Some other videos you might like: Oakland vs. MLB has turned UGLY 📺 th-cam.com/video/ShhLH9tlzVY/w-d-xo.html I don't regret Howard Terminal... but... 📺 th-cam.com/video/fCm3JB-vrCw/w-d-xo.html ESPN's "inside story" reveals LOTS about A’s, Oakland & Vegas 📺 th-cam.com/video/T57PKwRjg2o/w-d-xo.html Are A's losing $40M... or gaining hundreds? 📺 th-cam.com/video/h1WoTFpGAWE/w-d-xo.html What will Oakland A's fans do next...? 📺 th-cam.com/video/QCqHqsiR5QY/w-d-xo.html A's relocation vote could impact 7 other MLB teams 📺 th-cam.com/video/NlDlx0ufxfs/w-d-xo.html New case for MLB expansion in Oakland? 📺 th-cam.com/video/m_22yA6tQZI/w-d-xo.html MLB doesn’t want A’s in 2026 playoffs 📺 th-cam.com/video/0xQYbAxxXuk/w-d-xo.html Report: MLB could vote on Las Vegas, A's in November 📺 th-cam.com/video/H40kiBztcYA/w-d-xo.html A's players on "laughingstock" reputation 📺 th-cam.com/video/NybQnIwD36Y/w-d-xo.html
I don't disagree. Two terrible owners. The Expos were a different situation though in the sense that they let owners swap teams even though they knew for a fact when the "musical chairs" stopped there would only be 2 owners to take up 3 teams. I've really never seen anything like it in any sports. They let an owner sell the team without bringing in any new owners. This is how it played out: Step 1: The Red Sox owner at the time said he wanted to sell the team. Step 2. The Marlins owner said he wanted to buy the Red Sox. Step 3. Jeffrey Loria (an art dealer who was still probably a worse owner than Fischer) owned the Expos at the time. He said he wanted to buy the Marlins. Which meant just like the Marlins owner had to sell the team to buy the Red Sox it would theoretically mean the Expos owner has to find a buyer to sell his team to so he can buy the Marlins. Step 4. No one wants to buy the Expos. So MLB just buys the Expos outright and all the other 29 teams own their competitor. That is the only time in modern sports history I have ever of where a league let an owner(s) sell teams and lose and owner but bring in zero owners to replace them. It's very unusual. I have to kind of connect the dots in my mind to figure out why but there has to be a reason for this. Despite having Vladimir Guerrero, Sr. (In his prime), Fernando Tatis, Sr. (In his prime), Javier Vasquez (In his prime and one of the best strikeout pitchers/aces who would finish top 2 in CY voting), and of course Bartolo Colon (in hia prime when he was a 20 game winner- not the 10 year later version)... The Expos were still only selling about 1,500 seats some games. Lowest attendance in all of baseball and by a wide margin. Much worse than what the A's have EVER done. That was the weirdest most unprecedented and unlikely situation of ANY team, MLB or not, moving. They were leaving a team ownerless with no expectation of a new owner. The team moved to Washington DC under that situation too. MLB moves are rare and Fischer is a terrible owner... But this is nothing like the Expos move. The Expos didn't even HAVE an owner when they moved to DC. Loria was probably a WORSE owner than Fischer. The Marlins sold their team to HIM. The Red Sox sold their team knowing for a FACT that no owner would replace him as one of the 30 owners. Those situations are very different and for more crazy in the Expos move. The Expos weren't just moved. They were sold when they weren't even bought. That makes zero sense. This is what happened. MLB realized the team would be more valuable outside of the Olympic Stadium hellhole on Montreal. They bought the team, moved the team to a better place and then sold it. That worked well. That's what's going on with Oakland now. It's just less complicated because MLB doesn't have to actually buy the team to make it happen. As ridiculous as what they did with the Expos was it still worked for the best. This isn't even close to as crazy as the Expos relocation. The Olympic site in Montreal was no longer MLB viable. The Coliseum was never really viable with Mt. Davis and sewage and opossums and rails blocking the view even for radio announcers. This is very less complicated than the Expos move. The Expos move ended up making perfect sense. Less complications are a good thing.
The issue is that Brodie is explaining exactly WHY teams SHOULD move. The Braves moved from Milwaukee despite never having a losing season. How did that work out? Now they are the #1 team in over 500 counties. They have the best record in the league. The Braves have what might be the best lineup in baseball history top to bottom. They are also on a 5 year division championship streak. They also won the WS a couple years ago during that streak. They also had a record 15 straight years where they were the only division championship team in their division and won a WS in the meantime. Moves are good. The Braves prove that's a fact. The big question is this: When was the last time a team relocated and was worse for it? I can answer that. 1902. When the Milwaukee Brewers became the St. Louis Browns. 1902. Well over a century ago. Before WWI. Does anyone think that's happening again? The Expos sold their team and didn't even have a buyer and still became better. If you care about the A's... They will be better for this. If you are petty enough to argue over where the A's play then you clearly don't care about the A's. A's hats will fly forever. It doesn't have to happen in a specific location. Root for the A's or don't root for the A's. It doesn't matter where they play unless you actually buy tickets to show up to the games NO MATTER WHAT. I have always done everything I can to support my teams ESPECIALLY during the worst years. It's not my favorite team but I also am a huge fan of the Texas Rangers. I've never even been to Texas. I don't care where they play. I like the RANGERS. Get your ish together people. Are you A:a fans or are you Oakland fans? It seems the A's, Warriors and Raiders have all decided you are ONLY Oakland fans. It's sad I root for my favorite team's competition more than you do when your team loses. I never stop rooting for my team. Finish 30th out of 30 every year for 30 years. That's great. Give me the best chance at 30 #1 overall picks in a row. It's not the "Oakland A's." It's not the "Kansas City A's" or the "Philadelphia A's" either. It's the A's. Like them or don't like them. End of story.
The Giants announced they were moving before the '58 season even started. But they were going to Minneapolis, not SF. Walter O'Malley twisted Horace Stoneham's arm to go further west.
@@fosternyc926 That's why they went - if you think they were big rivals in California? That's *nothing* compared to the rivalry they had when they had to split New York.
@@mactheknife7049 that’s why. if i were the Giants, why would i satisfy the Dodgers in getting a new stadium? i’d just stick to Minneapolis and stick it to the Dodgers. but i understand since the Giants were also getting a new stadium
While the NY Mets uniforms pay homage to the old NY (Baseball) Giants (the other NY Giants - the NFL one - are actually enfranchised as the "New York Football Giants") and Brooklyn Dodgers, the colors of the uniform (white, blue, and orange), also pays homage to the former New Netherlands colony that the former Dutch Republic, whose flag was orange, white, and blue, would later, under direct British rule, would become New York.
I was searching for a video that explained why each MLB team that relocated moved and this is perfect. This is way easier that searching and having more complicated explenations about it, but this keeps it simple.
What is particularly interesting about the Browns and Cardinals is that Sportsman's Park, home to both teams, belonged to the Browns, and the Cardinals were tenants of the Browns, even though the Cardinals drew over twice as many fans as the Browns during the last quarter-century the two teams shared the stadium.
@@michaelgwfrogwelge-- Yes. It is the last time that has happened. It also happened a couple of times in the early 20s, when the Giants and Yankees shared the Polo Grounds, before Yankee Stadium was built .
Great analysis Brodie. One thing I want to add for the Pilots is they had terrible luck with timing. They were originally slated for a 1971 or 72 opening season but because the Royals wanted to play sooner the needed to start in 69.
Senator Symington of Missouri threatened MLB's antitrust exemption if Kansas City didn't get another team ASAP and, since unlike Peter Angelos he had real power, MLB caved.
@@tomandrews2887 The Royals played at Kansas City Municipal Stadium (the KC A's former park) until Royals Stadium (now Kauffman Stadium) opened in 1973 on the same complex shared with the Chiefs' home, Arrowhead Stadium.
@@HighpointerGeocacher Seattle did not get that luxury. The Kingdome wasn't going to be ready, but the threat of a lawsuit from KC forced them to play sooner. The Pilots were never financially stable due to the early start, and they could never recover from that in their minor league stadium.
Tell this to someone who experienced many of the 33 summers where Washington had no baseball. Thankfully, the Nationals' future appears secure, no matter who succeeds the Lerners as owners. It's now an affluent top-ten market with an attractive, state-of-the-art ballpark in a booming area of D.C., as well as a team with some on-field success capped by winning the 2019 World Series. No Calvin Griffith or Bob Short will take this franchise out of town.
Candlestick Park was purpose build for Giants. Unfortunately for all involved, the owner only visited the construction site during the morning and not in the afternoons and evening when the games will actually get played. It was known for one of the coldest stadium due to wind coming in in the afternoon. When they build the new stadium, someone thought of doing a wind study with US Davis, and they decided to rotate the stadium so the home plate will be back towards the wind, thus that entire seating secting will block it.
Walter O'Malley tried to get a domed stadium built for the Dodgers to keep them in Brooklyn, but Robert Moses, a very powerful urban planner in NYC at the time, wanted to build a stadium in Queens. O'Malley didn't want to move the Dodgers to Queens because the team would lose it's ties to Brooklyn, so he took up the city of Los Angeles' offer to move to California. The irony is that the stadium in Queens became Shea Stadium, and the spot in Brooklyn where O'Malley wanted his stadium is now the site of the Barclays Center. Also, if you want a good book about the year that the Seattle Pilots existed, I would recommend the classic book "Ball Four" by Jim Bouton.
The Yankees and Giants shared the Polo Grounds for a time, until the Yankees got Babe Ruth, and started out-drawing the Giants, and so, the Giants kicked the Yankees out of the Polo Grounds. The Cardinals and Browns also both shared Sportsman's Park. The Brooklyn Dodgers had become one of the most popular (and profitable) teams in baseball. The Giants played at Seals Stadium while Candlestick Park was being built.
That is why Yankee Stadium was called "The house that Ruth built." He did not build it literally, but the phenomenal success he had on the franchise forced the Yankees to build a giant new stadium.
