Cities Most Likely To Gain A Pro Sports Team Via Relocation Or Expansion By 2028
 

The NBA, NFL and MLB have been slower to grow via expansion or relocation over the last 20 years or so. The NHL and WNBA both seem to have experienced much more expansion and relocation activity during the same time frame.

Over the next 10 years, what cities do you think are most likely to attract a pro sports team, either by expansion or relocation? If the city will likely attract a pro sports team via relocation, which team(s) could you see it attracting?

When Steve Ballmer - a former Microsoft exec who has deep ties to Seattle - bout the LA Clippers, I thought it was only a matter of time until he would move the team to Seattle; now, it appears that they will likely remain in the L.A. area (Inglewood), at least for the near future.

I can see Austin landing the San Antonio Spurs (NBA) via relocation. Austin has been home to a Spurs development league affiliate for many years, and not long ago, the team even went so far as to change its name from the Austin Toros to the Austin Spurs. Austin continues to grow at a fast pace, and could potentially surpass San Antonio in population by 2028. I can also see Nashville landing the Memphis Grizzlies (NBA).

I can see Orlando attracting the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (NFL) via expansion. I can also see San Diego landing an NFL team by 2028 if their stadium issues ever get resolved, and I can also see an NFL team entering the Central Texas (Austin/San Antonio corridor) market by 2028.

I can see London finally attracting an NFL team by 2028, especially considering the league's constant promotion of itself by hosting regular season games there.

Other potential candidates:

Las Vegas (NBA) - the T-Mobile Arena looks NBA-ready
Seattle (NBA)
Cincinnati (NBA)
Portland (MLB)
St. Louis (NBA and NFL)
Mexico City (NBA)
Austin/San Antonio (MLB)
Vancouver (NBA)
Montreal (MLB)

MLS has 12 west teams and 11 east. I think Miami is getting a new team.
NHL has one less central team than other divisions. Maybe Houston or Austin will get a team. I think MLS will see the most growth.

I think 3-4 NBA teams may move among Brooklyn, Sacramento, LA Clippers, Memphis and/or New Orleans. I think Seattle will get a team and maybe Memphis will move to Nashville. I don't think San Antonio will move to Austin, but perhaps they may play some games there. I don't think Midwest will get another NBA team. Las Vegas may get an NBA team from one of the California cities.

For NFL, I think Buffalo will lose their team to Toronto. I think either the LA Chargers or NY Jets will move, with one going to London.

For MLB, I think San Diego and Oakland will move, with one perhaps going to Portland and one going to Austin.

It just depends. It's not just about what city won't support or which is lacking a team but also where can you make money. Believe it or not, you can make more money as LA's/Orange County's or NY's/NJ's third team than as Austin's only team.

The Grizzlies aren't going anywhere.

You can't be serious. We just finished the league's newest (until next season) and most state of the art arena and Kings ownership has a 35 year lease. The Kings aren't going anywhere after the Seattle saga five years ago.

The most likely would be Detroit (eventually) getting a MLS expansion team.

Very interesting response, especially considering Brooklyn and Sacramento are the two newest tenants of new NBA arenas, and considering the recent revelation that Ballmer intends to keep the Clippers in the L.A. area (albeit in a new arena in Inglewood). But I agree with your sentiment, because as a former L.A. resident and current NYC resident, it seems as though no one cares about the Clippers or the Nets in those two metro areas (they are Lakers and Knicks territory, respectively).

I agree that Buffalo could likely lose the Bills to Toronto. It's somewhat hard to imagine, though, as Buffalo is one of those cities with deep NFL history (a la Green Bay and Pittsburgh).

I thought it was strange that the San Diego Chargers would occupy the multibillion dollar stadium that the Rams are building in Inglewood, but now that they are set to do so in two years, I am not sure whether a move away from that stadium by 2028 is likely.

And I can see the Oakland A's possibly relocating to Portland, too (one MLB team in the Bay Area seems to be enough), but would have a harder time seeing the San Diego Padres relocate to Austin.

