I feel like I'm gonna have to disagree on the San Jose front, as the proximity to other teams, specifically teams that have a lot of recent success (Dodgers, Giants, etc) seems like it would be hard to attract a new fan base. Its less than an hour drive to Oracle Park from San Jose! Salt Lake City doesn't have a team within 7.5 hours of it, and its a city thats growing quite rapidly.
I completely can agree. The only argument against that is that it was big enough for the A’s and Giants. The A’s didn’t move because there’s no fan base, it’s because they thought they could make more money elsewhere
@@SentryBaseball giants also said San Jose territory (which was given to them from the A’s to help them stay when they were contemplating moving) is their turf and no other team can move there. Baseball can say otherwise but I doubt it considering their minor league team is located there. Salt lake and Portland seems to be the most viable
While San Jose seems like a logical choice from a sheer numbers perspective, it is probably dead in the water. The A's initially tried to move to San Jose, but they were blocked by San Francisco. I do not see a scenario where SF blocked the A's, but allows an expansion team. Expansion in the west is probably limited to SLC or Portland. Both of which have market size issues. The other issue will be realignment, assuming that MLB goes to eight 4 team divisions. Even without adding an extra team in the west, you still have 5 NL teams that "should" be in a west division, with the AL only having 3 natural fits, and having to choose one of the Texas clubs to fill out a division, while the other joins a prospective central or south division.
Take the NL West and add the Cardinals, Cubs & Brewers. Put the Pirates and Reds into the NL East and the eastern expansion. The Rangers & Astros are fine in the West with the rest of their division. Give them the Royals, Twins & the other expansion team. White Sox, Tigers & Guardians go to the east. The more difficult approach would be a 4x8 concept like the NFL.
When it comes to expansion it really isn’t San Francisco’s choice to “block” anything. Blocking the A’s was one thing, because it was an already established team. If the MLB really wanted San Jose, they’d simply tell the Giants to suck it up and deal with it as they place an expansion team there.
Seriously impressive video. As someone who's written academic papers for what seems no reason, its fascinating that you did one on what could be considered a hobby. Keep up the good work!
This might be the smartest most underrated TH-camr on the platform this video was extremely thought out this guy should get millions of views and hundreds of thousands of subs
Nope. I was an A’s fan, and I think a San Jose team would be great. I’d root for anyteam in the Bay Area no matter where, as long as it’s not the Giants
The A's wanted to move to Oakland but the Giants "claimed" San Jose because of their minor league team and Levis Stadium. So no, San Jose is very unlikely.
Unlikely yes, but the study was to see which cities are most “worthy” if you will. In the actual paper (which I hope to publish in the summer), it goes over limitations and such like that. Thanks for watching.
The A’s allowed the Giants to explore San Jose as a possible new stadium site before their current ballpark was built. Ironically, it’s why now the A’s couldn’t move there.
Instead of using metro area statistics, it may be more accurate to use Combined Statistical Area. In Salt Lake City, for example, the metro stats don't include the Ogden and Provo metro areas, which are only a 1/2 hour drive away from Salt Lake's proposed stadium site. The SLC metro area is, what, 1.2 million? But the Combined Statistical Area is around 2.7 million.
Great video. Any thoughts on the lack of control for all the other confounds for you independent variables? I think there’s a good case that just about every one has a causal link to each other
@@reececalvin3551 for sure, it just happened to be that in the research those two variables represented a direct issue, and the others didn’t . Thanks for watching
I don't agree with the assumption that one team should be in the West and one in the East. 1) The league doesnt actually have an even distribution right now. 2) One team would be have to be added to the AL and one to the NL each of which are separated into divisions geographically so splitting them up like that doesnt help with reallignment much. 3) With the addition of teams the league would likely also reorganize it's divisions to be either 2 or 4 divisions in each league instead of the 3 they have currently.
Gross city product and population within 75 miles would be variables to add. Television markets can somewhat arbitrary as they were orignated 50+ years ago....some metro regions can include multiple tv markets today.
