View Full Version : Great Q&A on Contraction

11-08-2001, 01:33 PM
Done by Dave Van Dyke: (http://www.foxsports.com/story/story.adp?contentId=198955)

Here are a few of the questions people here have asked:
Q: Why Montreal and Minnesota? Why not Florida, which also isn't drawing fans and needs a new stadium? Why not Tampa Bay?

A: It gets very political here and it's probably best we don't get too deep into it.

Suffice it to say that Montreal and Minnesota have the easiest leases to back out of, plus owners who apparently don't mind leaving their cities without teams.

Tampa has a long stadium lease and Selig seems to have made that franchise a pet project by sending John McHale from Detroit to find new ownership and scout out stadium sites.

Florida stays, because Selig believes the area could still buy into a stadium proposal, because Montreal owner Jeffrey Loria has a home near there (and he will "buy" the franchise), and because baseball would like a team there. The Marlins most likely will stay until the next round of contraction in a couple of years, or be moved to Washington, D.C., or Minnesota.

Q: Why can't Minnesota and Montreal survive the way they are?

A: They are the lowest two teams on the revenue totem pole.

The Expos had revenues (including radio and TV deals) of about $16 million in 2000, compared to the Yankees' $190 million. That much difference can buy a lot of talent.

Minnesota's revenue isn't much higher than Montreal's. To make matters worse, owner Carl Pohlad kept much of his revenue sharing from large-market teams.

Other owners are furious that the Twins profited $6 million each of the last two years, money that they gave the Twins to buy better players.