But the people of Wisconsin need to pony up another $450 million to update their 22 year old stadium or the Brewers are totally leaving town!
A’s have signed a binding agreement to purchase land for a future ballpark in Las Vegas.
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
View: https://twitter.com/jaclynfox5vegas/status/1666018279880822784?s=46
Local LV reporter says that it appears that the stadium bill might be dead until the next LV legislative session, which isn’t until 2025.
Local LV reporter says that it appears that the stadium bill might be dead until the next LV legislative session, which isn’t until 2025.
So they do not meet for the next 18 months (or more)? At all?
Besides that (which is fodder for another part of this board) I am happy that they did not rush anything through. Owners should pay for their stadia.
So is this a dead end for the A’s and Vegas?
BTW I happen to be staying across from teh Tropicana this week and the footprint there is tiny. It doesn’t seem like they can fit the stadium they want there.
BTW I happen to be staying across from teh Tropicana this week and the footprint there is tiny. It doesn’t seem like they can fit the stadium they want there.
Great news... for now, anyway. I'm sure there will be much backroom dealing to try and extort the taxpayers of Nevada and line the pockets of state politicians. But glad to see it's dead for now.
I wish Fisher would just sell the team, take his $2 billion plus payday and fuck off somewhere. There are supposedly two local groups who want to keep the Athletics in Oakland.
Sell it to them.
BTW with the amount of bitching Mark Davis did about Fisher and the A’s, I wonder if he had something to do with this? Probably not, I doubt he’s nearly half as Machiavellian as his old man, but it wouldn’t shock me if he told certain lawmakers to slow the train down.
I wonder if the legislature not passing the necessary funding counts as the A's "not having a deal." They only get their revenue sharing set to 100% of what other teams are entitled to if they have a stadium deal in place by 1/15/24.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/04/25/oakland-as-move-to-las-vegas-would-mean-at-least-50-million-for-the-team---even-before-it-leaves/?sh=3c000c503ffa
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/04/25/oakland-as-move-to-las-vegas-would-mean-at-least-50-million-for-the-team---even-before-it-leaves/?sh=3c000c503ffa
Per The Athletic, many in the legislature were less-than-enamored with the A's proposal:
https://theathletic.com/4592120/2023/06/08/as-las-vegas-plan-takes-heat-in-nevada-special-legislative-session/
And this gem from a caller in opposition to the A’s stadium
View: https://twitter.com/rickeyblog/status/1666681369685266437?s=46
Does this at least crack open the door that the team may figure out an Oakland strategy? Or is that ship now long since sailed?
A place where an actor can beat a Vietnamese man until his retinas detach and it will never be mentioned.
That's the thing about this whole journey. There were times that I thought that the A's were no doubt going to stay in Oakland. Then I thought that the Vegas deal was completely done. But it's becoming an embarrassment for MLB and I think that Manfred has to step in and settle this. I don't think that he will because Rob Manfred completely sucks and is a spineless weasel, who lives to make sure that billionaires get every last drop of corporate welfare from the public that they can possibly siphon from the public teet, and he has no qualms about allowing MLB to look dumb, so I expect this charade to last another day to 10 years.
Basically it's perhaps 50/50. I think. Maybe.
I think the Oakland ship has sailed. Everyone has gotten used to idea of the A's leaving, and thanks to them making clear their willingness to leave, I don't think there is any appetite at all to contribute even a penny of public money to a park for the A's.
Seems like a good opportunity for Nashville to come in and throw a ton of cash and get this done quick.
There seems to be a very large Oakland group of supporters on Twitter and they’re staging a reverse walk out on June 13 where they’re looking to bang the place out. It’s going to be filled with a lot of anti-Fisher signs, etc.
If it works I expect that it will get a lot of media attention which might turn the tide a bit. My hope is that this combined with the Nevada legislature not taking too kindly to the A’s proposal forces MLB to take notice and nudge Fisher out. MLB usually only does the right thing when faced with no other alternatives.
If it works I expect that it will get a lot of media attention which might turn the tide a bit. My hope is that this combined with the Nevada legislature not taking too kindly to the A’s proposal forces MLB to take notice and nudge Fisher out. MLB usually only does the right thing when faced with no other alternatives.