Bill James once wrote that no statistic in invulnerable to the laws of common sense. In the case of MLB expansion, the "common sense" is more like "sexiness" or "coolness". San Jose and Raleigh are NOT sexy picks, at all; also, the Giants would never allow a team in San Jose. Charlotte is a better choice than Raleigh (although Nashville is probably the best pick), and Salt Lake City will probably be the choice out west. (And what about Montreal? Well, actually, they'll get another team only if there's a billionaire backer and a new stadium...if not, not.)
@@ryanlargent9320 so in the paper that was written I explain why they weren’t integrated. That is because the data is from American databases (in the source doc), so it wouldn’t be possible to keep the data consistent. Thanks for watching !
Theres no way Orlando gets a team. The two teams that are already in Florida have struggled mightily to draw fans in markets bigger than Orlando, and there has even been talks of relocation for Tampa Bay.
If Colorado could name its baseball team after a defunct hockey team (the Colorado Rockies), Carolina, if it gets a team, can name it after a defunct baskteball team (the Caroling Cougars.)
The NFL variable doesn't hold true anymore. Multi-purpose stadiums is what drove them to be linear in the past. Now each team wants their own venue. Charlotte and Nashville have been without baseball teams for a while after getting their NFL team.
Not San Jose! That's just too close to SF, though with the A's in Las Vegas, maybe, but Salt Lake City is more realistic in my mind. Raleigh isn't bad, but I was thinking Nashville or Charlotte. 4 teams in each of 8 divisions is great. No more wild card, never mind 3 of them! And I'd also halt interleague play cos it tends to take away from the fall classic.
i’d like to think entering the new markets they’d like the idea of setting up a new portland and seattle rivalry, since SEA feels very disconnected from everyone else. good fanbase in RAL and POR too, and opposite sides of the country
This was a very interesting video. I have had my own thoughts on potential sports expansion cities. For population, I use both Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas, as well as their growth or shrinkage percentages, and I also use the tv market size and growth or shrinkage percentages. I’m certain that a market which is losing population, as a number of areas have been in recent years between the COVID-19 pandemic and political unrest, will negatively affect the chances of getting a team, at least in the short term. I’m interested in historical support levels: how long have the current major league teams in a market have been there, as well as how many seasons a team was there in the past, and how many years of support have there been for minor league teams. That can give an idea of how much generational-level support is in a community. For example, Buffalo has had football since 1960, but there were earlier teams there, and they have had either major league or minor league baseball nearly continuously since the 1870s, a potential indicator of how long a city might support a team now. I’m also interested in attendance numbers for professional and college teams in the markets, ages of existing stadiums and arenas in the markets, and existing stadium capacity in case a team needs to play in one before a new one is built. Naturally, I’m interested in how many Fortune 500 companies are in a given market, as well as any which are household names. Many arenas and stadiums have names of companies I don’t know, but then there are household name companies that might be good corporate stadium naming rights candidates such as United Airlines, Delta Airlines, or Coca-Cola. Nike is headquarter in the Portland area, so a Nike Stadium might be a good combination for a baseball team serving Portland.
I need to raise a question on San Jose as well. Others have mentioned the Giants territorial rights, so I’m not going to get into that. My question is….What Stadium Plan?????? If you’re using the ESPN Doolittle article as a source, I really suggest you check your data and consider something else. I can’t speak to the other cities mentioned with any authority, but as a Bay Area baseball fan who has followed and researched a lot into local teams and potential moves…I don’t think Doolittle even actually mentions a plan, and I can anecdotally say that I’ve never heard of anyone in San Jose since the failed A’s push to move talk about even “Concepts of a plan” since then. The ESPN article refers to a plan from ten years ago, which was actually called “Cisco Field” (A naming rights deal that a few of the Athletics’ proposed plans had), and even the article admits that the land in that plan has been purchased by Google for their potential new Supercampus…but even though that plan is as unsure as any Athletics ballpark plan in any city, the land is still Google’s and not the city’s. The article only says otherwise that (unnamed) local officials say there are a handful of other potential city-owned sites downtown…. As a Bay Area native, I have my doubt about there being any city-owned properties of 13 acres+ in downtown that a ballpark could go on, and even the plots where it could are right in the line of the airport (including the Cisco Field plan, which was facing major FAA objections), where those lights would be challenged and likely not allowed. Pilots have trouble with Levi’s, and that stadium is over a mile away in the takeoff direction, downtown San Jose plots would be in the path of planes landing. Bottom line, it is not stated at all that there is a plan here. There’s only unnamed officials saying there are other plots of land, which haven’t gone through any analysis, challenges, or otherwise. There’s no renderings, no financing, not even an ownership group in place. I’m not sure you can give San Jose a “Ballpark Plan” looking at the references here.
