RealGM

Mexico City is "in consideration" to receive an NBA expansion team, according to Marc J. Spears.

"From what I'm hearing, Mark Tatum said Mexico City is in consideration. So move to the side Las Vegas. Move to the side Seattle. Mexico City, which also can open a door to Latin America, is a legit contender when the NBA talks expansion," said Spears on NBA Today.

Spears initially reported last week that Mexico City was a potential candidate for expansion.

The league has said it won't look at expansion until after negotiating the next TV rights deal.

The G League's Mexico City Capitanes is set to play a full home and away schedule this season.   

Via Marc J. Spears/NBA Today

Why the crickets?

Heat_team02 wrote:Why the crickets?

no habla ingles

If there is enough interest there, I think it could be huge for the NBA to expand to Mexico.

That said, man does it strike me as potentially difficult to get guys to millionaire athletes to live in Mexico City for the season or stay there for the season which would make it super difficult to field a competitive team.

I guess the players & their families aren't interested in being every day targets or living out of the country otherwise there would be more Buzz generated. I guess that could be a farm team where the unwanted go.

How about we figure out the black holes that are Detroit, Charlotte, Orlando, Houston, and OKC before we create another one?

You'd think the league that is a BUSINESS would realize that Mexico City is a terrible idea. Seattle and Vegas should be the primary goals of expansion, and then we can focus on another 4 teams to add in like 20 years. Also, I don't think people realize that the G-League team in Mexico City this year isn't going to be in the G-League forever, as it's only contracted until 2025.

With the first pick in the NBA draft the Mexico City Sombreros select...Eduardo Najera!

With the first pick in the NBA draft the Mexico City Sombreros select...Eduardo Najera!

alphatron10 wrote:You'd think the league that is a BUSINESS would realize that Mexico City is a terrible idea. Seattle and Vegas should be the primary goals of expansion, and then we can focus on another 4 teams to add in like 20 years. Also, I don't think people realize that the G-League team in Mexico City this year isn't going to be in the G-League forever, as it's only contracted until 2025.

From a business perspective, Mexico City would be the best option. It is the 4th (I believe) largest city in the world and would instantly have millions of die-hard fans. All of Latin America would be on board.

It's actually the opposite of Las Vegas. Mexico City would have an amazing home court advantage. High altitude, devoted fans and reasons not to go out at night. Vegas would have no home court. Fans of the opposing team would use it as an excuse to trek to Vegas. Casinos would own the majority of the season tickets and would comp them to high rollers that aren't local and likely also don't care about basketball and may not even care to show up. There are obviously lots of reasons for players to go out at night.

The only reason the NBA would consider either Vegas or Mexico is business. There are better locations if having these teams remain competitive is a priority. Signing star free agents would be nearly impossible in Mexico and the lack of a home-court advantage in Vegas would keep both of these teams irrelevant for a long time.

Backcountry wrote:

Heat_team02 wrote:Why the crickets?

no habla ingles

What does Joe Ingles have to do with it?

If Seattle doesn't get a team there will be hell to pay

Pickled Prunes wrote:

alphatron10 wrote:You'd think the league that is a BUSINESS would realize that Mexico City is a terrible idea. Seattle and Vegas should be the primary goals of expansion, and then we can focus on another 4 teams to add in like 20 years. Also, I don't think people realize that the G-League team in Mexico City this year isn't going to be in the G-League forever, as it's only contracted until 2025.

From a business perspective, Mexico City would be the best option. It is the 4th (I believe) largest city in the world and would instantly have millions of die-hard fans. All of Latin America would be on board.

It's actually the opposite of Las Vegas. Mexico City would have an amazing home court advantage. High altitude, devoted fans and reasons not to go out at night. Vegas would have no home court. Fans of the opposing team would use it as an excuse to trek to Vegas. Casinos would own the majority of the season tickets and would comp them to high rollers that aren't local and likely also don't care about basketball and may not even care to show up. There are obviously lots of reasons for players to go out at night.

The only reason the NBA would consider either Vegas or Mexico is business. There are better locations if having these teams remain competitive is a priority. Signing star free agents would be nearly impossible in Mexico and the lack of a home-court advantage in Vegas would keep both of these teams irrelevant for a long time.

The difference is that players would actually want to sign in Vegas, whereas no self respecting player other than Juan Toscano-Anderson would want to play in Mexico

alphatron10 wrote:You'd think the league that is a BUSINESS would realize that Mexico City is a terrible idea. Seattle and Vegas should be the primary goals of expansion, and then we can focus on another 4 teams to add in like 20 years. Also, I don't think people realize that the G-League team in Mexico City this year isn't going to be in the G-League forever, as it's only contracted until 2025.

How many NBA millionaires are gonna want to play in Mexico?

I just don't see how a Mexico City NBA team makes any money. They're wild about futbol and tickets for that start at like $8, and the teams have total salary of about 15-20 million dollars.

basketballwacko2 wrote:

alphatron10 wrote:You'd think the league that is a BUSINESS would realize that Mexico City is a terrible idea. Seattle and Vegas should be the primary goals of expansion, and then we can focus on another 4 teams to add in like 20 years. Also, I don't think people realize that the G-League team in Mexico City this year isn't going to be in the G-League forever, as it's only contracted until 2025.

How many NBA millionaires are gonna want to play in Mexico?

That's what I'm saying.... it's crazy to imagine any player wanting to live there.

alphatron10 wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

alphatron10 wrote:You'd think the league that is a BUSINESS would realize that Mexico City is a terrible idea. Seattle and Vegas should be the primary goals of expansion, and then we can focus on another 4 teams to add in like 20 years. Also, I don't think people realize that the G-League team in Mexico City this year isn't going to be in the G-League forever, as it's only contracted until 2025.

From a business perspective, Mexico City would be the best option. It is the 4th (I believe) largest city in the world and would instantly have millions of die-hard fans. All of Latin America would be on board.

It's actually the opposite of Las Vegas. Mexico City would have an amazing home court advantage. High altitude, devoted fans and reasons not to go out at night. Vegas would have no home court. Fans of the opposing team would use it as an excuse to trek to Vegas. Casinos would own the majority of the season tickets and would comp them to high rollers that aren't local and likely also don't care about basketball and may not even care to show up. There are obviously lots of reasons for players to go out at night.

The only reason the NBA would consider either Vegas or Mexico is business. There are better locations if having these teams remain competitive is a priority. Signing star free agents would be nearly impossible in Mexico and the lack of a home-court advantage in Vegas would keep both of these teams irrelevant for a long time.

The difference is that players would actually want to sign in Vegas, whereas no self respecting player other than Juan Toscano-Anderson would want to play in Mexico

Some players might want to sign in Vegas, but here's the truth... Vegas sucks. I mean, if you like strippers, hookers, gambling and drinking, sure. But you need to be pretty jacked up to get 365 days of satisfaction out of that lifestyle. And if that's you, you probably aren't leading your team to a chip. It's a pit when the sun comes up and a terrible place to raise a family.

Mexico City has better culture, better food, better scenery and just way more to offer off the court than Vegas... I just don't see NBA players feeling safe. But I would way rather live there than in Vegas. No contest.

The NBA will end up in Seattle and Vegas, I just find the Vegas part unfortunate. They are leaking other potential destinations to up the bidding. Even with the travel, London makes way more sense than Mexico City. The NBA could just invest in a supersonic jet.