The current Baltimore Orioles team (the former St. Louis Browns) are actually the third iteration of the Orioles in the Major Leagues. The first one was first in the American Association from 1882 to 1891, and then moved over to the National League, where they stayed until the NL reduced itself from 12 teams to 8 by folding four teams after the 1899 season. That team featured several famous stars, most notably Wee Willie Keeler and John McGraw. When the AL Orioles debuted in 1901, McGraw was with them, as both player and manager. However, McGraw and AL president Ban Johnson hated each other. Johnson founded the American League to be a cleaner alternative to the rough-and-tumble National League, where McGraw had starred. A frustrated McGraw left the AL Orioles mid-way through the next season to take the managerial reins of the New York Giants, a job he stayed with for 30 years. And he brought with him several players who had played with the NL Orioles in the 1890s.
Not only did the Brownies and The Cards play the World Series in the same city, they played it in the same stadium. Sportsman park was the home of the Browns. The Cardinals rented from the Browns.
Joining the 1921 & 22 World Series, played entirely at the Polo Grounds, between the Yankees & Giants. They met again in 1923 (only time the World Series has had the same two teams for three consecutive years), but by then Yankee Stadium had opened, just in time for the Yankees to win their first championship. As much as I love the history of baseball, I'm even more infatuated with the history of baseball STADIUMS. Can't get enough.
@@GregMcNeish same. I love them too. Im a Cubbie fan so I feel fortunate. In my opion we have the greatest one left. I would loved to have seen a game at Forbes Field or Crosley Feild, or Tje Polo Grounds but especially Ebbets Field. Of all of them if I had to pick just one it’d be that one. That one has some sort of mythos about it. Dem Bums finally winning it all and then gone 2 years later. They should have kept all those old Jewel Box Parks. I can’t understand why they would tear down Tiger Stadium and definitely not Old Yankee Stadium. It should’ve been saved. Who tears down the House that Ruth built? What a shame that was.
@@shaindaman13 -- League Park in Cleveland is still there, sort of. The playing field is still there, but the stands have been taken down and replaced with much smaller ones, and the park is used for high school and other non-professional games.
Only the giants vs Yankees in 1921 & 1922 World Series and the browns vs cardinals in 1944 played an entire World Series in the sane park other than the 2020 World Series
Fun fact - the 1944 Browns and Cards managers shared an apartment as the city had a wartime housing shortage and, since they shared the stadium, one team would always be on the road while the other was in St. Louis. The wife and children of the manager of whichever team was on the road would go to their off-season home (both of which happened to be in Ohio) while their husband/father's team was on its road trips. For the World Series they flipped a coin, with the winner getting to stay in the shared apartment while the loser was able to use another unit in the building offered up for the purpose by a resident who was going to be out of town.
Funny enough, the Browns were on the verge of moving to Los Angeles...in 1942. In fact, the vote was to take place on December 8th, 1941. Well after the Japanese attacked pearl Harbor the day before this vote, the move was rejected by every team...including the Browns.
Construction on a lighting system at Wrigley Field was also supposed to begin on December 8, 1941. Instead, the materials were donated to the War Department, and Wrigley Field didn't get lights until 1988. LOL.
A lot of common themes, so many of which apply to Oakland. "Second team in same market", "Team not being invested / losing record" and "small market team".
That is correct. The three franchise relocations of the mid 1950's involved the movement of the less-popular and less-successful of two teams in a two-team market that were each no longer capable supporting two teams. This appears to be true with the San Francisco Bay area; the Giants are more successful and more popular than the A's. Thus, the A's should move.
The odd thing about how the MLB treats the SF Bay Area Market is that they split the Giants and Athletics into separate "territorial rights" areas, whereas other cities with 2-team markets (NYC, Los Angeles, Chicago) share the same territory.
NYC was offering to build a stadium for the Brooklyn Dodgers in Queens, where Shea Stadium would be built. To the Dodgers ownership it was build in Brooklyn or leave the city. With the Giants needing a replacement for Polo Grounds it seems odd no one thought to give them the site of the future Shea Stadium and find a place in Brooklyn for the Dodgers.
NYC planner Moses grand plan was for both teams to play in a city owned stadium where Shea was eventually built. Not only did he not allow any public help for O'Malley to buy land near his preferred location where Barclays Center is today, he frustrated any attempt for the two clubs to build their own ballparks. The neighborhood around Ebbets Field was changing, a lot of Brooklyn fans were moving to Long Island. Ebbets wasn't near public transportation then, only had room for 500 cars in the neighborhood and their growing suburban fanbase found it more and more difficult to get to games. The location where O'Malley wanted to move to was at the Brooklyn terminus of the Long Island Railroad, which would have been a perfect fit for the Dodgers considering the new demographic and geographic reality, and would've kept them in Brooklyn. Moses wouldn't let it happen, and he's the real reason NY lost both of its national league teams.
I think the Giants wanted to stay in Manhattan if they stayed in NYC. Too bad they couldn't have shared Yankee Stadium for a few years while the Polo Grounds was thoroughly renovated and modernized.
Giants played at Seals Stadium in 1958 and 1959. Candlestick Park opened in 1960 as a baseball only stadium. The 49ers moved in in 1971, thus Candlestick was enclosed and expanded
The San Francisco Seals of the PCL played at Seals stadium. They moved when the Giants arrived, as did the Hollywood Stars and the Los Angeles Angels when the Dodgers arrived in LA.
GREAT history lesson and well done. As you saw, many of the relocations from the East was cities with TWO teams (AL & NL). As a guy who grew up in Brooklyn, I appreciated the trivia about the Mets colors. You will also note that the Mets NY logo on their hats is the same one used by the Giants before moving to SF. To this day, Brodie, all of us Brooklynites still resent O'Malley moving our "Beloved Bums" to LA. People in Brooklyn and Queens follow the Mets while those in Manhattan, Bronx and Staten Island are normally Yankee fans. BTW...it was the Giants who moved West before the Dodgers HOWEVER it is believed that the owners of both teams plotted to move at the same time. MLB felt that it needed TWO teams in California to make baseball work on the coast. Both teams had the same basic issues as you mentioned. It had to be both or no teams moving to CA. The Giants went to Seals Stadium until candlestick park was completed. The Dodgers played at the LA Collisium until Dodger Stadium was built
Read Jimmy Breslin's book on the 62 Mets. MLB didn't want to expand. They realized they could expand to six additional cities without letting anyone else into he club by simply moving teams out of two team (or three) team cities. Two from NY, and one from each of Boston, Philadelphia, St Louis, and Chicago. Only when Bill Shea threatened with a 3rd league did they agree to give NY a NL team back, and they put the screws to Joan Payson and made her pay. Now for the Giants.. they were already out the door. The Dodgers are a bit more complicated. O'Malley wanted to OWN his stadium, not rent it. He sold Ebbets to a developer at the end of 56 with a lease back for five more years (three guaranteed plus two one year options.) He had to be out of Ebbets at the end of 61 regardless. The fuse was lit. So once LA passed proposition B and the Dodgers were deeded 350 acres in Downtown LA, he didn't need to exercise the options on Ebbets and gave the keys to the developer, which is why Ebbets was torn down first. O'Malley was offered Shea, but unless he could own it, he wasn't going to take it. He tried to convince Moses to condemn the land at Atlantic and Flatbush and sell it to him on the cheap so he could build his dome. At a presser at Gracie Mansion, Moses told him, "What you are saying to the mayor is, that if you don't get this particular piece of property, you're gonna pack up your marbles and leave town.." so he did. New York City was never going to deed the Dodgers 325 acres of Brooklyn. Los Angeles said, "Here you go.." and off he went. (Watch HBO Sports "The Ghosts of Flatbush"). The polo grounds stuck around because Stoneham had a land lease that ended in 1962, at which time he could remove the stadium or renew for 30 years. He never had a choice, since NY condemned it for (eventual) housing once Shea was built. That lawsuit is a good one. The Coogans believed the value was in the land. Stoneham believed the value was in the physical stadium, and the City thought it worthless..
Blue and orange are also the colors of the NYC flag, sort of the "official" colors of the city. So it makes sense for the Mets to wear blue and orange.
Very good history, Brodie. But, I have read that Candlestick was not being built when Giants relocated. Have read where SF mayor showed Stoneham potential sites for new ballpark. Took Stoneham to Candlestick Point on a beautiful sunny day. Stoneham loved the location. However, frigid night time conditions never were mentioned during the tour. I live in Philadelphia. Went to a night game at Candlestick in June 1989 and absolutely froze. Brutal.
Brodie, do a program about what would happen if MLB lost its exemption to the antitrust laws back in the 1920s and was upheld in 1953. I think it would mean having to pay minor leaguers at least minimum wage for everything required of them. I think it is the biggest reason MLB stays away from politics. Just look at Disney World and Florida.
Seals Stadium in San Francisco was already in place when the Giants moved. The San Francisco Seals were famous for being the team where Joe DiMaggio got his professional debut.
Grew up in the shadow of Chavez Ravine. All I knew was Koufax and Drysdale were at Dodger Stadium and I was a fan. Watched "Lords of the Flatbush" and saw what the Dodgers meant to Brooklyn. Sad to watch - unfortunately politics plays a major role in why teams move, BTW, the best way to learn about the Seattle Pilots is the book, Ball Four by Jim Bouton. This book spawned sports journalism.
Seals Stadium was the park of the Pacific Coast League team, the San Francisco Seals, that was used as a temporary ballpark for the Giants in the 1958 and 1959 seasons until Candlestick Park opened in 1960.
The Browns actually tried to move to Milwaukee before the 1953 season but were denied because Lou Perini, owner of the Boston Braves, owned the territorial rights to Milwaukee and ended up moving his Braves there.
There were at least three other teams that relocated at the beginning gf the A. L. The teams are the Grand Raids Rippers to Cleveland in 1900, Kansas City Blues to Washington in 1901, and Sioux City to Chicago in 1900.