Okay so I looked back through it, and I found what the conundrum is. The data is consistent but the issue is that I didn’t really define what constitutes a stadium plan. So I guess if there is land then it counts. Thanks for pointing this out.
@@SentryBaseball No worries…that description makes more sense, though I still question what land is available in San Jose that’s being referred to by these officials. But yeah, this didn’t seem the same as the things we’ve seen out of cities like Portland and Nashville regarding possible new stadiums, in terms of land purchases and renderings.
I see them doing Charlotte and Indianapolis just because both teams have two other pro sports teams. I could see them not saying Raleigh because Charlotte seems like the bigger option. Only because I don't think the MLB will go with the most deserving area and will go with what some guy thinks is the best option.
Where did you pull the demo and income data from? The Metropolitan Statistical Area data should really be pulled from the American Community Servey (ACS) from the Census Bureau. You can pull it from their website. Your methodology is sound tho man! Nice job dude! Had to repost because my comment got flagged because of the census website link
Great video. I've been geeking out on speculating where sports teams should be situated. I reached a similar conclusion about Raleigh. MLB should avoid NFL markets where the football owners will be be first in line for public money for venues. That makes Charlotte and Nashville less appealing.
Great stuff, keep it up! Considering the Giants’ exclusive rights to San Jose and how hard they fought a potential move to SJ or even Fremont by the A’s, isn’t it reasonable to assume an expansion team is equally off the table? Also, would there be wisdom in adding consideration first colleges with NFL/NBA-level average attendance? I still think Raleigh is better than Charlotte/Nashville, but UNC & NC State averaging 50k+ for football and 17(NC)/13(State) for MBB could hurt its case.
This is great stuff! Would love to adapt the study in the future and add stuff like this. Once it’s academically turned in then I’m gonna expand and this is a great idea! Thanks for watching
If it was up to me and could only be expand to two more teams, I’d give it to Oakland and Montreal. They are the only two markets who have had successful teams be taken away, and not have either a second team already there or put there after. These two markets have shown they can have competitive baseball, there are fanbases there who want baseball. MLB wants to expand to other countries, and Montreal is probably their safest bet. It’s a fucking shame what MLB is letting happen to Oakland, and they need to to fix it. Oakland was willing to work with Athletics ownership for the waterfront park at Howard Terminal but Fisher backed out to get less land and less aid (wtf is he doing other than screwing Oakland idk), and until it’s built a new team could still play in the coliseum. I definitely think Oakland is better fit than San Jose, especially since San Jose is technically in the San Francisco market and would get blocked by Giants ownership for sure (this occurred when the Giants were threatening to move to Florida, and the A’s ownership gave them the SJ TV market to entice them to stay, which then backfired when the Giants prevented them from building a new stadium in San Jose). As for the east, personally I think Montreal deserves their own team, but I’m unaware of Canadian infrastructure and all the potential stadium talks, I haven’t heard their name in team and stadium lobbying so it could very well fall through and if so, Raleigh would be the next best fit. If not, Nashville is a very solid option as well. If MLB expands beyond 32, say to 36 or something, I would hope that Oakland, Montreal, Raleigh, Nashville, Portland, and Salt Lake City get their own team at some point.
Funny, I think the A’s end up in Portland and the Angels end up in Sacramento with no team in Las Vegas, along with Diamondbacks in SLC, the Sox in Nashville, and the Rays in Orlando… expansion in Phoenix & Charlotte by 2030
@@timphares3061 indeed. It’s one of the limitations because data was pulled from American databases, so I wouldn’t have had consistent data. Thanks for watching
I work in Raleigh. Guy I sit next to is a White Sox fan. I’m pretty sure he would have a new favorite team if there was an expansion to Raleigh.