I agree, with the Kings moving into Golden 1 Center just last year, it's highly unlikely that they would relocate by 2028.

That said, I was very surprised that the Kings ended up staying in Sacramento, as I was almost positive they were headed for Seattle back when the discussions of that possibility were happening

Steve has made it abundantly clear that he wants the clippers nowhere near Seattle, it's time to let this dream die already.

I'd be surprised if the Spurs move.

1. Nothing indicates Austin will build an NBA quality arena any time in the near or even medium term future . UT is eventually going to tear down and replace the Erwin Center with something else that's smaller, more college-oriented, and use that existing site to expand their medical school. That means there's nowhere in the central city where you could put a pro arena. I wouldn't be surprised if a private investor proposed building a big pro sports facility in a place like Round Rock, but would there be enough momentum?

2. The Spurs are too popular and too good and too established(the team started way back in 1967, its one of the oldest pro teams of any sport in the sunbelt). It would be really distastful if they left their home and there would probably be major political backlash. The City of San Antonio has sunk a LOT of money into luring and then retaining pro sports(see Alamodome), the Spurs are their only success so far. Local leaders would freak out if the Spurs threatened to leave and they'd bribe them with arena improvements.

3. Austin and San Antonio are basically one market. It's only a short drive from one city to the other. Eventually they are likely to become a single CSA.

.....

To be honest I don't see Austin getting a pro sports team anytime soon unless its MLS, and that would sooner go to San Antonio. My impression is that the city's political culture makes it unlikely to spend public funds on a pro sports facility, and while it is a wealthy city none of it's elites are interested enough in sports to buy a team and build a stadium or arena for it. And geographically, there's no great place to put a big stadium or arena, unless it went out in the suburbs.

1. The word "Austin" is almost synonymous with "momentum", so by all means, yes there would.

2. The Spurs *were too popular and too good. In light of the Kawhi Leonard uncertainty, there is more than enough reason to believe that those circumstances have peaked and are now trending in the opposite direction.

3. Google "Washington Wizards Wikipedia", and refer to "Baltimore Bullets". There is precedent, as those two cities also eventually became one CSA (with the faster-growing, more prominent city retaining the team).

my prediction is seattle will be the first city with a big three expansion team (nhl) and detroit will be the next city for mls....portland is too flaky to commit to big name sports but i think it would work. people here will clap for anything....

There was a lot more movement on the new baseball team agenda in Montreal this past week. Stephen Bronfman and Mitch Garber, two Montreal billionaires behind the new effort met with the new mayor, Valerie Plante to discuss civic support for a new team, and a new stadium. The city may consider a land gift to the developers since the head honchos hinted that the stadium would be a privately financed matter...


The more probable scenario for a new stadium is near the Peel basin at the head of the Lachine canal close to downtown and the skyline. A new electric suburban rail line will drop a station in adjacent Griffintown and the Bonaventure highway is very close with a fast link to the new Champlain bridge now under construction and deemed to be ready in 2020 or thereabout. The South shore commuters and American tourists often use that improving route into the city.

Thanks for the update.

If an MLB team were to return to Montreal, it would be great to see it retain the Expos team name and branding elements. They had one of the more unique logo designs and caps in all of baseball, IMO.

My prediction: should there be an expansion of the NFL into a foreign country, it will be into Mexico City.

Are you saying that you expect the Nets to leave Brooklyn? Or that you expect another team to move into Brooklyn?

I have a hard time seeing any of those moves. Toronto already treats the Bills as their de facto team, so it's hard to see why Bills ownership would alienate the fans by moving away from Buffalo.

I also can't envision the Jets leaving NY. They have a new stadium in the league's biggest market. Why would they want to move to an untested market in another country? The Chargers would be more vulnerable to a move to test London, but I doubt the NFL will be approving any moves out of L.A. for the next couple decades.