Yes, the first Giants stadium was Seals stadium. The Pacific Coast League folded. The thing that made the move west viable was air travel. The Washington Senators: First in War, First in Peace and last in the American League
The issue is that Brodie is explaining exactly WHY teams SHOULD move. The Braves moved from Milwaukee despite never having a losing season. How did that work out? Now they are the #1 team in over 500 counties. They have the best record in the league. The Braves have what might be the best lineup in baseball history top to bottom. They are also on a 5 year division championship streak. They also won the WS a couple years ago during that streak. They also had a record 15 straight years where they were the only division championship team in their division and won a WS in the meantime. Moves are good. The Braves prove that's a fact. The big question is this: When was the last time a team relocated and was worse for it? I can answer that. 1902. When the Milwaukee Brewers became the St. Louis Browns. 1902. Well over a century ago. Before WWI. Does anyone think that's happening again? The Expos sold their team and didn't even have a buyer and still became better. If you care about the A's... They will be better for this. If you are petty enough to argue over where the A's play then you clearly don't care about the A's. A's hats will fly forever. It doesn't have to happen in a specific location. Root for the A's or don't root for the A's. It doesn't matter where they play unless you actually buy tickets to show up to the games NO MATTER WHAT. I have always done everything I can to support my teams ESPECIALLY during the worst years. It's not my favorite team but I also am a huge fan of the Texas Rangers. I've never even been to Texas. I don't care where they play. I like the RANGERS. Get your ish together people. Are you A:a fans or are you Oakland fans? It seems the A's, Warriors and Raiders have all decided you are ONLY Oakland fans. It's sad I root for my favorite team's competition more than you do when your team loses. I never stop rooting for my team. Finish 30th out of 30 every year for 30 years. That's great. Give me the best chance at 30 #1 overall picks in a row. It's not the "Oakland A's." It's not the "Kansas City A's" or the "Philadelphia A's" either. It's the A's. Like them or don't like them. End of story.
In the late 1890s the NL was a 12 team league. After the 1899 season the NL contracted 4 teams. As stated in the video the western League was a minor league. With the contraction of the NL Ban Jonson President of the western league saw an opportunity for the Western League to claim Major League status and compete with the NL. He placed 3 teams in 3 of the 4 cities vacated by the NL. Those teams being Baltimore ( now the Yankees), Washington ( now in Minnesota) and Cleveland. He renamed the Western League as the American League. Louisville was the only city of the contracted NL teams not to gain a new team in the AL. The Louisville team began in the American Association in 1882 and was accepted to the NL in 1892 when the American Association folded. Like Montreal they have never seen Major league baseball again.
Excellent video and very interesting, Brodie! You always do a great job with your videos and it is entertaining to watch them for sure. It really is very interesting how we have come full-circle with the recent specualtion about teams being moved in the MLB.
A point to note about the second Washington Senators moving to Texas, when Bob Short bought the team in 1969 he raised ticket prices to the highest in the major leagues. It should also be noted he bought the team for 9 million dollars but demanded 12 million from anyone who wanted to buy it and keep it in Washington ( for comparison George Steinbrenner bought the New York Yankees in 1973 for 10 million) Short also claimed that Washington wasn't safe at night yet scheduled all Saturday home games at night. In 1971 he moved the Senators to Texas got 7 million in radio and TV money up front and sold the team two years later. Does this come as a surprise to anyone, it shouldn't... ever wonder why the basketball team in LA is named the Lakers, because their owner a Minneapolis native named Bob Short moved his own home town Basketball team from Minneapolis to LA and then quickly sold for a profit.
The original Senators franchise started in Kansas City, so they technically moved east first, and then moved back west to Minnesota. Minnesota nearly had an American League team before the Twins, since The White Sox briefly played in St. Paul, before moving to Chicago when the AL was formed. If the Sox had stayed, or if the Giants had come, then the Twins might have ended up somewhere else under a different name.
Great history of MLB moves. Did you know that the 1944 World Series, every game was played at Old Sportsman Park, which became the first Busch Stadium. The Cardinals and Browns both played at the same stadium at Grand and Shaudow. This is where I saw my first MLB game in 1961.
Also all of the games 1921 and 1922 World Series were played at the Polo Grounds, since the NY Giants and Yankees were sharing the Polo Grounds before Yankee Stadium opened in 1923.
The Montreal Expos relocating saga is where I first heard about Las Vegas wanting MLB, there was an ownership group in Vegas that wanted to buy the Expos and build a 40,000 seat ballpark in the parking lot area behind Ballys and Paris Las Vegas
The Los Angeles Dodgers first played in the Los Angeles Coliseum. The first season opener played at Dodgers Stadium was April 10, 1962 The Giants first played at Seals Stadium. The first season opener at Candlestick Park was April 12, 1960
Giants moved to seals stadium first. In 62 Candlestick Park was built. Also there was never talk of a new stadium for the Giants in NYC. Robert Moses would not build a stadium in Brooklyn . He wanted the ballpark built in Queens where the Mets ended up.
The thing that bothers me the most about relocation is that the city gets punished for a team's incompetence, and the team gets rewarded for their own incompetence. When a team sucks, thanks to the affirmative action policy of having a draft, they are able to get good prospects. This turns a bad team into a good team. Many times, these teams were bad just before moving, but good once they got to their new city. Here's some examples: The Avs and Stars won Stanley Cups soon after relocating from Quebec and Minnesota respectively. The Rams won a Super Bowl just a few years after relocating--both times. The Thunder got really good right after they left Seattle. The Titans made a SB soon after leaving Houston. What's going to piss me off is that in the likely event that the A's move, they'll be really good in a few years because they're terrible right now, and they'll draft a bunch of good players, and be World Series contenders within a few years of moving to Las Vegas. For example, the Tigers went from 119 losses in '03 to AL Champs in '06. The Cubs and Astros were 100 loss teams in '12, and won the World Series in '16 and '17 respectively. Short turnarounds can happen in MLB, and I'm worried it will happen to the A's (if they leave).
One more thing about Sick's Stadium, the sight lines from the press boxes were terrible, and the visiting announcers had to use a mirror to see left field. Also, a Lowe's now sits on the site of Sick's Stadium, and they at least used to have a cutout of a batter in front of the store, as well as markings for the bases and home plate, and a sign on the side of the road.
And in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns pulled up stakes and moved east to Baltimore and took on another bird nickname, the Baltimore Ravens. So two established teams named "Browns" both moved to Baltimore and took on bird nicknames.
In 1961 Minnesota was to get an expansion team. However Calvin Griffith made a deal for Washington DC to get the expansion team and he could move the original Senators to Minnesota
Relocation is unacceptable in this day and age. It essentially never happened except during the massive expansion period. Going from 16 teams in 10 cities to 26 teams in 24 cities. Or 22 depending on how you count Oakland and Anaheim. We need to expand by 6 teams. We are back over 11 million people per team in this country the highest it’s been since 1960 when they added 8 teams in 9 years. The culture is different now. An expansion team feels like a team you can call your own and. Or someone else’s cast off. There’s no excuse to relocate any team when there are buyers out there.
Sometimes relocation is necessary, because of population and demographic changes. For example, a greater percentage of the USA population lives in the West and South than in the 1950's, when all MLB teams were in the Northeast and Midwest.
The main reason why they relocate is because they've been asking for a new stadium and the cities aren't offering any support. The other reason why teams locate is that the market isn't generating any income.
That was in the early 1990s, before Peter McGowan led a group of investors to buy them(and that group still owns the team today, give or take a few investors, McGowan died a few years ago)
The giants or dodgers were offered what became the Shea stadium site the Dodgers replied they are the Brooklyn Dodgers we will not play in queens, the giants refused to play outside of manhattan.
Read the history of Sportsman Park in St. Louis. Bill Veeck of the Browns owned Sportsman Park, the Cardinals rented it after their stadium burned to the ground. When Veeck relocated the Browns to Baltimore, Gussie Busch bought the Cardinals and Sportsman Park and desired to rename it Budweiser Stadium. MLB commissioner nixed renaming the stadium for a beer, and thus Busch renamed it with his name. A year later Busch introduced to the world Busch Bavarian Beer. I still recall Bob Gibson pitching for the Cardinals during the 1964 World Series in Sportsman Park. My father recalls the Browns/Cardinals trolley series... th-cam.com/video/Ln3sNwccHxI/w-d-xo.html
I think in the wave of relocations in the 50s and 60s, one has to take into account that americans stopped going to live entertainment of any kind, including going to the ballpark, as television became more widely available. This is behind a fair bit of the poor attendance you cite.
The story of how the Mets got their colors isn't entirely correct. The official colors of NYC are blue and orange. Tge Mets aren't the only NYC area team to have those colors (Knicks, Islanders)
Minnesota was supposed to be an expansion team not the new senators but Griffith demanded to move his team to there instead and they got a new team so weird
@@HighpointerGeocacher No, it is the 1st time that 2 teams west of the Mississippi River played in a World Series. I know, that messed me up to in high school, also, you can when alot of bets!
1944 World Series had MANY players still at War. The Browns making it to the World Series was an aberration. Franchise was awful for most of its existence.
You can kind of blame us Milwaukee fans, because when the Braves drew 2 million fans the owners started seeing greener pastures in relocation -- of course it ended up backfiring on the Milwaukee fandom when the Braves moved to Atlanta
@@youtubeemployeesarestupid3464 Not only am I not ashamed of it, I could argue it opened the door to the modern sports world (altho at some point it would have expanded on its own, I think)
I missed the 1985 Expos with Gary Carter, Al Oliver, Andre Dawson, Warren Cromatie , Steve Rogers and Jeff Reardon. They would have made it to the WS if it wasn't for the Rick Monday (Dogers) HR.
The game was tied 1 -1 when Monday hit the home run that didn't automatically mean Montreal was going to win the game if that home run was not allowed this was 1981 NLCS not 1985
You just cant fail moving to vegas, there is no way that happens. Way too many people here on s regular basis with conventions, elementary, junior high, high sfhool and college sporting tournaments, 2.9million people thst live in vegas, to the gamblers and just the party goers. Theres no way the statidum doesnt seat 15k-20k on 2/3s of their home games with plenty of sale out games. Every single week theres 40-100k + people here on the strip. That location is actually perfect to neutralize traffic because theres way more ways to get there as i know this because i do uber full time and only work the strip. Every single tourist or professional i pick up and talk to about the As coming are extremely happy to have a reason to spend a weekend trip watching their home team play. Theres no way it fails. And hopefully with the As groming all these young players and with so much signing money to bring in 2 to 3 tier A players they will be a winnin program. I think it will be a success a long as the As give discount tickets to Nevada residents that have ID, and free parking to those with Nevada IDs it will boom.
I think he just meant the area still had a team. But if that’s the standard, then the Bay Area will still have a team if the As leave so that doesn’t work
@@tomandrews2887 tell that to a 76 year old man in Brooklyn if having an expansion team in queens is the same as having the dodgers in your own Burrough of Brooklyn for over 70 years…or having a team in sf be a replacement when you live in Oakland proper having the vagiants be a rival all your life
@@wyatthill6252 don’t worry, no one’s going to follow your wine and cheese franchise after the A’s leave. Other teams in Cali and across the country will just swallow up the A’s fans.
