The first step in keeping the Rays in Tampa Bay is a Trop extension
There may, however, be a temporary solution. A tourniquet, if you will.
The Rays and St. Petersburg officials need to come together to discuss a short-term extension of the Trop lease.
This would look nothing like the 10-year extension the team proposed earlier this year with the team, the city and Pinellas County each contributing up to $250 million to refurbish the aging stadium.
Instead, this would more closely resemble the team's one-year agreement at Steinbrenner Field this season.
For however many years they decide on - it could be two seasons, it could be five - the Rays would pay rent, the city would be responsible for the stadium's upkeep, and the redevelopment of the property could begin on the eastern-most side of the vast parking area with the city reaping all of those profits under a new rights agreement.
What's the rationale for the plan? It either buys time or solves problems for everyone involved.
For the city?
It lessens expenses incurred for the city's contractual obligation to fix the Trop roof and bring the stadium back up to a major league-ready status after Hurricane Milton. Instead of losing tens of millions of dollars just to get the ballpark prepped for the next three seasons until the use agreement runs out, the city could recoup millions in rent payments while getting several more years of baseball traffic in downtown.
For the Rays?
It gives them a longer runway to decide the team's future. Whether that means finding a new stadium deal in Tampa Bay or even planning a possible relocation elsewhere, there is no scenario where they would have a new stadium built by the time the use agreement ends. Without a Trop extension, the Rays would undoubtedly be looking at a temporary stadium situation in 2029, much like the Athletics today.
For aspiring ownership groups?
Same answer as above. Even if Stuart Sternberg sold to Tampa Bay buyers in the coming months - and nothing appears imminent - it could take years to secure land and funding for a new stadium, not to mention construction, and there would be a scramble for a temporary home.
For Major League Baseball?
It might theoretically satisfy commissioner Rob Manfred's request that Sternberg establish a "go forward" plan. It would likely delay MLB's hopes of a two-team expansion, but it could increase the odds that the Rays remain in Tampa Bay, which is Manfred's stated preference.
It's not a perfect solution. It doesn't help the team's revenue problems. It won't magically fix the decades-long pursuit of a new stadium. And the Rays will likely balk at the idea of paying anything more than nominal rent - they're supposedly paying the Yankees $10 million for the use of Steinbrenner Field but are banking on getting reimbursed through a business interruption insurance policy - so there are kinks that will need to be worked out.
But it could, in the long run, turn out to be profitable for the team. With everyone in baseball anticipating a work stoppage when the current collective bargaining agreement runs out before the 2027 season, it could have an effect on how much would-be owners are willing to pay for a franchise. By adding years to the lease, the Rays could see an increase in the team's value once a new labor agreement is reached.
It also allows for tensions between the Rays and local politicians to dissipate. Time may not heal every wound, but future elections could change the makeup at city hall and in county offices.
And while St. Petersburg Mayor Ken Welch has shot down the idea of negotiating with Sternberg about a new stadium in St. Pete, a short lease extension would ensure the Rays remain in the city beyond a second Welch term, should he win reelection next year.
Aspiring ownership groups in Tampa Bay may not like the idea of taking the pressure off Sternberg to sell right away, but there are no indications that a quick sale is on the way. And without an extension, the Rays could be negotiating with other cities/buyers for a potential move in less than 40 months.
Manfred's devotion to Tampa Bay will undoubtedly wane quickly if the city locks the Rays out of Tropicana Field and there is no full-sized stadium available here in 2029.
Yes, a short-term extension is only a temporary fix.
But, one way or another, it's necessary for Tampa Bay to keep baseball. Whether Sternberg sells the team to local buyers tomorrow or still owns it in 2029, a lease extension at the Trop is still essential.
John Romano can be reached at jromano@tampabay.com. Follow @romano_tbtimes.
• • •
Sign up for our Sports Today newsletter to get daily updates on the Bucs, Rays, Lightning and college football across Florida.
