?

Glad that I was able to unintentionally create an opportunity for you to take a shot at the Energy and its ownership group in another, unrelated thread. It must feel stifling to only have a couple of threads in which to remain relevant with your one-dimensional, single-topic posting style. You're welcome.

Glad that I was able to unintentionally create an opportunity for you to take a shot at the Energy and its ownership group in another, unrelated thread. It must feel stifling to only have a couple of threads in which to remain relevant with your one-dimensional, single-topic posting style. You're welcome.

I was going to thank you but you must have dislocated your arm, patting yourself on the back.

Observers make the mistake by using minor league sports attendance to gauge whether or not a city is capable of support for a major league level franchise. Let's not dismiss that minor league sports can sometimes be used as a good signal that a city could be ready.

OKC's NBA success and popularity has brought about this radar focus on MLB in OKC. IIRC, both Charlotte (NBA, NFL) and Nashville (NHL, NFL) had less than 1.5 million metro population when the NFL entered those markets to compete for the sports dollar (NBA, NHL) in those areas.


Charlotte - NBA Hornets, (NFL Panthers expansion - 1995) MSA Population 2000 [1,499,293] 1990 [1,162,093]
Nashville - NHL Predators, (NFL Titans relocation - 1997) MSA Population 2000 [1,231,311] 1990 [985,026]

US Metropolitan Area Population: 1990-2000 (http://www.demographia.com/db-usmet2000.htm)

These cities had strong corporate bases needed to support major league level sports; the current NBA & NHL franchises did feel the effect when the NFL entered those markets.

Oklahoma City will approach 1.5 million come 2020 at our current population rate increase. We have a very strong major college football presence in our area (OU Norman) that averages 85,000 fans per game (Top 15 collegiate nation wide).

Come 2020 will be the time to have that conversation about the addition of another major league sport like MLB or NFL to OKC.

The numbers indicate that you need 1 million population per major league (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL) level sport as a support safety net.

Just wouldn't completely rule out MLB or NFL after 2020; however it would have an affect on the NBA & major college football especially on the corporate level. Tulsa is within OKC's 150 miles MLB/NFL radius. The Tulsa market is corporately comparable to OKC in many aspects.

Come 2020-2025 if OKC sports a metro of 1.5 million and Tulsa 1.2 million & a state population over 4 million; then would be the time to begin that conversation. Be prepared to spend in excess of $1 billion minimum after 2020 should you decide to build an MLB or NFL venue. A Bricktown Ballpark MLB expansion could be used as a temporary home.

The OKC-TUL (100 mile radius) market isn't ready for MLB or NFL.

Two things about OKC and expansion of major league franchises. One, there is a limit as to how many teams in a league are manageable. Yeah, OKC pop is getting larger, but so are the cities where there are franchises. It makes no sense for any sport to have a league that is so large you can't keep track of all the franchises or schedule that many entities. Second is TV market, which is where the money is, not fan attendance. Charlotte in 2014 was the 24th largest TV market, Nashville # 29, OKC # 45. Additionally, as Laramie posted, is the corporate support angle and lack there of in this locale.

I still think the soccer team should play at BTBP and nobody seriously thinks OKC has a chance to get a MLB team. But then again, the soccer team can't even fill up Taft Stadium, so why would we think they needed to come downtown?

I do not think our attendance numbers were much better with the old Cavalry basketball team, minor league teams are not the easiest draw.

In 1991 (the year BEFORE the Blazers came to town) the Cavalry averaged 4,668 per game. They led the CBA in attendance. Here is a quote from Chip land:

For a first-year franchise, we had a banner year. We became the first CBA team ever with six crowds of more than 7,000.
The Cavalry also had the third, fifth, and seventh largest single-game attendances ever in the CBA at that point.
The only thing that killed the Cavalry was the Blazers.
Oh, I'm sorry. This probably doesn't fit my "one-dimensional, single-topic posting style." BTW Snowman, that wasn't directed at you :-)

Here's the article: Rob Manfred sees expansion in MLB's future (http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13256319/rob-manfred-sees-expansion-mlb-future)

It's pretty cool for OKC to be mentioned, but that's some pretty stiff competition for a team. I've always thought OKC would struggle to support both MLB and NBA teams. Most studies indicate a city needs a million people for each pro franchise to be successful. OKC falls well short of that mark, and baseball might be the most demanding sport for a city to support - 30,000 for 81 games?!?