The Yankees & Yankee fans refuse to believe they started as the Baltimore Orioles they claim they are a 1903 expansion team that replaced a folded orioles despite the fact Col. Rupert bought the orioles and moved them to NY.
I think MLB needs a second Canadian team again. It hasn't been the same since the Expos moved. The MLB screwed Montreal out of their team when they bought the Expos from Jeffrey Loria.
@@EvanEscher In my opinion, if Canada got a second team, it would appear to me that Vancouver would be a better choice. I would be the team of all of western Canada (BC, AB, SK, MB). When I lived in the Seattle area, many fans from British Columbia would come to Seattle when the Mariners played the Blue Jays. Putting the Vancouver team in the NL would provide a natural interleague rivalry with the Mariners and open the possibility of an all-Canada World Series between Vancouver and Toronto.
Angels are going to be next to relocate. There fans are lucky at least they’re talking about relocating up to Long Beach…I could see them threatening to relocate to Portland or going to Austin
@@mm4foreverThe Angels might be named for Los Angeles, but their market (Orange County) has much less overlap with the Dodgers market (Los Angeles city proper) than the overlap between Giants & A's market (where they had historically fought over San Jose and its tech money). While I wouldn't put it past Arte Moreno to move the team, Orange County is far too lucrative an area: MLB would almost certainly establish an expansion team if the Angels left.
@@mm4forever LA market is much larger than Bay Area, and indeed Angels are gonna move, but they're still gonna stay in the general area, unlike the A's... Even if they move outside the area MLB are gonna give them replacement team since MLB need New York and LA to have at least 2 teams...
The earthquake was when the Dodgers and Giants left New York. Never should've happened. Never should have been allowed. West Coast should have gotten expansion teams.
I agree. That was extremely painful for many New Yorkers. I feel the same way about the Milwaukee Braves. Its a pain that LA Dodgers and SF Giants will never understand. It wasnt right to move two beloved NY teams to the West Coast.
The issue is that Brodie is explaining exactly WHY teams SHOULD move. The Braves moved from Milwaukee despite never having a losing season. How did that work out? Now they are the #1 team in over 500 counties. They have the best record in the league. The Braves have what might be the best lineup in baseball history top to bottom. They are also on a 5 year division championship streak. They also won the WS a couple years ago during that streak. They also had a record 15 straight years where they were the only division championship team in their division and won a WS in the meantime. Moves are good. The Braves prove that's a fact. The big question is this: When was the last time a team relocated and was worse for it? I can answer that. 1902. When the Milwaukee Brewers became the St. Louis Browns. 1902. Well over a century ago. Before WWI. Does anyone think that's happening again? The Expos sold their team and didn't even have a buyer and still became better. If you care about the A's... They will be better for this. If you are petty enough to argue over where the A's play then you clearly don't care about the A's. A's hats will fly forever. It doesn't have to happen in a specific location. Root for the A's or don't root for the A's. It doesn't matter where they play unless you actually buy tickets to show up to the games NO MATTER WHAT. I have always done everything I can to support my teams ESPECIALLY during the worst years. It's not my favorite team but I also am a huge fan of the Texas Rangers. I've never even been to Texas. I don't care where they play. I like the RANGERS. Get your ish together people. Are you A:a fans or are you Oakland fans? It seems the A's, Warriors and Raiders have all decided you are ONLY Oakland fans. It's sad I root for my favorite team's competition more than you do when your team loses. I never stop rooting for my team. Finish 30th out of 30 every year for 30 years. That's great. Give me the best chance at 30 #1 overall picks in a row. It's not the "Oakland A's." It's not the "Kansas City A's" or the "Philadelphia A's" either. It's the A's. Like them or don't like them. End of story.
@@youtubeemployeesarestupid3464 "I am not going to drive a thousand miles to attend an A's game." That would be a logical argument except the A's are in Oakland right now and you probably aren't driving the 10 or 20 miles it would take to see them now. If you are God bless you and you really are a diehard fan and I hate for you that your team is moving. The thing is hardly anyone in Oakland is driving any distance at all to go to A's games even when they live close to them. That's the problem. There's just not enough A's fans in Oakland who are willing to drive to go see a team play during the down years while they play in the worst stadium in baseball. It's just like it was in Montreal with the Expos. They were averaging around 1,500 fans per game at that terrible Olympic Stadium. They moved to a brand new city in DC, they got a brand new stadium. They had some terrible years that netted them some great draft picks like Steven Strasburg, Bruce Harper and Anthony Rendon. During those years the fan base supported them enough that when their great prospects made it to the majors the team actually had some money to spend on free agents so ownership could reinvest that money into making the team very good for a long time. They eventually won a World Series as a result of the move to a new city. They moved because it was the best thing for the team. That's what teams are supposed to do. Whatever is best for the team. Moving to a new city is better for the A's. It might not be better for Oakland but it's better for the team. The A's first priority is to do what's best for the A's, not what's best for Oakland. If you want to complain about the owner, complain about the owner. I think he sucks personally. If you want to complain about the stadium, complain about the stadium. It's the worst stadium in baseball. If you want to complain about the trades, complain about the trades. I think the Olson and Murphy trades were awful trades for the A's. Look at what those guys are doing for Atlanta now. I'm not complaining because I'm actually a Braves fan so those trades really helped my team but if A's fans want to complain about them I would totally understand. I would complain about them too. Don't complain about the team doing something that's actually good for the team though. Moving out of that terrible stadium where no fans want to support the A's into a brand new stadium and new city with a new fan base is good for the team. The team is supposed to do things that are good for the team.
@@youtubeemployeesarestupid3464 I know plenty of people who root for teams that aren't in their city. It's very common. People move out of cities and still root for the team in the city that they abandoned. People root for teams in cities they've never been to. How many Yankees fans do you think exist that have never even been to New York City? If you're truly a baseball fan you're going to root for a team whether they live in your city or not. There are millions of MLB fans who root for teams even though they've never had an MLB team in their entire state. There are tons of baseball fans in New Orleans. You can root for a team no matter where they play. The only thing that matters about stadium location is getting fans in the seats and that's exactly why the A's moved. The fans who would feel abandoned by the A's leaving already abandoned the A's by not showing up to the games when they were there. At least the vast majority of them did. If all these A's "fans" complaining about the move spent the same amount of time and effort actually supporting the team as they do whining about the move then the team wouldn't be moving in the first place. When the people in the city don't support the team by going to games and then vote to elect government officials who don't want to do what it takes to keep sports teams in the city the team moves on to a city that offers more support. That's just how life works. The team would be stupid to not move to a more supportive area and a MUCH better stadium.
@@matthew01234 - If you dared move my teams, you are going to find yourself 2nd letter 5th letter 8th letter 5th letter 1st letter 4th letter 5th letter 4th letter, failed 1st letter 2nd letter 15th letter 18th letter 20th letter 9th letter 15th letter 14th letter!
@@juicyfartsofjimcornette1154 You probably support your teams. Or at least live in a city that supports the team and doesn't make them play in a terrible stadium then elects Mayor's who call the terrible stadium "Great" and refer to to it as a place your team should be happy to "play in for a long time."
@@matthew01234 - I don't support 1st letter 19th letter twice 8th letter 15th letter 12th letter 5th letter 19th letter like you that want to see my teams relocate!
Some other videos you might like:
Oakland vs. MLB has turned UGLY
📺 th-cam.com/video/ShhLH9tlzVY/w-d-xo.html
I don't regret Howard Terminal... but...
📺 th-cam.com/video/fCm3JB-vrCw/w-d-xo.html
ESPN's "inside story" reveals LOTS about A’s, Oakland & Vegas
📺 th-cam.com/video/T57PKwRjg2o/w-d-xo.html
Are A's losing $40M... or gaining hundreds?
📺 th-cam.com/video/h1WoTFpGAWE/w-d-xo.html
What will Oakland A's fans do next...?
📺 th-cam.com/video/QCqHqsiR5QY/w-d-xo.html
A's relocation vote could impact 7 other MLB teams
📺 th-cam.com/video/NlDlx0ufxfs/w-d-xo.html
New case for MLB expansion in Oakland?
📺 th-cam.com/video/m_22yA6tQZI/w-d-xo.html
MLB doesn’t want A’s in 2026 playoffs
📺 th-cam.com/video/0xQYbAxxXuk/w-d-xo.html
Report: MLB could vote on Las Vegas, A's in November
📺 th-cam.com/video/H40kiBztcYA/w-d-xo.html
A's players on "laughingstock" reputation
📺 th-cam.com/video/NybQnIwD36Y/w-d-xo.html
The A's situation reminds me a lot of the Expos, lousy ownership ran the team in the ground no fan support and the team ended up moving
I don't disagree. Two terrible owners. The Expos were a different situation though in the sense that they let owners swap teams even though they knew for a fact when the "musical chairs" stopped there would only be 2 owners to take up 3 teams. I've really never seen anything like it in any sports. They let an owner sell the team without bringing in any new owners. This is how it played out:
Step 1: The Red Sox owner at the time said he wanted to sell the team.
Step 2. The Marlins owner said he wanted to buy the Red Sox.
Step 3. Jeffrey Loria (an art dealer who was still probably a worse owner than Fischer) owned the Expos at the time. He said he wanted to buy the Marlins. Which meant just like the Marlins owner had to sell the team to buy the Red Sox it would theoretically mean the Expos owner has to find a buyer to sell his team to so he can buy the Marlins.
Step 4. No one wants to buy the Expos. So MLB just buys the Expos outright and all the other 29 teams own their competitor.
That is the only time in modern sports history I have ever of where a league let an owner(s) sell teams and lose and owner but bring in zero owners to replace them. It's very unusual.
I have to kind of connect the dots in my mind to figure out why but there has to be a reason for this. Despite having Vladimir Guerrero, Sr. (In his prime), Fernando Tatis, Sr. (In his prime), Javier Vasquez (In his prime and one of the best strikeout pitchers/aces who would finish top 2 in CY voting), and of course Bartolo Colon (in hia prime when he was a 20 game winner- not the 10 year later version)... The Expos were still only selling about 1,500 seats some games. Lowest attendance in all of baseball and by a wide margin. Much worse than what the A's have EVER done.