I feel like I'm gonna have to disagree on the San Jose front, as the proximity to other teams, specifically teams that have a lot of recent success (Dodgers, Giants, etc) seems like it would be hard to attract a new fan base. Its less than an hour drive to Oracle Park from San Jose! Salt Lake City doesn't have a team within 7.5 hours of it, and its a city thats growing quite rapidly.
I completely can agree. The only argument against that is that it was big enough for the A’s and Giants. The A’s didn’t move because there’s no fan base, it’s because they thought they could make more money elsewhere
@@SentryBaseballthe giants own the San Jose market that’s why the A’s didn’t move there
@@SentryBaseball giants also said San Jose territory (which was given to them from the A’s to help them stay when they were contemplating moving) is their turf and no other team can move there. Baseball can say otherwise but I doubt it considering their minor league team is located there. Salt lake and Portland seems to be the most viable
Dodgers aren’t a factor, it’s the Bay Area. San Jose would work, A’s fans would jump over and SJ locals would root for the team
@@WaluigiLebron except it wouldn’t work because of the Giants
While San Jose seems like a logical choice from a sheer numbers perspective, it is probably dead in the water. The A's initially tried to move to San Jose, but they were blocked by San Francisco. I do not see a scenario where SF blocked the A's, but allows an expansion team.
Expansion in the west is probably limited to SLC or Portland. Both of which have market size issues.
The other issue will be realignment, assuming that MLB goes to eight 4 team divisions. Even without adding an extra team in the west, you still have 5 NL teams that "should" be in a west division, with the AL only having 3 natural fits, and having to choose one of the Texas clubs to fill out a division, while the other joins a prospective central or south division.
@@MadThespian completely agree. The paper that was written on this goes over all of that. I hope to release that paper this summer!
Take the NL West and add the Cardinals, Cubs & Brewers.
Put the Pirates and Reds into the NL East and the eastern expansion.
The Rangers & Astros are fine in the West with the rest of their division. Give them the Royals, Twins & the other expansion team.
White Sox, Tigers & Guardians go to the east.
The more difficult approach would be a 4x8 concept like the NFL.
@ yes more difficult, but also more likely from what it sounds like. Thanks for watching
When it comes to expansion it really isn’t San Francisco’s choice to “block” anything. Blocking the A’s was one thing, because it was an already established team. If the MLB really wanted San Jose, they’d simply tell the Giants to suck it up and deal with it as they place an expansion team there.
Seriously impressive video. As someone who's written academic papers for what seems no reason, its fascinating that you did one on what could be considered a hobby. Keep up the good work!
This is quality content. Keep up the good work king.
Appreciate it 🙏
This might be the smartest most underrated TH-camr on the platform this video was extremely thought out this guy should get millions of views and hundreds of thousands of subs
As an Oakland A’s fan, an expansion team in San Jose would be another slap in the face to our dying fanbase.
Nope. I was an A’s fan, and I think a San Jose team would be great. I’d root for anyteam in the Bay Area no matter where, as long as it’s not the Giants
@ Well that’s great if you want a San Jose team. I just don’t think most of the A’s fanbase would want it at all.
The A's wanted to move to Oakland but the Giants "claimed" San Jose because of their minor league team and Levis Stadium. So no, San Jose is very unlikely.
Unlikely yes, but the study was to see which cities are most “worthy” if you will. In the actual paper (which I hope to publish in the summer), it goes over limitations and such like that. Thanks for watching.
The A’s allowed the Giants to explore San Jose as a possible new stadium site before their current ballpark was built. Ironically, it’s why now the A’s couldn’t move there.
Instead of using metro area statistics, it may be more accurate to use Combined Statistical Area. In Salt Lake City, for example, the metro stats don't include the Ogden and Provo metro areas, which are only a 1/2 hour drive away from Salt Lake's proposed stadium site. The SLC metro area is, what, 1.2 million? But the Combined Statistical Area is around 2.7 million.