Or Salt Lake City…or any viable market with a quality, already funded ownership group that’s ready to act.
It’s the “quality, already funded ownership group” part that’s a bit elusive…
Yeah! That'll show them!
It's like if a political party voted against a bill they supported just to show leadership that he's not the boss of them. Never happen
Tennessee just approved a shit ton of public money to build their new domed football stadium (replacing the ancient and obsolete 25 year old one that definitely can’t be used another day). Of course since it’s Tennessee, being the political bastion of those who think adding to the public debt is a crime worthy of death, there’s no way they’d throw another billion at a stadium right? /sarcasm
I don’t agree with statement at all because it’s completely untrue and misses the entire point of the reverse protest.
One of the reasons why Fisher is leaving is because he claims (and MLB is corroborating with them) that there is no support in Oakland for the team. The A’s have to move because the city and the fans simply don’t care.
Thats unequivocal bullshit. When the owners don’t gut the roster, don’t neglect the park, don’t jack up ticket and concession prices, Oakland is a great sports, and baseball, town. The stadium is packed when there are pretty good to great teams there. All it takes is for the owner to be partly plugged in and to give even half a shit about the franchise.
This community has supported the A’s through a lot of bullshit through the decades and have only had one really good ownership group (the Haas family) so for their collective name to be dragged through the mud as the main “reason” for their team leaving? Fuck that, I’d be pissed too.
How do you think that they should register their distaste? What do you think that they should do? Many times, fans are powerless to seize control of any sort of narrative when it comes to their team leaving, A’s fans are at least trying to do that.
This is something to be supported, so I’m not sure why you’re saying that it’s dumb.
I agree about neglect and pricing, but the A’s had 97 win teams in ‘18 and ‘19 and still couldn’t break 21,000 average attendance. Similar performance in 2012.
Last time Oakland was a decent baseball town was 2005
in 2019, they had 3 guys hit 33+ Hr and 7 guys hit 20+
The A’s did have shit numbers those two years, I admit, but I think it probably had to do with fans realizing that the whole boom-bust cycle was going to go bust again after that year (2019).
But they had good attendance records prior to that:
2015-17 they ended up in last place every year and had a high of 1.7m per year one season and a low of 1.4m. The other year they finished in the middle.
2014 they drew over 2 million
2013 they drew over 1.8m
2012 they drew over 1.6m
Not coincidentally those high years in the teens, they were really good finishing first or second.
They drew middling crowds (averaging about 1.4m) for mediocre teams from 2011-2008. But did great business from 2007-2004 twice topping over 2m and getting close to that number with back-to-back years of 1.9m.
What should be accounted for is that from 2009ish until about 2015, the team across the Bay was in the midst of a dynasty winning three World Series in five years. That has an effect on attendance as well.
The point is, when given the team, the support is there. Are there going to be as many fans in the seats as LA or NY or Boston or Chicago (NL) or St. Louis? No. But those franchises are the Cadillacs of MLB.
Oakland is a dependable car that if you give it just a little bit of love, will take you where you want it to go. If you neglect it, it’s going to die on you. Most markets are like that.
Fisher doesn't care what people think of him.
I don't see this as moving any needle. Worst case for him is he keeps the team as is and keeps making money. Next worse is he sells it to someone who will demand a bit less free shit. Best of course, is free shit, keeps team for a bit, makes money and sells for even more.
It's just a question of how bored hes willing to get just toying with the insect before he crushes it.
I know Fisher doesn’t give a fuck, but the one thing Manfred hates is bad publicity. If this thing goes completely sideways and now there’s national attention on the A’s fans and their side, there may be more than a gentle nudge to quit being a shithead, take your two billion and leave.
Is this a long shot? Probably. But it’s the only one that A’s fans have left. I truly hope it works.
Is this a long shot? Probably. But it’s the only one that A’s fans have left. I truly hope it works.
What makes Oakland unique in the “is [insert city here] a viable MLB market” debate is that there’s two questions; Is OAKLAND itself a MLB market, but also, is the Bay Area really a two team market?
I think the answer to the first question is “maybe”, but the problem for Oakland is that the answer to the second question is “probably not”. I feel like Bay Area is a market more like Boston, and not as much LA/New York/Chicago…
If a second team stays in the BA it really needs to be in San Jose.