The Golden State Warriors are moving: BACK from Oakland to San Francisco as soon as their new home is finished:

• Video Link

They are probably going to get the Columbus Crew MLS team. Precourt is like a demon possessed with his heart set on Austin. MLS is behind it also. The city and state are taking it to court, but Precourt(may he drop dead)will probably get his evil way.

And I don't think it is going to San Antonio, but I would love for them to play spoiler and work with those opposed to it in Austin. Doesn't this conflict with San Antonio's own attempt to get a non major league soccer team?

Eventually, you mean after we're all gone? It's pretty empty from the Northside to New Braunfels to San Marcos to Austin.

That said, if anyone in Austin, especially if they live in or south of the city, wanted to be a Spurs season ticket holder, it would be no big deal. So it'd be virtually pointless to move a team from San Antonio to Austin. The best idea would be to move them as far north as possible, so they could make it easier for Austin fans to commute.

There'd be no reason to unless San Antonio cratered and became Detroit. And even Detroit has retained its teams and they play in the city proper. There's no reason. Maybe the Spurs would play a few games there each year but not out and out move.

Quebec City could eventually get an NHL team, they were close in the last expansion round. Perhaps Pheonix will finally relocate..

Toronto has no real interest in the NFL in any significant way, I don't see the Bills moving.

I too would like to see the return of the Expos. Would be good to have another Canadian team again.

A Seattle NHL team would be nice as well, it's the biggest gaping hole in the league right now if you ask me. A large, generally northern city without a lot of other major league competition. How the NHL looked at Las Vegas and thought that was a better expansion candidate is beyond me.

Big 3? If it's a Big 3, that certainly doesn't include the NHL.

Seattle can be viewed as a sunbelt market regarding hockey. It'll be a mostly new addition to the culture.

They've taken to it in San Jose.

It is very likely that Seattle will get an NHL team. In fact the process is already underway:

https://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2018/2/...-keyarena-deal

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Arizona Coyotes move, Houston has been a rumored destination.

Nashville as well. Seattle would have a built in rivalry with Vancouver and hockey would be no more foreign than soccer which has worked there.

Not many teams could move in the next 10 years. Here's the teams that could move in maybe 5 years:

Oakland Athletics (MLB): They are getting close to closing for a new stadium in Oakland, but if they moved, I could see them go to Las Vegas.
Tampa Bay Rays (MLB): They aren't getting anywhere with a new stadium in the Tampa Bay area; Montreal seems the most likely location.
Arizona Coyotes (NHL): They want an arena of their own in the East Valley, even after all that mess just 5-10 years ago. If Seattle doesn't get an expansion team, Seattle is a perfect location, especially because it wouldn't result in realigning divisions (one reason why Quebec City didn't get an expansion team a couple years ago).
New Jersey Devils (NHL): They apparently are not doing well even with their arena in Downtown Newark. No clue where they could go, but somewhere in the Eastern Time Zone would be needed to keep the conferences balanced. Quebec City would be the best option, even though Quebec City would fit more in the Atlantic Division.
Carolina Hurricanes (NHL): Struggling with attendance and support. Like New Jersey, Quebec City is the best option, despite the divisional problems.

Here are the teams that we could see move in the next 10 years, although it's unlikely:

Jacksonville Jaguars (NFL): Have a long-term lease for their stadium, but tarping the upper levels is not a good sign of fan support, and having home games in London all the time isn't good either.
Cincinnati Bengals (NFL): If I remember correctly, the owner has said he would consider moving if he doesn't get a new stadium, or better lease, or something. This is all in the early stages. The Bengals, despite some recent playoff appearances, have historically been terribly run by the front office, and this is apparently still the case.
Buffalo Bills (NFL): With a new owner, this is now unlikely, but New Era Field is old and Roger Goodell wants a new stadium in Buffalo. If it doesn't happen in the next generation, the Bills may move elsewhere.
Florida Panthers (NHL): In a lease and are the only tenant at their arena. Arena owners likely won't let their main tenant leave, despite the lack of support in the Miami area. A more likely outcome is that the Panthers get a more favorable lease if they mention moving.
New York Islanders (NHL): Actively looking to move, but they want to stay on Long Island. They are planning on playing some games back in Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum, and want to build an arena in Flushing or in Nassau County. Unlikely to leave the New York metropolitan area.

