Building a baseball stadium in that location sounds so stupid that it might be true in Vegas.

Price range for construction of a new MLB ballpark: estimates for the new Texas Rangers stadium are in the $1.1bln neighborhood for 40k seats and a retractable roof. The proposed new home for the Rays (30k seats, fixed roof) would cost $900mil. Add that to an expansion fee of around a billion and you pay $3bln for your new team.

That said, MLB expansion to 32 teams will come sooner than later and LV is certainly an option. Right now, everyone is waiting for the Rays and A’s to get their new stadiums funded. That needs to happen first because as soon as MLB is announcing expansion, the threat of moving those two teams becomes way less credible.

MLb stadium would be pretty sick. Play some poker in summer then hit an MLB game. They already have so many teams though, would they really add a new one?

NFL has 32 teams; NBA 30 teams; NHL 31 teams; MLS 23 teams and counting.

MLB has 30 teams. Expansion to 32 teams and realignment has been talked about for a while now with Rob Manfred as recently as this Spring saying that they 'would like to be a 32-team league'. Based on the rumor mill, Mexico City looks to be the front runner for a team, but there are several other cities that have expressed interest including Montreal (after the Expos failed there), Charlotte, Portland and New Orleans. And Las Vegas.

Talk of the town is to follow the NFL model of 4 divisions with 4 teams each in both leagues which would make scheduling significantly easier and would allow to have (almost) all teams in a division in the same time zone and would also provide easy options to fix a playoff system that most people dislike. Wether it's just having the 4 division winners advance or a wild card system (potentially multi game) like the NFL.

If Vegas gets a baseball team, it makes no sense to have the stadium that close to the strip unless it wasn’t a dome so they can see the views. There is plenty of open land in and around Vegas that would cost SIGNIFICANTLY less money than buying the Rio and putting a stadium there. Along with the cost, the added traffic congestion would be ridiculous. I’m thinking IF they get a team, it will be a dome stadium not close to the strip at all.

who can see the views? the people at the game in 120 degree heat? nobody at a baseball game is going to care about "seeing the views" of vegas.

I agree it makes more sense to be further away from the strip and with a dome.

People watching TV and looking at images on social media.

At least that’s the reason why MLB prefers downtown stadiums. But again, that doesn’t really apply to a domed stadium and there’s zero chance for an open MLB ballpark in LV. Especially since the city relies on people’s ability to spend money on the Strip after watching a game instead of resting in bed with a heat stroke.

That said, Vegas wouldn’t even be the hottest city in the US with an MLB team, that distinction belongs to Phoenix.

Which spends a ton of money on A/C for the stadium even with the roof closed.

People still watch baseball? I thought that's just what you put on tv when you have bad insomnia and really need to catch some zzzzz's.

Just because a stadium has an open roof does not mean the A/C does not function...we routinely see games here in Houston that are high heat/high humidity and where the roof is open on either of the stadiums (baseball and football). A/C still makes it quite tolerable...on the field itself might be a different scenario, as those in Arlington see each year as teams wilt come September...

I don't believe it makes sense to build a stadium for an MLB team in Vegas, but it has nothing to do with weather. But if they did, it also need not be a domed stadium. Quite honestly, the LAST thing MLB needs is an artificial turf field, and a dome all but guarantees such...as we learned in the 60's with the Astrodome.

Tampa is the only current MLB ballpark with a fixed roof. All others that have a roof, use a retractable one. And of those, Toronto (build 30 years ago) is the only one that uses artificial turf.

If they build a new stadium in LV, it’s highly likely that significant metrics would be comparable to Globe Life Field that’s currently under construction in Arlington. Retractable roof, ~40k seats, 1.1bln+X construction cost.

But before MLB can talk expansion, they need to have funding for new ballparks in Oakland and Tampa secured. Otherwise you can’t credibly threaten those cities with relocation. At least not both of them. If MLB is able to work out the logistics for Mexico City, that’s clearly the #1 pick for a multitude of reasons but most importantly to have Latinos stick with baseball instead of switching to MLS. NASCAR is a powerful reminder that you really want to avoid becoming a sport that only attracts white males from states that were left behind economically.

i highly doubt Mexico City will get a permanent team, they’ll just have games down there more often. i can’t see owners or players approving it due to the travel logistics it presents, and also MC sits at a 40% higher elevation than Denver so it would create a significant wrinkle in home team advantage and lineup considerations.