That was the weirdest most unprecedented and unlikely situation of ANY team, MLB or not, moving. They were leaving a team ownerless with no expectation of a new owner. The team moved to Washington DC under that situation too. MLB moves are rare and Fischer is a terrible owner... But this is nothing like the Expos move. The Expos didn't even HAVE an owner when they moved to DC. Loria was probably a WORSE owner than Fischer. The Marlins sold their team to HIM. The Red Sox sold their team knowing for a FACT that no owner would replace him as one of the 30 owners.
Those situations are very different and for more crazy in the Expos move. The Expos weren't just moved. They were sold when they weren't even bought. That makes zero sense.
This is what happened. MLB realized the team would be more valuable outside of the Olympic Stadium hellhole on Montreal. They bought the team, moved the team to a better place and then sold it. That worked well. That's what's going on with Oakland now. It's just less complicated because MLB doesn't have to actually buy the team to make it happen. As ridiculous as what they did with the Expos was it still worked for the best. This isn't even close to as crazy as the Expos relocation. The Olympic site in Montreal was no longer MLB viable. The Coliseum was never really viable with Mt. Davis and sewage and opossums and rails blocking the view even for radio announcers. This is very less complicated than the Expos move. The Expos move ended up making perfect sense. Less complications are a good thing.
The issue is that Brodie is explaining exactly WHY teams SHOULD move. The Braves moved from Milwaukee despite never having a losing season. How did that work out? Now they are the #1 team in over 500 counties. They have the best record in the league. The Braves have what might be the best lineup in baseball history top to bottom. They are also on a 5 year division championship streak. They also won the WS a couple years ago during that streak. They also had a record 15 straight years where they were the only division championship team in their division and won a WS in the meantime. Moves are good. The Braves prove that's a fact. The big question is this: When was the last time a team relocated and was worse for it? I can answer that. 1902. When the Milwaukee Brewers became the St. Louis Browns. 1902. Well over a century ago. Before WWI. Does anyone think that's happening again? The Expos sold their team and didn't even have a buyer and still became better. If you care about the A's... They will be better for this. If you are petty enough to argue over where the A's play then you clearly don't care about the A's. A's hats will fly forever. It doesn't have to happen in a specific location. Root for the A's or don't root for the A's. It doesn't matter where they play unless you actually buy tickets to show up to the games NO MATTER WHAT. I have always done everything I can to support my teams ESPECIALLY during the worst years. It's not my favorite team but I also am a huge fan of the Texas Rangers. I've never even been to Texas. I don't care where they play. I like the RANGERS. Get your ish together people. Are you A:a fans or are you Oakland fans? It seems the A's, Warriors and Raiders have all decided you are ONLY Oakland fans. It's sad I root for my favorite team's competition more than you do when your team loses. I never stop rooting for my team. Finish 30th out of 30 every year for 30 years. That's great. Give me the best chance at 30 #1 overall picks in a row. It's not the "Oakland A's." It's not the "Kansas City A's" or the "Philadelphia A's" either. It's the A's. Like them or don't like them. End of story.
@@matthew01234Just have both the Giants and the A's share Pac-Bell Park!!! The San Francisco Athletics!!! Problem solved!!!
Lionel Messi will turn the Miami Marlins into the Montreal Expos one day after InterMiami wins their first MLS Cup.
The Giants announced they were moving before the '58 season even started. But they were going to Minneapolis, not SF. Walter O'Malley twisted Horace Stoneham's arm to go further west.
I think you mean 1957
@@rapalbumdepot2660 I stand corrected and 5'9". Thanks!
ironic how both teams are now rivals 😂 when they were buddies moving out west
@@fosternyc926 That's why they went - if you think they were big rivals in California? That's *nothing* compared to the rivalry they had when they had to split New York.
@@mactheknife7049 that’s why. if i were the Giants, why would i satisfy the Dodgers in getting a new stadium? i’d just stick to Minneapolis and stick it to the Dodgers. but i understand since the Giants were also getting a new stadium
While the NY Mets uniforms pay homage to the old NY (Baseball) Giants (the other NY Giants - the NFL one - are actually enfranchised as the "New York Football Giants") and Brooklyn Dodgers, the colors of the uniform (white, blue, and orange), also pays homage to the former New Netherlands colony that the former Dutch Republic, whose flag was orange, white, and blue, would later, under direct British rule, would become New York.
I was searching for a video that explained why each MLB team that relocated moved and this is perfect. This is way easier that searching and having more complicated explenations about it, but this keeps it simple.
What is particularly interesting about the Browns and Cardinals is that Sportsman's Park, home to both teams, belonged to the Browns, and the Cardinals were tenants of the Browns, even though the Cardinals drew over twice as many fans as the Browns during the last quarter-century the two teams shared the stadium.
Which means that the 1944 World Series was played not only in one city but in only one stadium.
@@michaelgwfrogwelge-- Yes. It is the last time that has happened. It also happened a couple of times in the early 20s, when the Giants and Yankees shared the Polo Grounds, before Yankee Stadium was built .
Great analysis Brodie. One thing I want to add for the Pilots is they had terrible luck with timing. They were originally slated for a 1971 or 72 opening season but because the Royals wanted to play sooner the needed to start in 69.
I didn’t know that. That’s interesting. It’s too bad. Obviously The Royale had and MLB ready park.
Senator Symington of Missouri threatened MLB's antitrust exemption if Kansas City didn't get another team ASAP and, since unlike Peter Angelos he had real power, MLB caved.
@@tomandrews2887 The Royals played at Kansas City Municipal Stadium (the KC A's former park) until Royals Stadium (now Kauffman Stadium) opened in 1973 on the same complex shared with the Chiefs' home, Arrowhead Stadium.
@@HighpointerGeocacher Seattle did not get that luxury. The Kingdome wasn't going to be ready, but the threat of a lawsuit from KC forced them to play sooner. The Pilots were never financially stable due to the early start, and they could never recover from that in their minor league stadium.
Tell this to someone who experienced many of the 33 summers where Washington had no baseball. Thankfully, the Nationals' future appears secure, no matter who succeeds the Lerners as owners. It's now an affluent top-ten market with an attractive, state-of-the-art ballpark in a booming area of D.C., as well as a team with some on-field success capped by winning the 2019 World Series. No Calvin Griffith or Bob Short will take this franchise out of town.
Candlestick Park was purpose build for Giants. Unfortunately for all involved, the owner only visited the construction site during the morning and not in the afternoons and evening when the games will actually get played. It was known for one of the coldest stadium due to wind coming in in the afternoon. When they build the new stadium, someone thought of doing a wind study with US Davis, and they decided to rotate the stadium so the home plate will be back towards the wind, thus that entire seating secting will block it.
This is really awesome! Please do more historical videos like this. Thanks.
Walter O'Malley tried to get a domed stadium built for the Dodgers to keep them in Brooklyn, but Robert Moses, a very powerful urban planner in NYC at the time, wanted to build a stadium in Queens. O'Malley didn't want to move the Dodgers to Queens because the team would lose it's ties to Brooklyn, so he took up the city of Los Angeles' offer to move to California. The irony is that the stadium in Queens became Shea Stadium, and the spot in Brooklyn where O'Malley wanted his stadium is now the site of the Barclays Center.
Also, if you want a good book about the year that the Seattle Pilots existed, I would recommend the classic book "Ball Four" by Jim Bouton.
The Yankees and Giants shared the Polo Grounds for a time, until the Yankees got Babe Ruth, and started out-drawing the Giants, and so, the Giants kicked the Yankees out of the Polo Grounds.
The Cardinals and Browns also both shared Sportsman's Park.
The Brooklyn Dodgers had become one of the most popular (and profitable) teams in baseball.
The Giants played at Seals Stadium while Candlestick Park was being built.
That is why Yankee Stadium was called "The house that Ruth built." He did not build it literally, but the phenomenal success he had on the franchise forced the Yankees to build a giant new stadium.
The current Baltimore Orioles team (the former St. Louis Browns) are actually the third iteration of the Orioles in the Major Leagues. The first one was first in the American Association from 1882 to 1891, and then moved over to the National League, where they stayed until the NL reduced itself from 12 teams to 8 by folding four teams after the 1899 season. That team featured several famous stars, most notably Wee Willie Keeler and John McGraw.
When the AL Orioles debuted in 1901, McGraw was with them, as both player and manager. However, McGraw and AL president Ban Johnson hated each other. Johnson founded the American League to be a cleaner alternative to the rough-and-tumble National League, where McGraw had starred. A frustrated McGraw left the AL Orioles mid-way through the next season to take the managerial reins of the New York Giants, a job he stayed with for 30 years. And he brought with him several players who had played with the NL Orioles in the 1890s.
Not only did the Brownies and The Cards play the World Series in the same city, they played it in the same stadium. Sportsman park was the home of the Browns. The Cardinals rented from the Browns.
Joining the 1921 & 22 World Series, played entirely at the Polo Grounds, between the Yankees & Giants. They met again in 1923 (only time the World Series has had the same two teams for three consecutive years), but by then Yankee Stadium had opened, just in time for the Yankees to win their first championship.
As much as I love the history of baseball, I'm even more infatuated with the history of baseball STADIUMS. Can't get enough.
@@GregMcNeish same. I love them too. Im a Cubbie fan so I feel fortunate. In my opion we have the greatest one left. I would loved to have seen a game at Forbes Field or Crosley Feild, or Tje Polo Grounds but especially Ebbets Field. Of all of them if I had to pick just one it’d be that one. That one has some sort of mythos about it. Dem Bums finally winning it all and then gone 2 years later. They should have kept all those old Jewel Box Parks. I can’t understand why they would tear down Tiger Stadium and definitely not Old Yankee Stadium. It should’ve been saved. Who tears down the House that Ruth built? What a shame that was.
@@shaindaman13 -- League Park in Cleveland is still there, sort of. The playing field is still there, but the stands have been taken down and replaced with much smaller ones, and the park is used for high school and other non-professional games.
Only the giants vs Yankees in 1921 & 1922 World Series and the browns vs cardinals in 1944 played an entire World Series in the sane park other than the 2020 World Series
Fun fact - the 1944 Browns and Cards managers shared an apartment as the city had a wartime housing shortage and, since they shared the stadium, one team would always be on the road while the other was in St. Louis. The wife and children of the manager of whichever team was on the road would go to their off-season home (both of which happened to be in Ohio) while their husband/father's team was on its road trips. For the World Series they flipped a coin, with the winner getting to stay in the shared apartment while the loser was able to use another unit in the building offered up for the purpose by a resident who was going to be out of town.