Notice that the NBA has no teams on the list. The most-recent teams that threatened to move, the Sacramento Kings, Los Angeles Clippers, and Milwaukee Bucks, now have long-term solutions in place with new arenas built or being built. The NBA has never been stronger, and is actually in position to supplant the NFL as the biggest league in the US or North America, fan-wise. This leaguewide strength has lead to good or great stability for each franchise.

The one exception for the NBA is the Pelicans. They're a small market, not the main draw in that market, as well as poorly run with a strange ownership situation with the Benson family feuding. I don't think the Pelicans are long for New Orleans unless they become a contender in the next couple of seasons, which is highly doubtful in its own right given the state of the Western Conference and their own assets cupboard.

Regarding your take on the NBA, could you then see expansion as an option? If the league is really as strong as you imply, could you see it expanding - potentially to Las Vegas, St. Louis, Cincinnati and / or Vancouver (2 Western Conference additions and 2 Eastern Conference additions via expansion) by 2028?

Regarding the New York Islanders, didn't Nassau Coliseum just undergo a massive renovation in order to retain the team there?

Regarding the Florida Panthers and their lack of support, can we all agree that South Florida has, by far, the most fairweather fans in all pro sports?

the seattle metropolitans were the first US team to win the stanley cup in 1917...first US team, win stanley cup......seattle!!! it will just mean it comes full circle a century later....

Interesting speculation. "Seattle Pelicans" actually has a nice ring to it, in keeping with the Seahawks bird theme.

They wouldn't be the Pelicans, just like they wouldn't have been the Seattle Kings and they aren't the Oklahoma City Sonics. They'd change the name to Sonics, retake the historical rights that the Thunder currently have, and the Pelicans would cease to exist.

The ownership and relative lack of support may be true, but the incredible TV revenue makes up for a lot of that. If you see TV viewership go down nationwide and/or worldwide, then there may be some rumblings.

It's interesting that the NHL has become popular in certain markets that one would never expect it to be popular in (San Jose & Nashville), yet has failed to take off in other similar markets (Atlanta & Phoenix). It will be interesting to see what happens in Las Vegas over the long-term.

You're right about the ludicrous revenue from the national broadcasters, but I'm not sure what effect that has on a struggling local market and whether the NBA would want to capture a larger local market. If you look here, New Orleans is the 51st largest TV market in the US, between Memphis and Providence, RI. That makes them the dead last TV market in the NBA. Add in that they rank 24th in attendance this season and all the way back to the 2014/15 season, I think we see rumors about the Pels sooner than later. After all, one of the main reasons the Maloofs gave for trying to move the Kings and later sell them is that the local TV market wasn't good for them in Sacramento, which new ownership immediately disproved by getting a $30 million local broadcasting deal.

The Coyotes will be in Seattle within the next decade. The Suns might not be too far behind in relocating (probably not to Seattle) if that team doesn't get better anytime soon and Devin Booker finds success with another, better, Western Conference team once his current contract expires. They're also bitching about wanting a new arena. Robert Sarver can go fuck himself for the way he's ruined that once respectable franchise. Ditto Ken Kendrick (owner of the Diamondbacks) for demanding that Maricopa County pay for the stadium upgrades he wants for his 20-year-old ballpark.

Cincinnati can't even get it's act together finding a proper site for an MLS stadium (that's FC Cincinnati's fault). The sooner the Reds and Bengals either relocate or are contracted, the better. Tear down the fucking wastes of space that are Great American Ballpark and Paul Brown Stadium and connect downtown to the riverfront by capping Fort Washington Way and expanding The Banks over where PBS and GABP stood.

probably because san jose is rife with disposable income and nashville is full of northerners. sunbelt markets full of west coast retirees dont scream nhl to me. atlanta is a tougher nut to crack but its staunchly southern and hockey just isnt in the dna....shrug...