Mexico City direct distance to:
Los Angeles: 1550 miles
Phoenix: 1255 miles
Houston: 750 miles
Miami: 1280 miles

For reference:
New York to Miami: 1220 miles
LA to New York: 2365 miles
LA to Seattle: 960 miles
LA to Chicago: 1740 miles
Chicago to NY: 625 miles

It does seem a bit too much on an island in terms of distance between possible teams.

Direct distance Seattle to other AL West teams:
Houston: 1892 miles
Arlington: 1671 miles
Oakland: 678 miles
Los Angeles: 961 miles

Replacing Seattle with Mexico City would actually decrease travel distances in the AL West. That division also has the major problem of having two teams in CT and 3 in PT.

But with a 32 team league, they would certainly go with 4 divisions with 4 teams each in both leagues which would decrease total travel time significantly for (almost) every team while also making sure you don’t spread a division over 3 time zones.

There are a million obstacles to a team in Mexico, but travel time wouldn’t be a major one. But if it’s not a realistic scenario, Rob Manfred wouldn’t mention Mexico City along with Montreal first when he talks about expansion.

What are the odds they consider moving the WSOP to the Vegas Raiders new stadium? Would be able to run all the events in the stadium comfortably, easy parking, close to strip etc. Or maybe just the ME, but I also heard it was going to go to the convention center

Though I am sure this is a troll job, the odds of it are zero, and I am not sure how the events could be run comfortably when the playing surface and sidelines of the stadium would be about half the size of the Rio Convention Center and provide nearly none of the amenities or security.

The revenue from bets and concessions pay for the entire project in less than 10 years. With in-game betting coming this isn't really huge odds for it to make sense. Now whether or not it actually happens....I have no clue.

That's a lot of beer to sell and it still doesn't justify overpaying for the land by a half-billion. BTW, in-game betting has existed in Nevada for 5+ years. And how exactly is this MLB team going to get revenue from the bets anyway?

You just gave me a thought...by building their ballpark on the site of an existing casino and keeping the grandfathered gambling license and applying it within the ballpark and having their own in game gambling app for use while at the games.

Kind of how Moulin Rouge keeps having a pop-up casino every 2 years.

https://vegasinc.lasvegassun.com/bus...-moulin-rouge/

Rio was opened in 1990, so there is a chance it has that type of license that means the gambling could continue on-site without a hotel...aka the ballpark.

In game betting while at the park would be pretty fun.

Real time bets on your phone.

Will he get on base? 3:1

Will he hit triple? 15:1

Will someone hit slam? 800:1

Over / Under on number of walks?

on and on.

Would make going to games WAY more fun.

Anything to make baseball more watchable.

Live in game bets were a staple of watching games at Wrigley Field or Comiskey Park during the 60s and 70s. Common wagers were get on base, swing at next/first pitch, steal attempt, steal success, strikeout, balls/strikes, walk, run scoring this batter, over/under on game length (with Jim Kaat pitching, take the under), etc.

Later, in Baltimore, bets on Earl Weaver getting the boot were common.

In game betting has been a thing for sometime now.
Mex City ain't getting a team.
Charlotte ain't getting a team.
Montreal ain't getting a team.
Vegas can have their choice with Oakland or Tampa.

Weird parallel imo. NASCAR is the number 1 spectator sport*. Their stadiums hold like 200k people, and they attract double the sponsorship money of the NFL.



*I don't watch it and don't get the interest.

from last month: South Point 400 least attended NASCAR Cup race in LVMS history

https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports...-lvms-history/

Although I live in Charlotte (center of Nascar) and get more than enough exposure, I doesn't do much for me either.

I have been to only one race but I will say that standing on the rail while the herd of beasts go roaring by helped me better understand the attraction. It's hard to describe the power and speed of those cars. You just have to experience it.

Trying to remember which version of iPhone was out in the 60s and 70s