In the Trib, Gary Peterson asks for Bud Selig to show some leadership and settle this once and for all, even though he thinks Selig pretty much already has this figured out. Craig Calcaterra feels the same way.
But our inner realist understands that Selig isn’t nearly that disengaged. It’s entirely possible, bordering on likely, that the great consensus builder knows how MLB owners feel about the Giants’ territorial rights, has a pretty good idea what the outcome of this conflict is going to be, understands why it has to be that way, and has figured out a way to get from here to there. The rest is just time-consuming mechanics — glad-handing, horse trading, making the money work.
Meanwhile, Mark Purdy is pissed and has his talking points in order. So does the Merc’s editorial board.
Keep the comments thread civil, everyone.
newballpark.org 
these are very frustrated writers….. nothing new….this thread is ripe for a flame war…..
“Lead once and for all.” What a concept for Selig. He probably knows there’s a firestorm either way: Go with San Jose and watch the Giants and the East Bay fume. Or go with Oakland, which has no plan, no site, no money and no corporate or public backing. Which means it’s a dead end.
I don’t think the average East Bay fan would be fuming if the A’s got the green light in SJ or vice versa. I’m sure they’d have an opinion, but the fans that’d suffer rage strokes are probably the fans that found their way to this site over the past couple years. This is a specialized site so only the fans/voters most concerned with the outcome would bother coming here, esspecially the ones that bother to post on these boards.
.
That said, I think the real time to vent frustrations would be following next week’s Winter Meetings– esspecially if there still aren’t any new tid bits let alone actual substantial news. Purdy makes some valid points but regardless of which city you endorse, the real event we’re all waiting for is the precedence MLB will make with their decision. Just some things to consider:
MLB “has” the South Bay already. The Giants “have” it. They’re not entirely missing out on the South Bay if MLB chooses Oakland.
.
Territory rights are not a commodity to be bought, sold, traded between teams. They’re (somewhat) arbitrary borders established by MLB. You can’t assume that the Giants can be bought out anymore than you can assume that the Giants have any actual claim to SCCo.
.
As avid followers of this ballpark saga, it’s not really clear to anyone whether MLB is considering a share Bay Area, or simply giving the A’s exclusivity to SCCo– not to mention what’ll be done with the East Bay. Each of those scenarios would have a very different end result.
@Briggs–relative to the territorial rights–agree with your comments—but where MLB could help itself out is establish some consistency—2 team markets share the territory—you do this in the Bay Area and now we are like all of the other 2 team markets, you don’t establish any precedence for TB to move to NJ—and you now allow the A’s and the Giants for that matter, to choose what city they will build a ballpark in—-the ridiculous thing about TR now in the Bay Area is that the only thing it affects is where you can build ballpark—not where you can market to-or where you can open sales offices etc—bottom line though–your right—this is MLB—and the ultimate decision will show who is really in charge and running baseball–BS or BN—
@GoA’s: Absolutely. Too many readers/posters here are falling into the simple binary or “Do the A’s get SCCo or not?” They’re really missing out on what is potentially happening. With these three scenarios (1-shared), (2-redraw t-right boundries), (3-maintaining status quo), MLB is essentially defining their operating procedure concering their teams’ markets and potential future growth. The Rays to NJ isn’t that crazy– no more crazy than the Expos to Washington DC. I think a shared Bay Area would be great, but there’d be a lot of nitty gritty to sort out before anything like that ever gets done– but who knows? Maybe that’s why this is taking so long.
.
On a side note, a shared Bay Area would hopefully silence the crazy Oakland and/or San Jose boosters that threaten to abandon the team if they don’t get their way. Within the context of the Bay Area, rooting for a team based on your area code seems purely like an internal construct to me. If I had it my way, I’d have the A’s play in San Francisco. It’s the only true urban city in the Bay Area, it’d provide the best backdrop for a ballpark and it’d cause a lot of fans (both A’s and Giants) to evaluate what their fanship is based on. Colors? Area code? Players?
.