Funny enough, the Browns were on the verge of moving to Los Angeles...in 1942. In fact, the vote was to take place on December 8th, 1941. Well after the Japanese attacked pearl Harbor the day before this vote, the move was rejected by every team...including the Browns.
Construction on a lighting system at Wrigley Field was also supposed to begin on December 8, 1941. Instead, the materials were donated to the War Department, and Wrigley Field didn't get lights until 1988. LOL.
A lot of common themes, so many of which apply to Oakland. "Second team in same market", "Team not being invested / losing record" and "small market team".
That is correct. The three franchise relocations of the mid 1950's involved the movement of the less-popular and less-successful of two teams in a two-team market that were each no longer capable supporting two teams. This appears to be true with the San Francisco Bay area; the Giants are more successful and more popular than the A's. Thus, the A's should move.
The odd thing about how the MLB treats the SF Bay Area Market is that they split the Giants and Athletics into separate "territorial rights" areas, whereas other cities with 2-team markets (NYC, Los Angeles, Chicago) share the same territory.
Great job Brodie
One player,Eddie Mathews,played for the Braves in Boston, Milwaukee and Atlanta.
NYC was offering to build a stadium for the Brooklyn Dodgers in Queens, where Shea Stadium would be built. To the Dodgers ownership it was build in Brooklyn or leave the city. With the Giants needing a replacement for Polo Grounds it seems odd no one thought to give them the site of the future Shea Stadium and find a place in Brooklyn for the Dodgers.
Stoneham wasn't planning to stay in NY, whereas O'Malley was trying to negotiate to stay in NY.
NYC planner Moses grand plan was for both teams to play in a city owned stadium where Shea was eventually built. Not only did he not allow any public help for O'Malley to buy land near his preferred location where Barclays Center is today, he frustrated any attempt for the two clubs to build their own ballparks. The neighborhood around Ebbets Field was changing, a lot of Brooklyn fans were moving to Long Island. Ebbets wasn't near public transportation then, only had room for 500 cars in the neighborhood and their growing suburban fanbase found it more and more difficult to get to games. The location where O'Malley wanted to move to was at the Brooklyn terminus of the Long Island Railroad, which would have been a perfect fit for the Dodgers considering the new demographic and geographic reality, and would've kept them in Brooklyn. Moses wouldn't let it happen, and he's the real reason NY lost both of its national league teams.
I think the Giants wanted to stay in Manhattan if they stayed in NYC. Too bad they couldn't have shared Yankee Stadium for a few years while the Polo Grounds was thoroughly renovated and modernized.
You forgot to mention that along with the former New York Giants’ orange the Mets also adopted their logo since they no longer had a use for it
The Washington Nationals used the Washington Senators logo.
@@ajrichards1190 And Walgreen's too. 😁
@@ajrichards1190Which they had to get permission from the Texas Rangers who still had the rights to it
@@michaelleroy9281 Well, the Minnesota Twins were the original Senators. From 1905-1955, they were called the Nationals.
Giants played at Seals Stadium in 1958 and 1959. Candlestick Park opened in 1960 as a baseball only stadium. The 49ers moved in in 1971, thus Candlestick was enclosed and expanded
The San Francisco Seals of the PCL played at Seals stadium. They moved when the Giants arrived, as did the Hollywood Stars and the Los Angeles Angels when the Dodgers arrived in LA.
GREAT history lesson and well done. As you saw, many of the relocations from the East was cities with TWO teams (AL & NL). As a guy who grew up in Brooklyn, I appreciated the trivia about the Mets colors. You will also note that the Mets NY logo on their hats is the same one used by the Giants before moving to SF. To this day, Brodie, all of us Brooklynites still resent O'Malley moving our "Beloved Bums" to LA. People in Brooklyn and Queens follow the Mets while those in Manhattan, Bronx and Staten Island are normally Yankee fans. BTW...it was the Giants who moved West before the Dodgers HOWEVER it is believed that the owners of both teams plotted to move at the same time. MLB felt that it needed TWO teams in California to make baseball work on the coast. Both teams had the same basic issues as you mentioned. It had to be both or no teams moving to CA. The Giants went to Seals Stadium until candlestick park was completed. The Dodgers played at the LA Collisium until Dodger Stadium was built
Read Jimmy Breslin's book on the 62 Mets. MLB didn't want to expand. They realized they could expand to six additional cities without letting anyone else into he club by simply moving teams out of two team (or three) team cities. Two from NY, and one from each of Boston, Philadelphia, St Louis, and Chicago. Only when Bill Shea threatened with a 3rd league did they agree to give NY a NL team back, and they put the screws to Joan Payson and made her pay.
Now for the Giants.. they were already out the door.
The Dodgers are a bit more complicated. O'Malley wanted to OWN his stadium, not rent it. He sold Ebbets to a developer at the end of 56 with a lease back for five more years (three guaranteed plus two one year options.) He had to be out of Ebbets at the end of 61 regardless. The fuse was lit. So once LA passed proposition B and the Dodgers were deeded 350 acres in Downtown LA, he didn't need to exercise the options on Ebbets and gave the keys to the developer, which is why Ebbets was torn down first. O'Malley was offered Shea, but unless he could own it, he wasn't going to take it. He tried to convince Moses to condemn the land at Atlantic and Flatbush and sell it to him on the cheap so he could build his dome. At a presser at Gracie Mansion, Moses told him, "What you are saying to the mayor is, that if you don't get this particular piece of property, you're gonna pack up your marbles and leave town.." so he did. New York City was never going to deed the Dodgers 325 acres of Brooklyn. Los Angeles said, "Here you go.." and off he went. (Watch HBO Sports "The Ghosts of Flatbush").
The polo grounds stuck around because Stoneham had a land lease that ended in 1962, at which time he could remove the stadium or renew for 30 years. He never had a choice, since NY condemned it for (eventual) housing once Shea was built. That lawsuit is a good one. The Coogans believed the value was in the land. Stoneham believed the value was in the physical stadium, and the City thought it worthless..
Blue and orange are also the colors of the NYC flag, sort of the "official" colors of the city. So it makes sense for the Mets to wear blue and orange.
Very good history, Brodie. But, I have read that Candlestick was not being built when Giants relocated. Have read where SF mayor showed Stoneham potential sites for new ballpark. Took Stoneham to Candlestick Point on a beautiful sunny day. Stoneham loved the location. However, frigid night time conditions never were mentioned during the tour. I live in Philadelphia. Went to a night game at Candlestick in June 1989 and absolutely froze. Brutal.
Hey Brodie, Kudos for pronouncing Montreal correctly. I guess we have Randy to thank for that.👍
How do you say it?
Like you would Monday or money.
@@Just_Klaatu Oh yeah. I just went back and noticed that. Cool. It may take a while but I’ll change the way I say that.
Brodie, do a program about what would happen if MLB lost its exemption to the antitrust laws back in the 1920s and was upheld in 1953. I think it would mean having to pay minor leaguers at least minimum wage for everything required of them. I think it is the biggest reason MLB stays away from politics. Just look at Disney World and Florida.
Seals Stadium in San Francisco was already in place when the Giants moved. The San Francisco Seals were famous for being the team where Joe DiMaggio got his professional debut.
FYI, blue and orange are also the colors of the flag of NYC (also see the Knicks and Islanders)
Grew up in the shadow of Chavez Ravine. All I knew was Koufax and Drysdale were at Dodger Stadium and I was a fan. Watched "Lords of the Flatbush" and saw what the Dodgers meant to Brooklyn. Sad to watch - unfortunately politics plays a major role in why teams move,
BTW, the best way to learn about the Seattle Pilots is the book, Ball Four by Jim Bouton. This book spawned sports journalism.
Seals Stadium was the park of the Pacific Coast League team, the San Francisco Seals, that was used as a temporary ballpark for the Giants in the 1958 and 1959 seasons until Candlestick Park opened in 1960.
The Browns actually tried to move to Milwaukee before the 1953 season but were denied because Lou Perini, owner of the Boston Braves, owned the territorial rights to Milwaukee and ended up moving his Braves there.
There were at least three other teams that relocated at the beginning gf the A. L. The teams are the Grand Raids Rippers to Cleveland in 1900, Kansas City Blues to Washington in 1901, and Sioux City to Chicago in 1900.
Yes, the first Giants stadium was Seals stadium. The Pacific Coast League folded.
The thing that made the move west viable was air travel.
The Washington Senators: First in War, First in Peace and last in the American League
The Pacific Coast League never folded.
The issue is that Brodie is explaining exactly WHY teams SHOULD move. The Braves moved from Milwaukee despite never having a losing season. How did that work out? Now they are the #1 team in over 500 counties. They have the best record in the league. The Braves have what might be the best lineup in baseball history top to bottom. They are also on a 5 year division championship streak. They also won the WS a couple years ago during that streak. They also had a record 15 straight years where they were the only division championship team in their division and won a WS in the meantime. Moves are good. The Braves prove that's a fact. The big question is this: When was the last time a team relocated and was worse for it? I can answer that. 1902. When the Milwaukee Brewers became the St. Louis Browns. 1902. Well over a century ago. Before WWI. Does anyone think that's happening again? The Expos sold their team and didn't even have a buyer and still became better. If you care about the A's... They will be better for this. If you are petty enough to argue over where the A's play then you clearly don't care about the A's. A's hats will fly forever. It doesn't have to happen in a specific location. Root for the A's or don't root for the A's. It doesn't matter where they play unless you actually buy tickets to show up to the games NO MATTER WHAT. I have always done everything I can to support my teams ESPECIALLY during the worst years. It's not my favorite team but I also am a huge fan of the Texas Rangers. I've never even been to Texas. I don't care where they play. I like the RANGERS. Get your ish together people. Are you A:a fans or are you Oakland fans? It seems the A's, Warriors and Raiders have all decided you are ONLY Oakland fans. It's sad I root for my favorite team's competition more than you do when your team loses. I never stop rooting for my team. Finish 30th out of 30 every year for 30 years. That's great. Give me the best chance at 30 #1 overall picks in a row. It's not the "Oakland A's." It's not the "Kansas City A's" or the "Philadelphia A's" either. It's the A's. Like them or don't like them. End of story.