I've always thought OKC could handle a MLS team or maybe even an NFL team with only 8 home games (but that could really hurt OU and OSU). Just remember, sometimes cities names are thrown out there as threats more so than legitimate destinations for a franchise.
Why is Montreal on that list? Didn't they just lose a team not too long ago?

Why is Montreal on that list? Didn't they just lose a team not too long ago?

Milwaukee Braves and Seattle Pilots were both teams that left their cities and a few years later MLB returned to both locales. Montreal would be a good location as long as Olympic Stadium was not their home field.

Milwaukee Braves and Seattle Pilots were both teams that left their cities and a few years later MLB returned to both locales. Montreal would be a good location as long as Olympic Stadium was not their home field.

Montreal has a very rabid fanbase for MLB and, as mentioned above, the WORST stadium situation. Not sure about corporate sponsorship.

The 2 biggest factors that will determine whether a team relocates here to OKC will be corporate sponsorship and TV market size. We might swing the former but the latter won't work unless we could convince them to include Tulsa (a LONG stretch IMO). There isn't enough room to expand the Brick to MLB standards but they might consider it as a temporary home if there were firm commitments to build a new park. Oakland has shown it only needs to be around 35K capacity with their plans for a San Jose park.

The numbers don't work for major league baseball in OKC | News OK (http://newsok.com/the-numbers-dont-work-for-major-league-baseball-in-okc/article/5434055)

MLB teams are in the large markets where you have all 4 major franchises (MLB, NFL, NBA & NHL) table by rank:

Milwaukee (1,572,245), Cleveland (2,063,598), Kansas City (2,071,133) & Cincinnati (2,149,449) are the smallest MLB markets.


MOST INFLUENCIAL (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL)
MAJOR MARKETS -TV & Population



1. New York

8. Washington D. C.



3. Chicago
11. Detroit


4. Philadelphia

13. Phoenix


5. Dallas-Fort Worth
15. Minneapolis-St. Paul


6. San Francisco-Oakland
16. Miami


7. Boston
17. Denver





Oklahoma City is included in the four smallest NBA markets (TV households & population).
Among the 4 smallest NBA markets; we rank 2nd in TV households behind SLC/2nd in population behind Memphis.

4 Smallest NBA Markets: 2014-15 TV households/Population

TVs 34th (897,390)/Pop - 48th (1,153,340) - Salt Lake City Attendance avg - 18,830 (10th in NBA, 94.6 capacity)
TVs 44th (704,490)/Pop - 42nd (1,336,767) - Oklahoma City Attendance avg - 18,203 (15th in NBA, 100.0 capacity)
TVs 50th (653,560)/Pop - 41st (1,343,230) - Memphis Attendance avg - 17,329 (18th in NBA, 95.6 capacity)
TVs 51th (641,150)/Pop - 45th (1,251,849) - New Orleans Attendance avg - 17,192 (19th in NBA, 90.1 capacity)

Conclusion: MLB franchise? There's a better chance the city may be on the NFL's radar for the 2020-2030 decade.


Market TV households: http://www.tvb.org/media/file/Nielsen_2014-2015_DMA_Ranks.pdf
MSA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas
2014-2015 NBA Attendance - National Basketball Association - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance)

I agree with Tramel. There is no way OKC is getting MLB. There are just too many, other, more well-heeled, larger markets in front of us.

I heard on the news a spokesman for OKC stated that The Brick logistically couldn't be upgraded to suit MLB and that they would have to find a new location all-together. I would certainly be interested in an MLB team, however I'm not sure how it would hold up here.

Funny how just a few months ago people on this board were arguing that baseball was a dead/dying sport and that the Bricktown Ballpark should be adapted instead for soccer. Now folks are geeking on the idea of OKC being in the MLB discussion...

