[stevebydac]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

You're making the mistake of thinking that metro area population is the key determinant. That is not necessarily so. A good population base certainly helps, but if that population isn't interested in baseball, then no matter how large the city is the club won't succeed. Look at the NHL's troubles in putting clubs into cities with large populations but with little interest in hockey.

Interest in baseball in the city was damaged by the strike, and then the performance struggles of the club slowly eroded away much of the fan base. I suspect also the rise in Maple Leafs mania plays a role, as well as the changing demographics of the city.

Good point about it being a hockey area. But aren't "performance struggles" the fault of the club? Make the club better, and attendance would improve, no? And (I'm not from Toronto) can you please explain the demographics change? How is that different from what other cities face?

To spend a ton of money, they need the revenue. They haven't got it. Consider:

The last season in which the Blue Jays had a per game attendance which matched the AL average was 1998; every season since then it has been below league average, with 2002 being the worst at just 74% of the AL average. It had reached 97% of the AL average in 2008, but attendance was down by nearly 22% this year, dropping its percentage of AL average to 82%. The club cannot even match the league average in attendance, let alone surpass it, so ticket sales certainly aren't going to provide the necessary revenue.

LGO, but their attendance drop coincided with their performance drop. Manage the team better, and attendance would improve. Toronto HAD great attendance. They aren't Tampa Bay or Florida who have always struggled with attendance.

The Jays also don't have a regional sports network, something which has played a huge role in boosting the media revenues of clubs like the Yankees and Red Sox. There doesn't seem to be anywhere near the level of interest for Rogers to operate SportsNet as such a RSN for the Jays (curiously, many Jays games are aired on TSN, a rival sports network).

Another good point, my friend.

The fundamental economic structure of baseball has changed enormously since the early 1990s. Consider the top five MLB Aug. 31 official payrolls in 1992 and 1993:

1992

1 - Toronto Blue Jays - $49,427,166
2 - Oakland Athletics - $48,029,667
3 - New York Mets - $44,009,334
4 - Boston Red Sox - $42,138,665
5 - Los Angeles Dodgers - $42,050,166

1993

1 - Toronto Blue Jays - $51,935,034
2 - Atlanta Braves - $47,206,416
3 - New York Yankees - $46,588,791
4 - Boston Red Sox - $46,164,788
5 - Chicago White Sox - $42,115,723

The Jays essentially spent their way into the top echelons, at a time when the differences between the top payroll teams was relatively small.

You're overlooking the degree to which many areas of the country dislike the city of Toronto. There was even a comedic documentary on the subject, Let's All Hate Toronto.

The numbers above are actually helping my argument. So far we've determined that they used to be one of the top-attended teams in the league, the attendance dropped coinciding with poor baseball team building, and now you're showing they were able to spend with the biggest clubs in the league.

And while I was not aware that there is some anti-Toronto sentiment in Canada, there is still only one baseball club in the entire country. I'm sure good marketing could find a few handfuls of baseball fans (among 33,000,000) who aren't ready to nuke their country's largest city.

Studies have shown that dividing the population in half for two-team cities is not correct. In reality, there is a lot of cross-over in fan interest between the clubs, and interest in the sport in general is raised by the presence of a second club. The best statistical fit has come by making no adjustment to market size for two-team cities; the next best fit is by assigning a value of 70%-80% of the market size to each club. The lowest fit was by dividing the market in half.

Fair point, LGO. But using your 80% figure only boosts the Cubs/White Sox higher than Toronto (and Boston BTW). It doesn't boost the others enough. So Toronto is still, then, the 9th largest MLB market, still only one slot behind Boston.

You've proven to me that Toronto isn't as baseball-crazy as Boston or St. Louis, but I'm not convinced they can't be successful. Their market is still in the top ten of MLB, and they've had great attendance when they were managed better.

Don't misunderstand, I wish you folks the best. You deserve a good team. My heart goes out to you.