Thank you for the history lesson Brodie, found it very fascinating
Really enjoyed this. I learned a few new facts myself.
In the late 1890s the NL was a 12 team league. After the 1899 season the NL contracted 4 teams. As stated in the video the western League was a minor league. With the contraction of the NL Ban Jonson President of the western league saw an opportunity for the Western League to claim Major League status and compete with the NL. He placed 3 teams in 3 of the 4 cities vacated by the NL. Those teams being Baltimore ( now the Yankees), Washington ( now in Minnesota) and Cleveland. He renamed the Western League as the American League. Louisville was the only city of the contracted NL teams not to gain a new team in the AL. The Louisville team began in the American Association in 1882 and was accepted to the NL in 1892 when the American Association folded. Like Montreal they have never seen Major league baseball again.
Seals Stadium was located betw 15th and 16th St, Potrero and Brannan in the mission district. You could see the Hamms brewery from the stadium.
ny mets home uniform has dodger blue, giants orange & yankee pinstripes.
And the NY the Giants wore on their caps
Excellent video and very interesting, Brodie! You always do a great job with your videos and it is entertaining to watch them for sure. It really is very interesting how we have come full-circle with the recent specualtion about teams being moved in the MLB.
Love these videos
A point to note about the second Washington Senators moving to Texas, when Bob Short bought the team in 1969 he raised ticket prices to the highest in the major leagues. It should also be noted he bought the team for 9 million dollars but demanded 12 million from anyone who wanted to buy it and keep it in Washington ( for comparison George Steinbrenner bought the New York Yankees in 1973 for 10 million) Short also claimed that Washington wasn't safe at night yet scheduled all Saturday home games at night. In 1971 he moved the Senators to Texas got 7 million in radio and TV money up front and sold the team two years later. Does this come as a surprise to anyone, it shouldn't... ever wonder why the basketball team in LA is named the Lakers, because their owner a Minneapolis native named Bob Short moved his own home town Basketball team from Minneapolis to LA and then quickly sold for a profit.
The original Senators franchise started in Kansas City, so they technically moved east first, and then moved back west to Minnesota. Minnesota nearly had an American League team before the Twins, since The White Sox briefly played in St. Paul, before moving to Chicago when the AL was formed. If the Sox had stayed, or if the Giants had come, then the Twins might have ended up somewhere else under a different name.
Interesting fact, Baltimore's football and baseball team used to be the Browns before moving to Baltimore
Great history of MLB moves. Did you know that the 1944 World Series, every game was played at Old Sportsman Park, which became the first Busch Stadium. The Cardinals and Browns both played at the same stadium at Grand and Shaudow. This is where I saw my first MLB game in 1961.
Also all of the games 1921 and 1922 World Series were played at the Polo Grounds, since the NY Giants and Yankees were sharing the Polo Grounds before Yankee Stadium opened in 1923.
The Montreal Expos relocating saga is where I first heard about Las Vegas wanting MLB, there was an ownership group in Vegas that wanted to buy the Expos and build a 40,000 seat ballpark in the parking lot area behind Ballys and Paris Las Vegas
The Expos situation sounds just like the A’s one, wow.
Giants owner was Horace Stoneham not Stoneman
The Los Angeles Dodgers first played in the Los Angeles Coliseum.
The first season opener played at Dodgers Stadium was April 10, 1962
The Giants first played at Seals Stadium.
The first season opener at Candlestick Park was
April 12, 1960
I'm seeing that the worst of the 2 teams in the same city often gets the boot and forced elsewhere
The Senators won #3 American league Pennants 24, 25 & 33
with the W S championship in 24
Giants moved to seals stadium first. In 62 Candlestick Park was built. Also there was never talk of a new stadium for the Giants in NYC. Robert Moses would not build a stadium in Brooklyn . He wanted the ballpark built in Queens where the Mets ended up.
The thing that bothers me the most about relocation is that the city gets punished for a team's incompetence, and the team gets rewarded for their own incompetence. When a team sucks, thanks to the affirmative action policy of having a draft, they are able to get good prospects. This turns a bad team into a good team. Many times, these teams were bad just before moving, but good once they got to their new city. Here's some examples: The Avs and Stars won Stanley Cups soon after relocating from Quebec and Minnesota respectively. The Rams won a Super Bowl just a few years after relocating--both times. The Thunder got really good right after they left Seattle. The Titans made a SB soon after leaving Houston. What's going to piss me off is that in the likely event that the A's move, they'll be really good in a few years because they're terrible right now, and they'll draft a bunch of good players, and be World Series contenders within a few years of moving to Las Vegas. For example, the Tigers went from 119 losses in '03 to AL Champs in '06. The Cubs and Astros were 100 loss teams in '12, and won the World Series in '16 and '17 respectively. Short turnarounds can happen in MLB, and I'm worried it will happen to the A's (if they leave).
Best video yet
Saludos Brodie
Near the end, Montreal also split games with San Juan Puerto Rico, like the ray explored with...... Montreal lol
One more thing about Sick's Stadium, the sight lines from the press boxes were terrible, and the visiting announcers had to use a mirror to see left field.
Also, a Lowe's now sits on the site of Sick's Stadium, and they at least used to have a cutout of a batter in front of the store, as well as markings for the bases and home plate, and a sign on the side of the road.
Montreal Exposed played a couple of MLB games in Puerto Rico in the 2000s
They played 20 games in San Juan in 02 03 and 04
Relocation +Expansion +Continental League= hold on to your hats
Red Sox wanted to move too. The 1967 Impossible Dream season changed their minds.
Oh, another side note. A happy coincidence with the Mets colors was that they are the same colors as the flag of the city of New York.
Seals Stadium 1958 1959 Candlestick Park 1960-1999
And in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns pulled up stakes and moved east to Baltimore and took on another bird nickname, the Baltimore Ravens. So two established teams named "Browns" both moved to Baltimore and took on bird nicknames.
In 1961 Minnesota was to get an expansion team. However Calvin Griffith made a deal for Washington DC to get the expansion team and he could move the original Senators to Minnesota
Seals Stadium after Polo Grounds, 2 years before Candlestick.
Relocation is unacceptable in this day and age. It essentially never happened except during the massive expansion period. Going from 16 teams in 10 cities to 26 teams in 24 cities. Or 22 depending on how you count Oakland and Anaheim.
We need to expand by 6 teams. We are back over 11 million people per team in this country the highest it’s been since 1960 when they added 8 teams in 9 years.
The culture is different now. An expansion team feels like a team you can call your own and. Or someone else’s cast off.
There’s no excuse to relocate any team when there are buyers out there.
Sometimes relocation is necessary, because of population and demographic changes. For example, a greater percentage of the USA population lives in the West and South than in the 1950's, when all MLB teams were in the Northeast and Midwest.
Didnt the Mets used the same cap insignia that Giants used before relocating to SF?
Yes
Blue and orange is also the colors on the NYC city flag
The main reason why they relocate is because they've been asking for a new stadium and the cities aren't offering any support. The other reason why teams locate is that the market isn't generating any income.
3rd baltimore Orioles team. 2nd American League team.
Didn't the giants almost moved to Tampa???
That was in the early 1990s, before Peter McGowan led a group of investors to buy them(and that group still owns the team today, give or take a few investors, McGowan died a few years ago)
1992 It was voted down by National League owners in November of that year
They almost moved to Toronto in 1975!!!
@@bullwinkle2380 San Diego Padres almost moved to Washington DC in 1974 before Ray Kroc purchased the team.
Them and the Sox threatened to move to Tampa as leverage for a new stadium
Nope not just Montreal. Brooklyn doesn't a have team. While we are a part of NYC we are not Queens and that's where the Mets play.
Giants won 5 World Series in New York
The giants or dodgers were offered what became the Shea stadium site the Dodgers replied they are the Brooklyn Dodgers we will not play in queens, the giants refused to play outside of manhattan.
Read the history of Sportsman Park in St. Louis. Bill Veeck of the Browns owned Sportsman Park, the Cardinals rented it after their stadium burned to the ground. When Veeck relocated the Browns to Baltimore, Gussie Busch bought the Cardinals and Sportsman Park and desired to rename it Budweiser Stadium. MLB commissioner nixed renaming the stadium for a beer, and thus Busch renamed it with his name. A year later Busch introduced to the world Busch Bavarian Beer. I still recall Bob Gibson pitching for the Cardinals during the 1964 World Series in Sportsman Park. My father recalls the Browns/Cardinals trolley series... th-cam.com/video/Ln3sNwccHxI/w-d-xo.html
And Babe Ruth was also born in Baltimore
Good job, but you ignored the famous Champion Baltimore Orioles Dynasty of the 1890s in the NL.
I think in the wave of relocations in the 50s and 60s, one has to take into account that americans stopped going to live entertainment of any kind, including going to the ballpark, as television became more widely available. This is behind a fair bit of the poor attendance you cite.
The rays aren't moving
They need to move out of St Pete and into Tampa itself.
Horace Stoneham, not Stoneman.
Thank you. My mistake
Bill Stoneman was a former MLB pitcher threw 2 no hitters for the Montreal Expos
How the dodgers and the city of LA destroyed 3 communities
The story of how the Mets got their colors isn't entirely correct. The official colors of NYC are blue and orange. Tge Mets aren't the only NYC area team to have those colors (Knicks, Islanders)
Minnesota was supposed to be an expansion team not the new senators but Griffith demanded to move his team to there instead and they got a new team so weird
The Washington Senators won 3 AL pennants - 1924, 1925, 1933.
Don't forget they won the World Series 1924
you forgot the chicago white sox
The White Sox had a close call in 1988 but they didn't move
@@michaelleroy9281 ok
1944 was the first world series played west of the Mississippi River
St. Louis Cardinals had played in the World Series multiple times prior to 1944, against opponents other than the Browns.
@@HighpointerGeocacher No, it is the 1st time that 2 teams west of the Mississippi River played in a World Series.
I know, that messed me up to in high school, also, you can when alot of bets!
1944 World Series had MANY players still at War. The Browns making it to the World Series was an aberration. Franchise was awful for most of its existence.
"Washington D.C.: First in war, first in peace, last in the American League."
So Finley didn't want to share a stadium with the Chiefs, so he moved the Athletics to Oakland to share a stadium with the Raiders.