Every weekday, tune into our Sports Day Tampa Bay podcast to hear reporter Rick Stroud break down the biggest stories in Tampa Bay sports.
Never miss out on the latest with your favorite Tampa Bay sports teams. Follow our coverage on X and Facebook.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
8 hours ago
- New York Times
This Week in Sports Trivia: August 21, 2025
Remember the torpedo bat saga? It was only the New York Yankees' second game of the season, back in late March. They blasted a franchise-record nine home runs in a 20-9 rout of the Milwaukee Brewers, and all of a sudden, the odd-shaped bats — increasingly being used by the Yankees and across Major League Baseball — were all anyone was talking about. It feels like a long time ago. Advertisement Tuesday, the Yankees had another nine-homer game, this time against the Tampa Bay Rays, and our story didn't even mention the word 'torpedo.' It shows how quickly innovations can become the norm in sports. The power-hungry Yankees — if not the torpedo bat — are part of this week's quiz, so it might help to take a peek at the box score. But we'll touch on many other topics, too. So enjoy the quiz, and while you're at it, take some time to play our daily Connections: Sports Edition! (Illustration: Demetrius Robinson / The Athletic; top photos: Jonathan Dyer, Trevor Ruszkowski / Imagn Images; Peter Aiken, Jack Gorman, Ian MacNicol / Getty Images) Spot the pattern. Connect the terms Find the hidden link between sports terms Play today's puzzle
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Volusia County Council hire new assistant county manager tasked with special projects
Volusia County has hired an assistant county manager, one of the top positions in county government leadership, who will focus on special projects. Gus Zambrano, 61, is coming to Volusia from the post of assistant city manager of Hollywood, Florida. The Volusia County Council voted 7-0 on Tuesday, Aug. 19, to approve him for the assistant county manager role. His salary is $185,000. It's not the first time the county has had an assistant county manager, but the position has been vacant for a while, County Manager George Recktenwald said. "It's going to fill a need that we've had for a while for special projects," Recktenwald said. Among those projects is Transform386, which is handling well over $400 million in federal funding for Hurricane Ian and Hurricane Milton recovery projects. Zambrano also applied for the city manager position in Venice and made it to a group of six finalists, according to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. But he said Volusia County was the first place he applied when he thought about leaving South Florida. "I've grown up in urban areas all my life, so to see the special nature and the special place that Volusia is, is something that really needs to be preserved," he said. Zambrano said his love of nature and skillset, which includes a background in economic development, bring a balance to the role. That sentiment received support from councilmen. "The balance between those two are critical because the economy needs to flow in order to be able to do everything else," he said. Who is Volusia County's new assistant county manager? Zambrano just moved to Port Orange. He has a wife and four children who are all grown, he said. His background includes economic development, real estate and government, according to his resume. From 2015 to 2025, he was an assistant city manager in Hollywood, Florida, and focused on sustainable development. That role included overseeing development services, public works and utilities, parks, and design and construction management. There, he managed an over $600 million five-year capital improvement program and helped secure "over $21M in Resilient Florida grants." From 1999 to 2015, Zambrano held several roles in the city of Miramar. Those included the director of community and economic development, where he led "a 42-member team with an operating and grants budget of $10.3M." Before that, he served as director of economic development and revitalization. In that role, he led efforts that brought in "over 7,100 jobs and $254 million in capital investment." Cindy Harris, who is running for the District 3 seat on the County Council, was the only member of the public to comment. She said she was impressed by Zambrano's resume. But she said she'd like to see the county give people time to review candidates for positions like that. It was posted as an item on the County Council agenda. "Giving a four-day notice is not enough," she said, adding that she wanted to speak with Zambrano after his appointment. "And so it begins, Gus," County Council Chairman Jeff Brower said. Zambrano spoke with Harris in the hall outside of County Council chambers. "I like to listen to people. I really pride myself on being a good listener," Zambrano said in an interview with The News-Journal. "I try and solve problems that everyday people experience with the bureaucracy of government." This article originally appeared on The Daytona Beach News-Journal: Gus Zambrano is new Volusia County assistant county manager Solve the daily Crossword