There's no way SF gives that up though.
If NV is like NC, the legislature passes a two-year budget in the first year of it's cycle (cycle being election in Nov of even-numbered year, new legislature begins Jan of odd-numbered year, ends with next election). They call the odd-numbered year the "long session" -- consider lots of bills, pass a two-year budget, etc. Even the "long session" might only last 4-6 months. Then the second year is the "short session" -- 1 or 2 months -- limited to making tweaks to the passed budget. They can also call special sessions.
And let’s not forget, the current ownership group has been threatening to leave *incessantly*. Every fan base has their breaking point. So when the A’s are perpetually in a cycle where the fans know they won’t keep any good talent long term, *and* the team is constantly on the verge of moving, it’s no wonder the fans aren’t going to respond like they did years ago.
Give Oakland a competent, community-friendly owner with a new baseball-only park in a good location and I have little doubt attendance would be just fine.
I'd try to figure out something involving as many people as will fill the Mausoleum that day but Fisher doesn't get a dime of it.
The Giants also have rights to the rest of Santa Clara Valley, or Santa Clara County (aka Silicon Valley). To put it into perspective, the population of San Jose is a little over a million; the whole county about 2 million. The Giants own all of that. Also worthy of note is that the county is home to companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, Netflix, Intel, Nvidia, AMD and many more that pay their employees decent to outrageous salaries so they can easily afford to take the family of four the 45 miles or so up to games.
In a fair, fair world, you'd plant the A's in the middle of the valley and have all those fans much closer to a stadium that could be built, but things aren't fair.
It was fair in the early 90s when the A's gave the Giants those territorial rights for absolutely nothing. I think that the Giants were making noise out of moving out of Candlestick and wanted to move into Santa Clara/San Jose. When the A's asked for those rights back (because they wanted to move to SJ) the Giants told them to take a walk.
WRT the Giants looking to relocate to San Jose, funny but I recall more plans they were working on to move to Tampa Bay. Can you imagine that?
The Giants were close to moving to TB and in the 70s close to moving to Toronto. (In the 50s they almost relocated to Minneapolis but we’re talked into going to the west coast by O’Malley.)
Incidentally the A’s were extremely close to moving to Denver in the late 70s. Can you imagine Canseco, McGwire and the rest of those dudes hitting in Denver? Holy shit.
1978… I still have this baseball book that just listed the A’s without a city name, which indicates how close to reality it almost became: View: https://twitter.com/baseballruben/status/1643731439282982912?s=46&t=KYO-hlcIPjze7WFtbMSCvg
I used to buy that book every year! Man that was my guide to all things baseball when I was a teenager. I think I still have the 1983-1989 versions in my attic somewhere. I should dig them out.
“Washington Nat’l Lea.”
I had the Glenn Beckert one.
https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/1974-topps-washington-nationals-the-year-topps-jumped-the-gun/
See this is what I talk about when I talk about Campaign Contributions. Whoever is going to build this thing for the A's (and maybe the Unions) must have promised some serious dough for the pols.
Relatedly, two Congresspeople from the Oakland area have introduced the Moneyball Act into Congress, which would require teams to "compensate the state and local authorities they move away from." Under the proposed act, if the team failed to do so, Congress would remove MLB's anti-trust exemption. If the team were to disband in an attempt to avoid the fine, the owners will be personally liable for the money. An interesting idea, though I have no expectation that it'll make much headway.
Attendance ended up being 27759.
View: https://twitter.com/AthleticsPR/status/1668770453081702400?t=SbnQYtGZRmC09jOveCPXsw&s=19
View: https://twitter.com/AthleticsPR/status/1668770453081702400?t=SbnQYtGZRmC09jOveCPXsw&s=19
Very smart to have the senate vote on it on a day where another LV team wins a championship.
Yeah - I'm confused.
The protest last night was well done. Crowd stood silently for the first pitch, then was chanting "Sell the team" so loudly for the second pitch that the A's pitcher couldn't hear the Pitchcom. It would have been embarrassing for baseball if Manfred were capable of being embarrassed.
Oakland is going to go from having 3 major teams in the city to 0? At least the Warriors are still close but that kind of sucks. Is this good for Giants and Niners or irrelevant?