Great video. Any thoughts on the lack of control for all the other confounds for you independent variables? I think there’s a good case that just about every one has a causal link to each other
@@reececalvin3551 for sure, it just happened to be that in the research those two variables represented a direct issue, and the others didn’t . Thanks for watching
Incredible work
Jesus bro really thought out the process of making the picks
Wow baseball needs another team in the bay area? Crazy.
In smaller markets, having other teams can be a negative. There are only so many sports dollars.
I don't agree with the assumption that one team should be in the West and one in the East.
1) The league doesnt actually have an even distribution right now.
2) One team would be have to be added to the AL and one to the NL each of which are separated into divisions geographically so splitting them up like that doesnt help with reallignment much.
3) With the addition of teams the league would likely also reorganize it's divisions to be either 2 or 4 divisions in each league instead of the 3 they have currently.
Gross city product and population within 75 miles would be variables to add. Television markets can somewhat arbitrary as they were orignated 50+ years ago....some metro regions can include multiple tv markets today.
Bill James once wrote that no statistic in invulnerable to the laws of common sense. In the case of MLB expansion, the "common sense" is more like "sexiness" or "coolness". San Jose and Raleigh are NOT sexy picks, at all; also, the Giants would never allow a team in San Jose. Charlotte is a better choice than Raleigh (although Nashville is probably the best pick), and Salt Lake City will probably be the choice out west. (And what about Montreal? Well, actually, they'll get another team only if there's a billionaire backer and a new stadium...if not, not.)
Montreal couldn’t be included because the data is American
@@SentryBaseball So I figured, but Montreal often gets mentioned in MLB expansion discussions. (So does Vancouver, and even Mexico City!)
@ yea Mexico City is a wild one but it was in the articles that were used funny enough
RDU and SLC based on the rapid growth of both metros and the distance from other MLB teams alone.
Let's do it, 919!
Did you include international cities like Montreal (an ever discussed return possibility), Vancouver, and Mexico City in your study? Why/why not?
@@ryanlargent9320 so in the paper that was written I explain why they weren’t integrated. That is because the data is from American databases (in the source doc), so it wouldn’t be possible to keep the data consistent. Thanks for watching !
I see Salt Lake City, Portland, San Antonio, and Orlando getting a mlb team
@@dreamcage1801 all are great candidates, but they only are gonna add 2 teams. Which 2 are you thinking if that’s the case? Thanks for watching
@ commissioner never said how many cities he wants to expand too
@ it’s more a logic exercise. Having 34 teams doesn’t make sense, but 32 is a model that has worked for multiple sports leagues
@ 32 could be outdated at some point too. 34 or 36 are greater numbers.
Theres no way Orlando gets a team. The two teams that are already in Florida have struggled mightily to draw fans in markets bigger than Orlando, and there has even been talks of relocation for Tampa Bay.
I've always preferred Raleigh just because it felt more "baseball-y" to me. Nice to see a mathematical justification for it!
If Colorado could name its baseball team after a defunct hockey team (the Colorado Rockies), Carolina, if it gets a team, can name it after a defunct baskteball team (the Caroling Cougars.)
The NFL variable doesn't hold true anymore. Multi-purpose stadiums is what drove them to be linear in the past. Now each team wants their own venue. Charlotte and Nashville have been without baseball teams for a while after getting their NFL team.
Not San Jose! That's just too close to SF, though with the A's in Las Vegas, maybe, but Salt Lake City is more realistic in my mind. Raleigh isn't bad, but I was thinking Nashville or Charlotte. 4 teams in each of 8 divisions is great. No more wild card, never mind 3 of them! And I'd also halt interleague play cos it tends to take away from the fall classic.
Great video! I'm wondering how New Orleans would stand up compared to the rest of the cities
I think Indy has a plan for baseball in place as well
Any city thats making a bid and has a ballpark should get a team immediately
i’d like to think entering the new markets they’d like the idea of setting up a new portland and seattle rivalry, since SEA feels very disconnected from everyone else. good fanbase in RAL and POR too, and opposite sides of the country
This was a very interesting video. I have had my own thoughts on potential sports expansion cities.
For population, I use both Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas, as well as their growth or shrinkage percentages, and I also use the tv market size and growth or shrinkage percentages.