Incidently, I find it fascinating how pro-Oakland guys bash on Lew Wolff while keeping fairly quiet on Bud Selig (who’s the real person of consequence).
Bud Selig has been a terrible leader for MLB: The 94 strike, the steroid era, etc/
@David: Those events occured before and during his tenure. Nothing essentially about them happen because of Selig. Could things have been handled differently? Absolutely. Could things have been handled better? No one can answer that, so it’s moot.
.
A point a brought up a few posts ago was that we don’t know the nature of what MLB is doing here, thus we can’t really say whether this whole process is taking too long or moving too quickly. We’re just frustrated back not being in the loop. At this point, calling Selig’s leadership into question serves more to vent frustration rather than to provoke a response.
We’re just frustrated by not being in the loop. At this point, calling Selig’s leadership into question serves more to vent frustration rather than to provoke a response.
@Briggs – the steroids started before Selig, but he was the “leader” who turned a blind-eye, when it became obvious (brady anderson, mcgwire, bonds’ big head, etc.) he embraced it. He lauded Sosa and McGwire for “saving” baseball.
What about the tied all-star game?
and my own issue: put the hit king (Peter Edward Rose) in the hall of fame!!!
agree that BS has been horrible for baseball—this issue of TR is no exception—interesting how little BS has managed the PR around this–tells me that he is pretty clueless of his fan base—whether it be USA today or the local papers everyone is questioning/chuckling over why it would take so long to make a decision–on the steroid issue..what defined that for me is that the issue is still there on some level and nothing really happened to those involved–recall A-rod where he had trouble reading his own apology–it was one thing to read it–another to not have prepared to read it–obviously he didn’t write it…and then he went back stage and didn’t realize the camera was still on him and he and the other Yankee players that were there to support him started laughing–steroids will forever be a mark on the game that BS needs to take ownership of–
Technically, Bud Selig is still reviewing Pete Rose’s application for reinstatement. He’s more than comfortable with sitting on any issue until an easy solution presents itself.
It’s pointless to get upset about things we can’t control, like columnists that need to fill column inches or commissioners that will wait for a miracle if they think one is on the way. Let’s dial back the repetitive rhetoric and name-calling until something tangible happens.
One particular part of Purdy’s piece caught my eye:
The way I read it, I can’t tell if that is his opinion or information from the baseball insiders he cites in the prior sentence. I’ve emailed him for clarification.
“In San Jose, members of MLB’s so-called “blue ribbon panel” have visited San Jose City Hall at least twice in the past two months. They reportedly have been going over the stadium drawings and plans in detail, right down to the height of light poles in relation to the airport’s landing path.”
Interesting how the BRC visited San Jose twice to go over stadium drawings….even in relation to the airports landing path. That is pretty meticulous if you ask most people.
But the A’s are going to stay in Oakland anyways so why waste their time?? LOL!
San Jose A’s in 2015
Moving forward, a review:
1) The Giants have SCCo. as their exclusive territory ONLY because they themselves going to relocate to San Jose…THAT’S IT!
2) Teams don’t “own” territories; they are licensed to the individual teams by MLB, and MLB can do whatever they want with them (alter, etc.)
3) MLB territories, both television and geographic, have changed many times in the past to accomodate various relocations/expansions. The “precedence” has already been set.
4) As GoA’s mentioned, the other two-team markets are all shared territories; no “precedence” is set if the Bay Area goes the same route, or even just SCCo.
Meant to say “they themselves WERE going.” Coffee hasn’t kicked in yet!
By the way, funny how Peterson left out that the A’ Stomper, Cahill and Anderson would also be at SJ Holiday Parade, along with the Giants Romo and Torres. Stating such would have took the “fire” out of his biased SJ article; gotta love the traditional Bay Area media (sarcasm of course)!
Interesting quote from Adrian Beltre in the Boston Globe about preferring to stay in Boston (presumabley as opposed to the A’s — who are the other team rumored to be going hard after him).