New York Times
9 hours ago
- New York Times
If MLB expands, could its 162-game schedule shrink? It very well might
The commissioner of baseball sat in front of the ESPN microphones in Williamsport, Pa., last weekend, and all sorts of hot-button words started flowing. By now, you probably know which ones we mean. Expansion. Realignment — and not just any old realignment … Geographic realignment — which could totally reinvent the … Playoff format. Advertisement Rob Manfred dropped all of those breadcrumbs last weekend, in response to a David Cone question asking if he could open 'a window into the future.' There was lots to chew on, even if you've given up bread and carbs. But there was one more breadcrumb, firmly connected with expansion, that the commissioner never got around to dropping: The demise of the 162-game schedule. One club official we spoke with this week casually referred to baseball's current 162-game slog as 'an endangered species.' Another longtime club executive, also granted anonymity so he could speak freely, was even more emphatic. 'Expansion,' he said, 'means the end of 162.' Hmmm, bet you never thought that expansion had anything to do with how many games get crammed into a baseball schedule, right? Oh, yeah, it does. Of course it does. A baseball season is the world's largest jigsaw puzzle. Every piece is connected to every other piece. That means that if this sport does someday expand from 30 to 32 teams, everything is in play — much of it visible, some of it not so visible. So if there are 32 teams, it seems more likely that the season will last 156 games — or possibly 154 — than 162. Math is a factor. History is a factor. Health is a factor. Money is a factor. How? Why? Let's explain it all as best we can, based on our conversations with officials across the baseball spectrum, from the commissioner's office to front offices to the MLB Players Association. Nope. Never said that. Math is a big part of any schedule in any sport — but especially this sport. Before we lay out the math that applies to shrinking the 162-game schedule, we should probably remind you of something important: None of this is certain. First of all, expansion itself isn't certain. The commissioner often talks about it in a way that makes it sound practically inevitable. But it all would need to be negotiated with the players' union, so there's no assurance that that would go smoothly. Advertisement It is also far from unanimous, among officials of the 30 current clubs, that expansion is a good idea. Where? Probably Nashville and Salt Lake, but that's not a lock. When? Sometime after the Rays and A's get settled into their next homes, which could be anywhere from 2029 to 2089. How much is it worth? Billions, but maybe not enough billions to convince the skeptics. So all of that has to get sorted out first. It won't be this week. It won't be this year. It won't be anytime soon. It's wise to remember that as we move along, despite all the fun talk this week. But where were we? Oh, that's right. Schedule math. Let's say baseball in the future is a sport with 32 teams, split into eight divisions of four teams each. You know where the math majors would suggest the schedule needs to go if that's the setup? To 156 games. Here's our rough sketch of how simple it is to get to that number: 12 games apiece versus the other three teams inside the division. That's 36 games. Six games apiece versus the other 12 teams in your league. That's 72 games. Are you adding along at home? No need. That gets us to 108 games. Where do the last 48 games come from? Three games apiece versus the 16 teams in the other league. Now we're at 156. Bingo. There is one other reason that 156 games would work. There's a basic scheduling principle to keep in mind. The ideal schedule is arguably two series a week for 26 weeks, so 52 total. And if there are 32 teams, that creates perfect 156-game schedule math, of 52 times three. (In other words, that's two three-game series a week.) So the math works. But what about the … There's incredible irony here. Expansion could be the creature that kills the 162-game schedule, but once upon a time, it was the reason 162 happened at all. It came with the first wave of modern expansion, more than 60 years ago. For six decades, there had been only 16 teams in the American and National Leagues. And they played a 154-game schedule, a number the league settled on in 1908 and stuck with for more than half a century. Advertisement Then, in 1961, the California Angels and Washington Senators 2.0 arrived in the AL. In '62, it was the NL's turn. So Houston got a team, and the Mets brought NL baseball back to New York. So out went the 154-game schedule, and in came the 162-game schedule. Why? Math happened. Every team played each of the other nine teams in its league 