Springtime is always a busy time for stadium and arena shenanigans, if only because it’s budget season for most states and cities. But still! Buncha bullet points today, is what I’m saying, and expect a lot more next week, and so on and so on until legislators break for the summer or come to their senses, whichever comes first (you know damn well which will come first):
- An Arizona state legislative analysis says because Diamondbacks players pay $3.5 million a year in state income tax, that would over more than a quarter of the tax kickbacks team execs want for stadium renovations — asked and answered, move to strike. Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego, meanwhile, says the state analysis doesn’t look at actual economic data but rather projections like calculating every fan buys two beers (first, assume a spherical fan). No worries, though, the bill still has to go through — oh, welp, looks like it already passed the state house and just needs to clear the senate, and House Democratic Leader Rep. Oscar De Los Santos has expressed “alarm” and said “we should not be rushing through this legislative process,” guess there’s no time to worry like the present.
- Utah state senator Scott Sandall, figuring one MLB stadium with no team to play in it and no way to pay for it isn’t enough for a growing state, introduced a bill to let Salt Lake City’s stadium district build multiple stadiums as small as 18,000 seats for any sport, “to be proactive, just for the future,” not because he has any particular sports teams in mind that could use an 18,000-seat stadium or anything.
- Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas is supporting a new Missouri state bill to raise money for Royals and/or Chiefs stadiums by providing … okay, Lucas didn’t say exactly how much money or from where, and the bill itself isn’t posted on the Missouri senate website yet, but Lucas says it’ll help Kansas City “host FIFA World Cup games,” please nobody tell him that it’s going to be decades before the U.S. gets another World Cup after 2026, I don’t want to spoil his day.
- The proposed Cleveland Browns stadium in Brook Park is set to lead to the creation of a new Circle K gas station, maybe, if government bureaucrats don’t get in the way with their red tape about “residents” being “concerned,” can you believe those guys?
- Phoenix Suns co-owner Justin Ishbia has pulled out of bidding for the Minnesota Twins and is instead upping his minority stake in the Chicago White Sox, which certainly can be read as positioning himself to become majority owner once 89-year-old Jerry Reinsdorf gives up either control or this mortal coil. Whether he would go ahead with with Reinsdorf’s current stadium plans, let alone rebranding the team as the Chicacago White Sox, remains to be seen.
- The MLB cable empire keeps on crumbling, and at least one small-market owner, the Milwaukee Brewers‘ Mark Attanasio, says he wants a TV revenue sharing model more like the NFL’s where all the money is shared equally. This is worth watching since it would have a major impact on where teams could relocate to (Green Bay would suddenly be a viable MLB market), plus all sort of other things like how long the 2027 baseball lockout is likely to last.
“… Green Bay would suddenly be a viable MLB market …”
I’m sure this is a funny, but the reason GB is viable for major sports is the Milwaukee market. Teams would only locate there if Milwaukee lacked teams in that sport.
It was meant as a funny, yes. If you want the less funny version: “Relocating from Houston to Nashville would suddenly be a viable MLB move.”
Or Greensboro.
Or from the SF Bay area to Las Vegas… wait a minute.
The other reason Green Bay is viable for the NFL (the market has had a variety of obscure sports teams, but no other major sports) is the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961.
If NFL teams didn’t share national TV revenue, the Packers would have moved decades ago. Maybe to Milwaukee, maybe somewhere else.
Neil gets it, that was his point.
Actually the Packers moved from Milwaukee back to Green Bay 30 years ago. For decades the Packers played 4 games a year at County Stadium.
Which was basically half their home schedule. The only other modern examples I can recall of major league teams voluntarily playing that much of their home schedule away from their home market are the Kansas city-Omaha Kings, during an era when the NBA was much less prominent than today, the Virginia Squires, who played all over Virginia after the Bullets muscled them out of DC during the NBA-ABA merger talks, and the Expos playing a quarter of their home games in San Juan in 2003-2004 right before they were moved out of Montreal entirely. (The Edmonton Oilers also originally planned to split their schedule between Edmonton and Calgary but never actually did, and there were a number of teams that moved midseason due to going bankrupt.)
It was usually three regular season games and one preseason game, wasn’t it? Four out of (usually, at least after 1978) 10 home games.
The Carolina Cougars also did the regional bit (like the Squires).
The Celtics used to play a handful of home games a season in Hartford, but stopped in 1995 when…wait for it…the new arena came online.
And in a REALLY deep cut, the New York Kick of the (indoor) National Professional Soccer League split their schedule between Albany and Glens Falls in 1990-91 because they got started so late that they couldn’t get enough dates in either location.
And they originally played home games in Milwaukee because City Stadium was too small to accommodate everyone who wanted to see the Packers.
Once Lambeau’s renovations in the early 90s expanded the place, they stopped playing games in Milwaukee in 1994.
That’s not really a “move” as we think of it. But it still does not invalidate my point, which is that without shared TV revenue, they would not have been able to remain in Green Bay at all.
If the poor MLB owners pushed for NFL style revenue sharing- the rich teams would be better off leaving to start their own league.
ESPN finally gets what they want: a full season of Sunday night Yankees vs [Red Sox/Dodgers/Mets/Braves] games.
Actually, ESPN is dropping baseball after the 2025 season. The Disney-controlled channel doesn’t want to be left holding the bag in the event of a lockout.
The next MLB lockout will be owner-vs-owner. The players are relatively happy with the current agreement. The cable/streaming/broadcast revenue disparity will make it nearly impossible to reach an agreement all teams will favor.
You might even get the players to agree to a salary cap, as long as a high enough floor comes with it. But good luck getting the Pirates, Marlins, et al to agree to that when they won’t spend what they have now.
If Mr. Attanasio is granted his wish that ‘all’ revenues be shared equally, will he be cutting his fellow ownership club members checks for their share of his $600m + $500m in renovations stadium?
Asking for a friend.
Arizona teenagers pay a lot in state sales taxes every year, couldn’t they demand a kickback for new schools?
Arizona Republican legislators might be generous and let Primavera upgrade their website.