Does Rogers still care about the team? (predict the future)

[LittleOzzy]

I think most people considered the Blue Jays just one of Ted's little projects... but now that he is gone does the Rogers corporation still care about the team?

Fast forward 20 years, what type of situation do you think the Jays will be in?

I have no doubt that they will still be in Toronto, but I have doubts they will still be calling the Rogers Centre home. Will Rogers ever push for a new stadium, will they ever spend the money to make this team a winner?

Could you see an outside group buying the team or do you see MLSE buying them up on the cheap?

Would MLSE be a bad owner for the team? Where will the team be playing in the future?

[Randle McMurphy]

I think most people considered the Blue Jays just one of Ted's little projects... but now that he is gone does the Rogers corporation still care about the team?

Not really, no. It's just a way for them to market and sell their other products.

Fast forward 20 years, what type of situation do you think the Jays will be in?

Impossible to tell. They could have a different owner by then.

I have no doubt that they will still be in Toronto, but I have doubts they will still be calling the Rogers Centre home. Will Rogers ever push for a new stadium, will they ever spend the money to make this team a winner?

Unless a private investor backs a new stadium (and that's pretty unlikely), they will be playing in the same place in 20 years. Rogers certainly won't push for a new stadium, there is no need for one.

Could you see an outside group buying the team or do you see MLSE buying them up on the cheap?

I would think either one is a possibility.

Would MLSE be a bad owner for the team? Where will the team be playing in the future?

As long as the OTTP remains the majority shareholder, yes.

Toronto, at the Rogers Centre, for the foreseeable future.

[Brew666]

Rogers & Blue Jays = Noah's Arcade & Wayne's World

[Brew666]

I agree, the Rogers Centre is going to be their home for a very long time. I would absolutely love an actual baseball stadium as opposed to a multi-complex hunk of concrete, but it's likely that any owner of the Jays (now or in the future) is going to opt for the multi-complex b/c of our cold climate and the additional cash it can bring in.

I could see MLSE buying the Jays off Rogers, if Rogers wants to part ways. MLSE has been investing in stadiums (ACC, GM centre in Oshawa, BMO Field and when there were talks of an NHL team coming to Hamilton one of the stipulations was MLSE owning the building the team would play in) and if the Jays and Rogers centre go up for sale MLSE would jump at it I think.

[SharoneWright]

Very pertinent article by Dave Perkins on April 1. Really suggests they are in it more than ever... Would have happily forked over the money to Halladay, etc...

http://www.thestar.com/sports/baseball/ ... ir-mohamed

Big deal, you say? The owner (Pres/CEO Nadir Mohamed) shows up in spring training. So what?

Well, the late Ted Rogers never did it once, not down here, although he attended player functions in Toronto. Rogers never did what Mohamed was scheduled to do Wednesday evening at a dinner for the players, coaches and front-office types, which is to speak and lay out the proprietor's ideas going forward.

"It's a commitment, we've made the commitment and we're going to make it happen," Mohamed said when asked for a preview of his speech.

[sule]

I wish we had an Arab Sheik buy the team. Those guys flush gold coins down the toilet for fun. I'd love to see what a billionaire sheik would do with this team. Lord knows they love extravagance and being able to say they are better than their peers. That kind of attitude might accidentally translate into wins.

[Hendrix]

I wouldn't say there will be no need for a new stadium for the next 20 years. If it makes sense financially to build a new stadium then a new stadium would be built.

I'm kind of curious how Minnasota's new stadium will go over vs. the metro dome.

[Randle McMurphy]

I wouldn't say there will be no need for a new stadium for the next 20 years. If it makes sense financially to build a new stadium then a new stadium would be built.

Why would there be a need for a new stadium in the next 20 years?

The Rogers Centre is fine for baseball, no private investor (especially Rogers) is going to put their own money into building another stadium, and there is absolutely no reason to expect public funding only 20+ years after the last one was built.

[LittleOzzy]

I wouldn't say there will be no need for a new stadium for the next 20 years. If it makes sense financially to build a new stadium then a new stadium would be built.

Why would there be a need for a new stadium in the next 20 years?

The Rogers Centre is fine for baseball, no private investor (especially Rogers) is going to put their own money into building another stadium, and there is absolutely no reason to expect public funding only 20+ years after the last one was built.

In another 20 years that would make the stadium 41 years old... I think personally it will be time for a new stadium.

[satyr9]

Well I don't see a new stadium anywhere in the near future that's for sure, but I don't think that says much about Rogers commitment to baseball in general.