Urbanized I think you're referring to me. I'm the one who suggested the Brick would be a great venue for soccer (I still think it would, but now I back off my statement that it should be changed from its currents use). I made that statement hypothetically, with the condition that OKC would have an MLS team occupying the space. I don't have to tell you the benefits of the location, as you have made clear in the convention center and COOP threads its many virtues. Today, I see the popularity of MiLB in OKC and would support a two-stadium core -- provided the soccer stadium is as walkable as the Brick. As for MLB in OKC, no -- that's not something I would support (NFL or NHL either) and I'm certainly not "geeking on the idea" of having one of those franchises. Being mentioned, yes, is an honor.

Urbanized, I typically enjoy reading your insights into developments, the convention industry, and Bricktown. You often provide a fair amount of facts when others run on conjecture. Recently, however, your tone has started to show impatience and snark which detract from your often sound arguments. I hope you're not letting things posted on this site get to you too much. You've been far too valuable a contributor.

I appreciate your concern, and thanks for genuine feedback. You're right; the site can be very frustrating at times.

Regarding the thread, I don't think it was you I was referring to. The posts I was referring to were suggesting that baseball was a dead sport, to the effect of "give baseball the boot, and bring in soccer!" I enjoy soccer - grew up playing it and watching it, including Pelé/NASL and years of MISL attendance - but sincerely doubt the game will be larger than baseball in the U.S., in our lifetimes at least.

Prior to landing the Dodgers' AAA farm club from Albuquerque; things looked bleak. The tarps were placed on the right side upper deck (- 2,000-seat reduction) of the Bricktown Ballpark; Houston talked of relocation of PCL-OKC to suburban Woodlands. The trend seemed as though every MLB team needed to cut back; thereby moving their AAA operations to home.

Portland, a fixture in the PCL eliminated AAA baseball in favor of MLS soccer where they transformed Providence Park into a soccer specific stadium.

MLB is a very expensive sport with its multi-level layers of minor league development. OKC's drawback would be the financial aspects; the gravy would be ticket sales, memorabilia & corporate sponsors outside of the main course on the menu--TV money. Once you're set up for MLB; the TV money will be the bulk of your revenue stream. It's tough to join that circle of markets. Charlotte (Atlanta, Tampa-St. Petersburg, Miami), Portland (Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, San Diego) & San Antonio (Dallas, Houston) will be the nemesis with existing TV market concerns. Just look how Dallas Mavericks owner, Mark Cuban reacted to Oklahoma City's approval for relocation by the NBA's Board of Governors.

The NBA's TV profit-sharing model is more friendly to small market franchises than the other major leagues. IMO the NBA was a better risk for success than the NHL.


If you follow baseball, the Oakland A’s and Tampa Bay Rays both have been searching for a new ballpark for years, but to no avail. Lashbrook and Smith see that as a problem for baseball, and Portland could be a potential solution.

...there are so many roadblocks in the way that you probably have a better chance of having Disneyland come there, first. This has nothing to do with whether it’s Portland, or Charlotte, Las Vegas, San Antonio, or elsewhere, and everything to do with that aforementioned television matter.

Why Portland, And Other Markets Begging For MLB, Will Get Bloody Knees Waiting (http://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2013/10/25/why-portland-and-other-markets-begging-for-mlb-will-get-bloody-knees-waiting/)


Charlotte, NC - 2,380,314 NFL Cougars, NBA Hornets (need 3 million for adequate support).
Portland, OR - 2,348,247 NBA Trailblazers, MLS Timbers (need 3 million for adequate support).
San Antonio, TX - 2,328,652 NBA Spurs (head scratcher).
Las Vegas, NV - 2,069,681 4 Reasons Why Las Vegas Will Never Get A Professional Franchise « CBS Las Vegas (http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2014/07/23/4-reasons-why-las-vegas-will-never-get-a-professional-franchise/)


Oklahoma City, OK - 1,336,767 NBA Thunder will remain pat for now. The possibility of MAPS V (2024-31) might provide a better backdrop to add another major league franchise to our area; however, it won't be MLB.

I'll take a nice day, the American flag flying, hot dogs, peanuts, something cold to drink and --- baseball.

http://i.imgur.com/gO3Uw5x.jpg