You can kind of blame us Milwaukee fans, because when the Braves drew 2 million fans the owners started seeing greener pastures in relocation -- of course it ended up backfiring on the Milwaukee fandom when the Braves moved to Atlanta
@@youtubeemployeesarestupid3464 Not only am I not ashamed of it, I could argue it opened the door to the modern sports world (altho at some point it would have expanded on its own, I think)
Stoneham, not Stoneman.
Bill Stoneman was a former major league pitcher who threw 2 no hitters for the Montreal Expos
The Mets play in Queens, not Brooklyn, so Brooklyn is another city without a MLB team just like Montreal
I missed the 1985 Expos with Gary Carter, Al Oliver, Andre Dawson, Warren Cromatie , Steve Rogers
and Jeff Reardon.
They would have made it to the WS if it wasn't for the Rick Monday (Dogers) HR.
The game was tied 1 -1 when Monday hit the home run that didn't automatically mean Montreal was going to win the game if that home run was not allowed this was 1981 NLCS not 1985
We already lost the raiders twice!!!! We know the pain
You just cant fail moving to vegas, there is no way that happens. Way too many people here on s regular basis with conventions, elementary, junior high, high sfhool and college sporting tournaments, 2.9million people thst live in vegas, to the gamblers and just the party goers. Theres no way the statidum doesnt seat 15k-20k on 2/3s of their home games with plenty of sale out games. Every single week theres 40-100k + people here on the strip. That location is actually perfect to neutralize traffic because theres way more ways to get there as i know this because i do uber full time and only work the strip. Every single tourist or professional i pick up and talk to about the As coming are extremely happy to have a reason to spend a weekend trip watching their home team play. Theres no way it fails. And hopefully with the As groming all these young players and with so much signing money to bring in 2 to 3 tier A players they will be a winnin program. I think it will be a success a long as the As give discount tickets to Nevada residents that have ID, and free parking to those with Nevada IDs it will boom.
I have heard rumors that Montreal is trying to get the nationals back
Brooklyn didn’t get a team
I think he just meant the area still had a team. But if that’s the standard, then the Bay Area will still have a team if the As leave so that doesn’t work
@@tomandrews2887 tell that to a 76 year old man in Brooklyn if having an expansion team in queens is the same as having the dodgers in your own Burrough of Brooklyn for over 70 years…or having a team in sf be a replacement when you live in Oakland proper having the vagiants be a rival all your life
@@mm4forever Yeah I wouldn’t say that at all. I’m a lifelong Dodgers fan and I’m glad they’re in LA but it ducked how they got there.
@@wyatthill6252 don’t worry, no one’s going to follow your wine and cheese franchise after the A’s leave. Other teams in Cali and across the country will just swallow up the A’s fans.
The Yankees & Yankee fans refuse to believe they started as the Baltimore Orioles they claim they are a 1903 expansion team that replaced a folded orioles despite the fact Col. Rupert bought the orioles and moved them to NY.
I think MLB needs a second Canadian team again. It hasn't been the same since the Expos moved.
The MLB screwed Montreal out of their team when they bought the Expos from Jeffrey Loria.
Brochu, Loria, and MLB all screwed the Expos. Having read about about the Brochu years in Montreal, he reminds me of Fisher in a way.
@@EvanEscher In my opinion, if Canada got a second team, it would appear to me that Vancouver would be a better choice. I would be the team of all of western Canada (BC, AB, SK, MB). When I lived in the Seattle area, many fans from British Columbia would come to Seattle when the Mariners played the Blue Jays. Putting the Vancouver team in the NL would provide a natural interleague rivalry with the Mariners and open the possibility of an all-Canada World Series between Vancouver and Toronto.
Angels are going to be next to relocate. There fans are lucky at least they’re talking about relocating up to Long Beach…I could see them threatening to relocate to Portland or going to Austin
Metro Los Angeles is too big a market for the Angels to leave.
@@VincentPaterno-hs2fv so is the Bay Area and look what’s happening
@@mm4foreverThe Angels might be named for Los Angeles, but their market (Orange County) has much less overlap with the Dodgers market (Los Angeles city proper) than the overlap between Giants & A's market (where they had historically fought over San Jose and its tech money). While I wouldn't put it past Arte Moreno to move the team, Orange County is far too lucrative an area: MLB would almost certainly establish an expansion team if the Angels left.
@@mm4forever LA market is much larger than Bay Area, and indeed Angels are gonna move, but they're still gonna stay in the general area, unlike the A's...
Even if they move outside the area MLB are gonna give them replacement team since MLB need New York and LA to have at least 2 teams...
Ironically, (LA County) Long Beach would mean "Los Angeles" Angels was an accurate name.
The earthquake was when the Dodgers and Giants left New York. Never should've happened. Never should have been allowed. West Coast should have gotten expansion teams.
I agree. That was extremely painful for many New Yorkers. I feel the same way about the Milwaukee Braves. Its a pain that LA Dodgers and SF Giants will never understand. It wasnt right to move two beloved NY teams to the West Coast.
The issue is that Brodie is explaining exactly WHY teams SHOULD move. The Braves moved from Milwaukee despite never having a losing season. How did that work out? Now they are the #1 team in over 500 counties. They have the best record in the league. The Braves have what might be the best lineup in baseball history top to bottom. They are also on a 5 year division championship streak. They also won the WS a couple years ago during that streak. They also had a record 15 straight years where they were the only division championship team in their division and won a WS in the meantime. Moves are good. The Braves prove that's a fact. The big question is this: When was the last time a team relocated and was worse for it? I can answer that. 1902. When the Milwaukee Brewers became the St. Louis Browns. 1902. Well over a century ago. Before WWI. Does anyone think that's happening again? The Expos sold their team and didn't even have a buyer and still became better. If you care about the A's... They will be better for this. If you are petty enough to argue over where the A's play then you clearly don't care about the A's. A's hats will fly forever. It doesn't have to happen in a specific location. Root for the A's or don't root for the A's. It doesn't matter where they play unless you actually buy tickets to show up to the games NO MATTER WHAT. I have always done everything I can to support my teams ESPECIALLY during the worst years. It's not my favorite team but I also am a huge fan of the Texas Rangers. I've never even been to Texas. I don't care where they play. I like the RANGERS. Get your ish together people. Are you A:a fans or are you Oakland fans? It seems the A's, Warriors and Raiders have all decided you are ONLY Oakland fans. It's sad I root for my favorite team's competition more than you do when your team loses. I never stop rooting for my team. Finish 30th out of 30 every year for 30 years. That's great. Give me the best chance at 30 #1 overall picks in a row. It's not the "Oakland A's." It's not the "Kansas City A's" or the "Philadelphia A's" either. It's the A's. Like them or don't like them. End of story.
@@youtubeemployeesarestupid3464 "I am not going to drive a thousand miles to attend an A's game." That would be a logical argument except the A's are in Oakland right now and you probably aren't driving the 10 or 20 miles it would take to see them now. If you are God bless you and you really are a diehard fan and I hate for you that your team is moving. The thing is hardly anyone in Oakland is driving any distance at all to go to A's games even when they live close to them. That's the problem. There's just not enough A's fans in Oakland who are willing to drive to go see a team play during the down years while they play in the worst stadium in baseball. It's just like it was in Montreal with the Expos. They were averaging around 1,500 fans per game at that terrible Olympic Stadium. They moved to a brand new city in DC, they got a brand new stadium. They had some terrible years that netted them some great draft picks like Steven Strasburg, Bruce Harper and Anthony Rendon. During those years the fan base supported them enough that when their great prospects made it to the majors the team actually had some money to spend on free agents so ownership could reinvest that money into making the team very good for a long time. They eventually won a World Series as a result of the move to a new city. They moved because it was the best thing for the team. That's what teams are supposed to do. Whatever is best for the team. Moving to a new city is better for the A's. It might not be better for Oakland but it's better for the team. The A's first priority is to do what's best for the A's, not what's best for Oakland. If you want to complain about the owner, complain about the owner. I think he sucks personally. If you want to complain about the stadium, complain about the stadium. It's the worst stadium in baseball. If you want to complain about the trades, complain about the trades. I think the Olson and Murphy trades were awful trades for the A's. Look at what those guys are doing for Atlanta now. I'm not complaining because I'm actually a Braves fan so those trades really helped my team but if A's fans want to complain about them I would totally understand. I would complain about them too. Don't complain about the team doing something that's actually good for the team though. Moving out of that terrible stadium where no fans want to support the A's into a brand new stadium and new city with a new fan base is good for the team. The team is supposed to do things that are good for the team.
@@youtubeemployeesarestupid3464 I know plenty of people who root for teams that aren't in their city. It's very common. People move out of cities and still root for the team in the city that they abandoned. People root for teams in cities they've never been to. How many Yankees fans do you think exist that have never even been to New York City? If you're truly a baseball fan you're going to root for a team whether they live in your city or not. There are millions of MLB fans who root for teams even though they've never had an MLB team in their entire state. There are tons of baseball fans in New Orleans. You can root for a team no matter where they play. The only thing that matters about stadium location is getting fans in the seats and that's exactly why the A's moved. The fans who would feel abandoned by the A's leaving already abandoned the A's by not showing up to the games when they were there. At least the vast majority of them did. If all these A's "fans" complaining about the move spent the same amount of time and effort actually supporting the team as they do whining about the move then the team wouldn't be moving in the first place. When the people in the city don't support the team by going to games and then vote to elect government officials who don't want to do what it takes to keep sports teams in the city the team moves on to a city that offers more support. That's just how life works. The team would be stupid to not move to a more supportive area and a MUCH better stadium.
@@matthew01234 - If you dared move my teams, you are going to find yourself
2nd letter
5th letter
8th letter
5th letter
1st letter
4th letter
5th letter
4th letter,
failed
1st letter
2nd letter
15th letter
18th letter
20th letter
9th letter
15th letter
14th letter!
@@juicyfartsofjimcornette1154 You probably support your teams. Or at least live in a city that supports the team and doesn't make them play in a terrible stadium then elects Mayor's who call the terrible stadium "Great" and refer to to it as a place your team should be happy to "play in for a long time."
@@matthew01234 - I don't support
1st letter
19th letter twice
8th letter
15th letter
12th letter
5th letter
19th letter
like you that want to see my teams relocate!