Perhaps Bud is simply using the old ruse of pitting cities against each other to get a better deal. Maybe he’s going to follow the path of least resistance and never even attempt to take on the Giants and change the T-rights. I didn’t really buy into that before because he and Wolff are friends, but now I’m starting to wonder.
.
All the delay and blowing of sunshine up SJ’s rear could simply be tactics to get Oakland to finally do something. That’s obviously been the result no matter what his intentions are, but maybe that was really his plan all along. If so, he’s an even bigger douche than I thought.
.
All of which just goes to show that Gary Peterson nailed one thing perfectly: in a vacuum, speculation runs wild. Witness the previous two paragraphs and, for that matter, all of us for the last few years. Please dear god, let Bud finally say something substantial next week!
Disagree Dude,
That would only make sense if Oakland had a population of over 1 million, had the disposable income and massive corporate support like SJ/SV. So no, BS isn’t playing SJ to get a “better deal” out of Oakland. That would be akin to me playing Kim Kardashian to hopefully catch Roseanne Barr’s eye. In terms of territories, see my review above.
.
@Dude: Werd.
.
@ Tony D.: First off, I’m currently endorsing SJ for the A’s so no need to go all pro-SJ booster on me, but if the Bay Area was redefined as a shared territory, MLB would most definitely be setting a precedence. Among other things, it touches upon the membrane of how much authority MLB has over its franchises and their conducting of business. The differences between a shared and divided Bay Area market are vast.
@Dude–you never know with BS but if that is what is ultimately perceived than there could be some pretty large corporations who buy advertising and luxury boxes are going to be pissed off–including Cisco who has bought the naming rights for a SJ ballpark and the 75 or so other SVLG CEO’s who signed a letter advocating for him to allow the A’s to move to SJ—
One other conspiracy theory to throw out is the easy way to handle this is to keep TR the way they are today…let Oakland move forward and than not be able to deliver and decide that its time to contract the teams–crazy–yeah–seems so on the surface but about a year ago I had a buddy who is somewhat involved tell me that BS wanted to wait unitl after the collective bargaining agreement came up—some negotiating leverage there—bottom line we wont know what the real deal is but always interesting to speculate
Briggs,
I was just stating the facts regarding MLB territories. If somehow it came off as “all pro-SJ,” then I apologize.
And it wasn’t a response to your post, just a review for all going forward. Having been at this site and the original Baseball SJ for almost 7 years, coupled with my own research, you learn a lot about this stuff.
Respectfully Briggs.
Trib: “we have *sites now.”
Merc:”welcome to 2007!”
i wont spoil the brief feel good moment for pro-oaklanders who contnie to turn this issue to a Oakland vs the world (instead of an A’s affair). Rather, i will just wait until next week which should put all these absurdities to rest. 🙂
Okay, waiting to hear my take on this? And I’ll try to be civil.
Typical Purdy SJ cheerleading/Oakland bashing, like we’ve read from him the last 5+ years on this topic. That’s his job at the Murky News. I feel like I’m reading a post, word for word, from pjk, TonyD. or Sid when i skim through Purdy’s same old same old. Do they copy and paste his diatribes, or does Purdy copy and paste theirs?
You’re never civil JK; that’s the problem with you. And how could you bash Purdy when all he’s stating is the truth?
As for Rob, you’re not an SJ basher; you just plain hate SJ! You would rather see the A’s relocate to Mars (or contract) rather than simply move 35 miles south to SJ. And why do you care, since you now reside in CC Texas?
I’m with Briggs; can’t wait until we’re actually talking about the ballpark and actual construction. First rounds on me at Henry’s Hi-Life after the groundbreaking ceremony!
I’ve been accused of being a big San Jose basher, yet even I can’t understand why MLB hasn’t decided to move forward and let the A’s go there. And because of that I’m always led back to my original premise…..It ain’t happening. Problem is it ain’ happening in Oakland, either.
Like prospective homebuyers that don’t exist, MLB is still waiting to see how the economy shakes out.