I’m certain that a market which is losing population, as a number of areas have been in recent years between the COVID-19 pandemic and political unrest, will negatively affect the chances of getting a team, at least in the short term.
I’m interested in historical support levels: how long have the current major league teams in a market have been there, as well as how many seasons a team was there in the past, and how many years of support have there been for minor league teams. That can give an idea of how much generational-level support is in a community. For example, Buffalo has had football since 1960, but there were earlier teams there, and they have had either major league or minor league baseball nearly continuously since the 1870s, a potential indicator of how long a city might support a team now.
I’m also interested in attendance numbers for professional and college teams in the markets, ages of existing stadiums and arenas in the markets, and existing stadium capacity in case a team needs to play in one before a new one is built.
Naturally, I’m interested in how many Fortune 500 companies are in a given market, as well as any which are household names. Many arenas and stadiums have names of companies I don’t know, but then there are household name companies that might be good corporate stadium naming rights candidates such as United Airlines, Delta Airlines, or Coca-Cola. Nike is headquarter in the Portland area, so a Nike Stadium might be a good combination for a baseball team serving Portland.
@@gordonlong3095 this is great stuff. Fortune 500 companies is used in one of my bodies of literature funny enough. Thanks for watching
There’s a contract that says that the Giants own exclusive marketing and competition rights in San Francisco, right?
Yes, so it would be similar to the nationals move to Washington
Bro what I thought this vid was done by someone with more subs good shot!
I need to raise a question on San Jose as well. Others have mentioned the Giants territorial rights, so I’m not going to get into that. My question is….What Stadium Plan??????
If you’re using the ESPN Doolittle article as a source, I really suggest you check your data and consider something else. I can’t speak to the other cities mentioned with any authority, but as a Bay Area baseball fan who has followed and researched a lot into local teams and potential moves…I don’t think Doolittle even actually mentions a plan, and I can anecdotally say that I’ve never heard of anyone in San Jose since the failed A’s push to move talk about even “Concepts of a plan” since then.
The ESPN article refers to a plan from ten years ago, which was actually called “Cisco Field” (A naming rights deal that a few of the Athletics’ proposed plans had), and even the article admits that the land in that plan has been purchased by Google for their potential new Supercampus…but even though that plan is as unsure as any Athletics ballpark plan in any city, the land is still Google’s and not the city’s. The article only says otherwise that (unnamed) local officials say there are a handful of other potential city-owned sites downtown….
As a Bay Area native, I have my doubt about there being any city-owned properties of 13 acres+ in downtown that a ballpark could go on, and even the plots where it could are right in the line of the airport (including the Cisco Field plan, which was facing major FAA objections), where those lights would be challenged and likely not allowed. Pilots have trouble with Levi’s, and that stadium is over a mile away in the takeoff direction, downtown San Jose plots would be in the path of planes landing.
Bottom line, it is not stated at all that there is a plan here. There’s only unnamed officials saying there are other plots of land, which haven’t gone through any analysis, challenges, or otherwise. There’s no renderings, no financing, not even an ownership group in place.
I’m not sure you can give San Jose a “Ballpark Plan” looking at the references here.
@@SFGiantFutures-SFG this is great stuff. I’m gonna look into it, and I’ll update you probably tomorrow. Thanks for watching
Okay so I looked back through it, and I found what the conundrum is. The data is consistent but the issue is that I didn’t really define what constitutes a stadium plan. So I guess if there is land then it counts. Thanks for pointing this out.
@@SentryBaseball No worries…that description makes more sense, though I still question what land is available in San Jose that’s being referred to by these officials. But yeah, this didn’t seem the same as the things we’ve seen out of cities like Portland and Nashville regarding possible new stadiums, in terms of land purchases and renderings.
Awesome video! Underrated lol
I see them doing Charlotte and Indianapolis just because both teams have two other pro sports teams. I could see them not saying Raleigh because Charlotte seems like the bigger option. Only because I don't think the MLB will go with the most deserving area and will go with what some guy thinks is the best option.
Also consider Vancouver Canada this was all US teams but Vancouver makes some sense.
Yes the study was only US but there are a lot of international options
Great video!!