Right now it's year 1 of a rebuilding program and it's very hard to tell if there's a real commitment to growing a contender or not at this point. You'll see hints of it with who they draft and whether they continue to spend for guys like Hechevarria (and it may turn out poorly in the end, but man I wish we'd beaten out the Reds for Chapman too), but the Jays club itself isn't going to see big cash upgrades in the near future, nor should it if they hope to build a real winner. IMO the slower this process goes, the more likely I'll believe Rogers is in for the long haul with baseball in TO. If they're willing to put up with the stories about brutal attendance for a couple years while they start to stock and build the entire franchise, then I think it'll say a lot about their long term aspirations for the Jays. If they jump back into vaguely competitive more face than reality mode next year, that'll tell a different story altogether.

It's going to be agonizing if you're following the Jays daily, but to me the less they try for band-aids today, the more likely I think it is they have a plan for tomorrow.

Still, if some benevolent billionaire wants to give it a shot instead, I'm all for it.

[hsb]

The CN Tower area is going through a new rebuild. With the Toronto Aquarium, retail area and new additions to roundhouse park for families and kids, the place is going to have heavy traffic and feel more part of the core. Leaving the Rogers center within the next two decades would not be a good move.

[Randle McMurphy]

In another 20 years that would make the stadium 41 years old... I think personally it will be time for a new stadium.

The "next 20 years" isn't a reference to that time that comes after that. It's strictly the next 20 years.

[J-Roc]

Rogers does not care about the Blue Jays. They bought them to use for programming. It's been a big fail. I mean, it's probably helped to keep Sportsnet afloat, but they would have been better investing in more hockey like TSN did.

Ted Rogers looked at the Jays as a business opportunity, and that's it. The current CEO would love nothing more than to get rid of this team, but guess what...no one would ever buy it. And just floating out the idea of selling would bring attention to that fact and make everything worse. So he goes to spring training, and renews a "commitment". haha

No doubt Beeston would explain to them that they need to get value back in the team, and the only way is to win. Obviously easier said that done. And it might take many losing seasons to get there. But that's their only hope.

Only other possible owner is MLSE. And they sure as heck are not buying a losing property. If MLB changed their playoff system or whatever, then maybe there's a chance of reviving things faster.

As for the Rogers Centre, it'll be with us for a long, long time. But it's okay. The nice yards in Baltimore and Cleveland aren't attracting fans either. It's ALWAYS about winning.

[Hendrix]

I wouldn't say there will be no need for a new stadium for the next 20 years. If it makes sense financially to build a new stadium then a new stadium would be built.

Why would there be a need for a new stadium in the next 20 years?

The Rogers Centre is fine for baseball, no private investor (especially Rogers) is going to put their own money into building another stadium, and there is absolutely no reason to expect public funding only 20+ years after the last one was built.

Well it would depend upon if they thought they could recoup the money by renewed fan interest, more revenues etc.. I could see it getting to that point sometime before the place is 40 yeras old. If you were to couple a nupcoming good team with a new stadium maybe you could reach the same kind of fan interest from the early 90's.

Will be interesting to see what kind of revenues/attendance the Twins generate over the next couple years. And the metrodome was only 28 years old.

[Schad]

Beeston has already stated that we're likely looking at three decades before another stadium is built. The Rogers Centre isn't beautiful by any means, but it's functional and well-located, and that means that they really have no need to build a replacement...new stadiums usually experience a big boost in attendance for perhaps two years before the novelty wears off, and that's not enough to recoup the costs.

[satyr9]

Beeston has already stated that we're likely looking at three decades before another stadium is built. The Rogers Centre isn't beautiful by any means, but it's functional and well-located, and that means that they really have no need to build a replacement...new stadiums usually experience a big boost in attendance for perhaps two years before the novelty wears off, and that's not enough to recoup the costs.

I look forward to spending my retired years with season tickets in a new ballpark. Until then...

[raps4life~]

Speaking of Rogers Center, I found this on Wikipedia:

The stadium's inward-looking hotel rooms have regular two-way windows, yielding instances of what some could consider indecent exposure. When SkyDome first opened, a couple engaging in sexual intercourse was televised on the scoreboard Jumbotron during a baseball game. Days later, a man was caught masturbating during a game in full view of the packed stands. The man, later tracked down by a Sports Illustrated reporter, calmly said, "I thought they were one-way windows." Patrons now have to sign contracts stipulating that they will not perform any lewd acts within view of the stadium.

[Hendrix]

Beeston has already stated that we're likely looking at three decades before another stadium is built. The Rogers Centre isn't beautiful by any means, but it's functional and well-located, and that means that they really have no need to build a replacement...new stadiums usually experience a big boost in attendance for perhaps two years before the novelty wears off, and that's not enough to recoup the costs.

Looks like I'm off base. But I'm not sure if it would only last 2 years.

Lets say 25 years from now there's either a **** old skydome. Or there's a gret brand new facility that's been around 3 years. If the 2nd option is a more pleasurable experience I think I'de be more likely to go to the game no matter if it's been around for 3 years or not.