Also, San Jose and Nashville have had good ownership and as a result have had competitive teams for most of their existence. Atlanta and Arizona are or were garbage teams. I think if a hockey team wants to build a base in a sunbelt market they need to become watchable pretty quickly.

Any latent NBA support to be tapped in St Louis or KC? Would it even be possible for one of these two metros to host a Missouri-wide team?

This year's Vegas launch and local reception proves the point well. Probably the most successful expansion launch season in the history of North America's Big 4, and the locals are loving it.

Las Vegas is way too small and hot for MLB, even if they built a retractable roof stadium.

And the Bengals just built that place not all that long ago.

New Orleans is likely too small and impoverished to support one team let alone two. The only reason the Saints do so well is because they've been there so long and have a recent history of success. They aren't going anywhere any time soon.

If I had to guess, the Pelicans become the new Sonics.

For the purposes of this discussion, San Jose is basically San Francisco, which means that the Sharks have a pretty sizable TV market and season ticket base to grow and maintain. Nashville is surprising but probably has to do with good ownership. Phoenix was a mistake in every way imaginable from start to finish, they moved to a non-hockey configurable arena then moved way out in the boonies to a suburb. They may have had a chance in Phoenix or Tempe (because of they could draw ASU students to games).

I think the biggest problem for Atlanta is that the Thrashers never became good.

The problem with the Thrashers is that the owners also owned the Hawks, and the Hawks were more important to them. The Thrashers were secondary, and selling them, even to investors from another city, allowed the owners to concentrate on the Hawks.

This is why the Florida Panthers won't move, despite the obvious lack of support. If they shared an arena with the Heat, they might have moved by now. But the arena owners don't want to lose their only tenant.

The Sharks and Predators both benefit from being the "only game in town", even though that's not true. These markets are not oversaturated with teams.

The Bengals' lease ends in 2026. The deal was very favorable to the Bengals and unfavorable to the taxpayers. You can bet that the city/county would try to get a more favorable lease, and then the Bengals would threaten to leave. Whether that escalates to an actual move is uncertain and unlikely, but the first small steps are there.

I didn't realize Nashville is full of Northerners. But I do know that Atlanta is, yet the Thrashers crashed and burned there. Heck, half of Atlanta city proper feels like its made up of Northern transplants (NYC/NJ, Philly, DC, etc.). When in Atlanta, I see just as many (or more) New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania license plates as license plates from states surrounding Georgia.

The Austin City Council seems to be doing all it can to prevent Precourt from moving the Crew here if it takes any city resources/real estate or tax breaks. It's far from a done deal. There is no significant organized group in Austin trying to bring major league sports here. There was also major opposition to the Formula 1 track being built even though it was built with private money from some local billionaires.

The kids in Seattle play soccer. I'm guessing some play hockey, but where? The only rink in city limits is Key Arena if I recall.

Do tell. Where is it? Just when everyone assumed they'd have to settle for the "Howard Terminal" site, they made an offer to buy the Coliseum but the city is still thinking about it last I read. If they get it, I don't know if the plan would be to refurbish the Coliseum or demolish it and rebuild. It has the advantage of a BART stop making it easy for fans up and down and across the Bay to get there whereas Howard Terminal apparently has no transit to the site.

The Bengals will have been there for almost 60 years. I don't see them leaving easily. They may slide over to Louisville or something like that.

The sooner the Bengals leave Cincinnati/Hamilton County, the better. They're a pathetic franchise run by a miserable owner.

That's because Vegas' locals are mostly all transplants and is always full of tourists from other NHL cities that would love to catch a game while in town. Vegas is also full of degenerate sports gamblers. Vegas makes too much sense to me. The Raiders will likely sell out every single game.