I know it would be a bit out there. Like I said, I haven’t considered it a real possibility before. But we are talking about Bud Selig here. Even if he thinks that SJ is a better location, if he decides that avoiding the drama of bringing this to a head is more important than the optimal stadium location, well, a lot of crazy things become possible. Hey, maybe he’ll give the A’s T-rights to the Sea of Tranquility. It would certainly solve our power problem.
I’m really looking forward to the portion where ground has been broken and we’re discussion the options of what can and can’t fit into the ballpark, similar to the discussion held following the 360 Architecture concept renderings that did the media rounds this past summer. I’d like to see what sort of bells and whistles get thrown up around the ballpark. I can barely imagine the A’s playing in ballpark with their logo proudly featured above the scoreboard and outside. Considering the economy, I really hope my income is stable by the time inaugural season tickets go on sale. They’re probably be priced sky-high, but after all this, they’ll be worth it.
I don’t think BS has the votes for the SJ move. NY, Chic. and LA teams may be the big sticklers concerning territorial rights.
@Briggs–if it’s SJ @32k capacity, no discount seats for at least the first 3-4 years and the novelty of the cute little park wears off. I’ll save me a couple k a year just by not going. I’ll spend that on a trip or two down south to watch the Angel’s beat up on Wolff’s A’s. Also stop by The Hat in Pasadena and get a pastrami dip sandwich!!
You would actually drive hundreds of miles to cheer for the Angels over the A’s? You’re such a diehard.
jk, why would NY, LA and Chicago be stickers for TR? In their cities they share territorial rights. If anything they would probably support the A’s position that the rights here should be shared as well.
The only teams who may object are Seattle, Texas, LA Angels and the SF Giants. Only because the A’s will be a better position to compete fiscally if they move to San Jose. I highly doubt the AL West will care since they probably hate going to Oakland year in and year out anyways.
The reason why this is taking so long is because the owners meetings only happen once a year.
“Baseball time” is different that “real world time”.
No decisions can be made about anything that require a vote until those winter meetings. Nothing ever happens during the season for this reason.
Last year the BRC wasn’t ready by Dec 2009 so by “default” it got pushed to Dec 2010. That is “baseball time” for you. Not efficient and head scratching.
MLB has set a 2015 deadline for the A’s to be in a new place…by deduction San Jose is the only way that is going to happen. Oakland just started their process and it is obvious if MLB had any interest in Oakland then why has the BRC visited San Jose City hall twice in the last 2 months?
Logic dictates San Jose is where MLB wants to be as they know in this economy Oakland cannot get this thing done privately.
I will say if Oakland called BS and said “we will pour in $200 million in public money”, I am sure BS and Lew Wolff would jump on it and build in the East Bay….Too bad that is fantasy world type of stuff..
Don’t visiting teams for the A’s actually stay at downtown Frisco hotels?
I’ve heard they stay at the Oakland Airport Hilton.
They stay in San Francisco
i’m wondering how many of these pro oakland people are raiders fans and were raiders fans when they moved down to la and will remain raiders fans if that santa clara stadium for the niners happens and both bay area football teams share the venue together like the nyj/nyg do?
what would be the difference from rooting for the a’s and the raiders in all those instances? not like davis himself is a huge pro oakland owner and we’ve seen him do it already but if another city offered him a new stadium, he’d hightail out of oakland asap.
Sid’s assertion that BS and the BRC is working on “baseball time” is highly plausible given that the Mitchel Report took 20 months and was also released following the 2007 Winter Meetings.
letsgoas – the Raiders is a very good parallel and i await word from JK, who’s still a big Raiders fan.
Good point letsgoas…. Can’t wait to hear JK’s response…BTW, isn’t JK an Earthquakes fan aswell?
What would being an Earthquakes fan have to do with his extreme pro-Oakland bias?
Rob,
See you posted over at Baseball SJ; “it aint happening”? That’s your opinion I guess. Hopefully you’re wrong.
By the way, I disagree with the notion that BS doesn’t have the votes. If Selig didn’t have the votes than the “BRC” would have never existed or the report would have been submitted long ago.