Where did you pull the demo and income data from? The Metropolitan Statistical Area data should really be pulled from the American Community Servey (ACS) from the Census Bureau. You can pull it from their website. Your methodology is sound tho man! Nice job dude!
Had to repost because my comment got flagged because of the census website link
Thanks brother
Great video. I've been geeking out on speculating where sports teams should be situated. I reached a similar conclusion about Raleigh. MLB should avoid NFL markets where the football owners will be be first in line for public money for venues. That makes Charlotte and Nashville less appealing.
@@daltontf thanks for watching
Great analysis, what was the name of the class you wrote this for?
It’s a college research class
Great stuff, keep it up!
Considering the Giants’ exclusive rights to San Jose and how hard they fought a potential move to SJ or even Fremont by the A’s, isn’t it reasonable to assume an expansion team is equally off the table? Also, would there be wisdom in adding consideration first colleges with NFL/NBA-level average attendance? I still think Raleigh is better than Charlotte/Nashville, but UNC & NC State averaging 50k+ for football and 17(NC)/13(State) for MBB could hurt its case.
This is great stuff! Would love to adapt the study in the future and add stuff like this. Once it’s academically turned in then I’m gonna expand and this is a great idea! Thanks for watching
If it was up to me and could only be expand to two more teams, I’d give it to Oakland and Montreal.
They are the only two markets who have had successful teams be taken away, and not have either a second team already there or put there after.
These two markets have shown they can have competitive baseball, there are fanbases there who want baseball. MLB wants to expand to other countries, and Montreal is probably their safest bet. It’s a fucking shame what MLB is letting happen to Oakland, and they need to to fix it. Oakland was willing to work with Athletics ownership for the waterfront park at Howard Terminal but Fisher backed out to get less land and less aid (wtf is he doing other than screwing Oakland idk), and until it’s built a new team could still play in the coliseum. I definitely think Oakland is better fit than San Jose, especially since San Jose is technically in the San Francisco market and would get blocked by Giants ownership for sure (this occurred when the Giants were threatening to move to Florida, and the A’s ownership gave them the SJ TV market to entice them to stay, which then backfired when the Giants prevented them from building a new stadium in San Jose).
As for the east, personally I think Montreal deserves their own team, but I’m unaware of Canadian infrastructure and all the potential stadium talks, I haven’t heard their name in team and stadium lobbying so it could very well fall through and if so, Raleigh would be the next best fit. If not, Nashville is a very solid option as well.
If MLB expands beyond 32, say to 36 or something, I would hope that Oakland, Montreal, Raleigh, Nashville, Portland, and Salt Lake City get their own team at some point.
fun project, but why not consider foreign cities (particularly canada)?
@@nate_storm in order for the data to stay consistent, I had to limit it to US countries because the data is from US government websites or AWS
Great work...but should have included Oakland.
As a Braves fan this hurts to say, but good job bud
I want the NC team to be the Carolina/Raleigh Reapers!!!!
The Hawaii Valcos, Indy Racers, Salt Lake city Yetis, Charlotte Blue, Alabama Diamonds, Oklahoma Oaks, Mexico City Vatos, Maine Lobsters, Orlando Sun
Should be Indy and Salt Lake City
Bro do more of this and post them
Angels moved to Vegas, As to Sac, expansion team in Portland and Austin, this is the only way
Funny, I think the A’s end up in Portland and the Angels end up in Sacramento with no team in Las Vegas, along with Diamondbacks in SLC, the Sox in Nashville, and the Rays in Orlando… expansion in Phoenix & Charlotte by 2030
Carolina Blue Sox 🤞🏻
You haven't considered Montreal.
@@timphares3061 indeed. It’s one of the limitations because data was pulled from American databases, so I wouldn’t have had consistent data. Thanks for watching
Nashville and New Orleans
@atomic7141 NOLA is a fun one
Might want to put a sock on that mic; I'm hearing too many p-pops and such.
What, no love for Buffalo?
Great video! I hope you are wrong. I’d love a team out here in Salt Lake City.
I wish someone would consider Omaha😔
🤯
please invest in a pop filter for your mic