18 times. That added up to 162. Simple arithmetic, friends. It has taken many creative schedule gyrations to make future expansions fit into the 162-game puzzle. But maybe not for long. For a decade, the schedule makers have been talking behind the scenes about using the next expansion as the impetus to trim a schedule that has become a monster in more ways than one. Now here we are. But history in baseball always matters. So it's possible that if the schedule does shrink, it wouldn't shrink to the most mathematically perfect number (156). It could instead land on the most historically perfect number (154) — the previous standard for so many memorable seasons. That could also be a number that appeals to the record keepers, because numbers and records that revolve around season totals would be impacted by shaving games off the schedule. So the power of 154 is that virtually all of modern history can be divided into two sections — the era of 154-game seasons and the era of 162-game seasons. Because there is so much history attached to the 154-game season, you could see a path back to 154 when the shrink wrap settles. It isn't quite as neat and clean mathematically. But it's possible. To get to 154, a team would play a pair of two-game home-and-home series against one of those non-division teams — presumably a 'rival' — in place of two three-game series. Voila! But there's more going on here than just math and history … You know how much payroll money has already been allocated this year to players on the injured list? How about $953.57 million, according to Spotrac — with a month and a half left in the season. The sport has already cleared the $1 billion plateau once, in 2023 … and barely fell short last year. Now it's well on its way to another billion dollar payout this year — all to guys who are not playing. Advertisement So why would this sport want to shorten the schedule? Connect those dots! It's not a myth that one of the biggest causes for injury is fatigue. And where does that fatigue come from? Jamming 162 baseball games, in four time zones, into 26 weeks is a good place to start. And it isn't only the players who have noticed. 'I think they need to change it,' one club official said this week. 'The schedule is crowded. The players could use time off. It would be beneficial, I think, to the players' health. I think it would be beneficial to the players' performance. And I think it would be beneficial to baseball as a sport and as a spectator sport — to see more rested, healthier players playing more often than they are.' Lopping eight games off the schedule could add about 10 more off days in a season. And remember that schedule math we laid out earlier — of two series a week, of three games apiece? That leaves space for one guaranteed day off for every team in every week of the season. Should this sport be thinking long and hard about making something like that happen? It makes sense, except for one thing … Anyone else out there seeing dollar signs when we talk about all this? If you're not, it's only because you don't make a living working in baseball. So what do owners see when there's talk of lopping three or four home games off the schedule? All the money they'd be losing — from ticket sales, concessions, TV and sponsors. What else? And what do players see? Not all the benefits of those 10 more off days. They worry — at union headquarters anyway — how owners will use those lost dates as an excuse to pay the players less money, because of course. So feel free to write this down: None of this schedule-shortening stuff can happen unless the league can figure out a way to replace that lost game-day revenue with some other source of revenue. But it could be done. Advertisement Here's a good guess: Expanded playoffs, here they come. (Yep, again.) Can this sport create additional October inventory? Sure. It could turn best-of-five series into best-of-sevens. It could go from 12 playoff teams to 16, which creates eight best-of-three first-round series, compared with four under the current format. Would that get this done? Would Fox or Turner or Netflix or Peacock want to pay enough for those extra October games to make the rest of this doable? Who knows? Would the players even agree to it? You might remember that before the last labor deal got done in 2022, the league proposed expanding the postseason to 14 teams (just like the NFL). The union said no thanks. Have we mentioned lately that none of this is certain? But don't let that uncertainty stop you from exploring your most deep-rooted feelings about that magic number, 162. If expansion happens, we'd bet you four bleacher tickets that a shorter schedule happens right along with it. Manfred never got around to mentioning that the other day. But that's what we're here for. You're welcome. (Top photo of Shohei Ohtani at Chase Field in May: Christian Petersen / Getty Images) Spot the pattern. Connect the terms Find the hidden link between sports terms Play today's puzzle