Wolff himself stated that he talks to almost all the owners on a regular basis, and Purdy himself stated that Selig has the votes to overturn the Giants rights to SCCo…
But ONLY if a ballpark in SJ would happen for sure.
@Sid–who says AL west teams hate coming to Oakland? They enjoy it cuz they stay in SF where all the action is, like strip joints, cool clubs, shopping and great eateries. The pitchers love all the great eastbay golf courses too I hear. I bet they would still prefer to stay in SF over SJ if they A’s move to SJ, cuz there’s not a whole lot happening there too just like in Oakland, even though both cities have improved the night life and eateries. . I remember the visiting teams years ago use to stay at the Oak Airport Hilton, but the place got infested with hookers looking for some company…lol. Detroit a few years ago stayed in Oakland at the Waterfront Hotel at JLS. Not sure now. I guess the players don;t care for the lack of amenities at the Coli and and aging clubhouse compared to the new parks.
@ST–i was a die-hard Raider pre 1981, but lost interest when they went to LA. Bad move coming back cuz the 9ers got huge out here during their absence. But Al wants to stay in Oakland and a joint venture with the 9ers at a new Coli makes a lot of sense.
@LarryE–I’m not an Earthquakes fan, but my friend Kenny on here is. Can’t get into soccer, or Arena Football. Hockey’s okay. I have seen a few Sharks games and a bunch of Seal’s games back in the mid 70’s at the old arena. $6.50 for great seats back then (i saved some stubs and programs). They’d get 6-7k in a place that held 12k for hockey, but the team sucked every year but one I think.
@ JK, fair enough..
Thought i read in a previous post that you were an earthquakes fan
@sid–If the 980 Park was chosen for the ballpark, Oakland would have $75M to invest in the A’s in exchange for 25% of the ownership. According to Forbes the team is worth $300M. In addition to the $75 M, they would invest money for ramp relocation improvements. The total revenue (property tax and land rent) the A’s would receive from 980 Park would be about $100 (discounted to present value) excluding sales tax, hotel TOT tax, etc. This is because 980 Park is cheaper to produce as a site since their is no land acquisition, parking or main-line freeway improvement requirements. The other sites will cost $200M to produce for each City of which they will only receive a comparable return of say $80M, largely because the existing sites currently generate property tax so you can’t count it twice. So they will have to subsidize the ballpark site by $120M. Moreover, VC and SJ sites will require freeway improvements because they will back up traffic onto mainline freeway. Who will pay for the freeway upgrades? This was glossed over in the San Jose ballpark EIR, and so far Caltrans has not chimed in.
–If you want a ballpark in the Bay Area, bloggers should get behind 980 Park. It is the only one local government can afford, Oakland and San Jose included.
Mr. Grunwald,
You know what your problem is. You love your 980 idea SO MUCH that you’re willing to say anything to sell it; even going so far as to twist the facts of the Diridon site and San Jose’s ability to “pay” for the ballpark. It’s not a bad thing that you love your work; I think the 980 ballpark, much like the international terminal at SFO, is an awesome idea. But reality dictates that (as Rob would say) “it aint happening.”
Aside from Diridon South being served by current and future transit modes, a lot of ballpark patrons travelling by car will park in the downtown core and walk to games; much like what we now see with the Sharks/HP Pavilion. Downtown San Jose (especially during Summer festivals) often has events which are attended by 30-50,000 daily, and they get in and out of the core with no problems (auto, light-rail, Caltrain). Is there some vehicular traffic on local freeways? Of course, but welcome to the big city!
Bryan – Don’t take this personal, but you represent all that is wrong with Oakland and its baseball effort: 1) no consensus among the government bodies (980, VC, JLS…what is it already?) 2) underestimating your opponents (buying out LW? Really? And SJ…i won’t even go there) 3) Always citing cheaper and far fetched alternatives without any way to actually pay for it. This is why nothing has happened for the past 15 years. The only saving grace has been the TR, but that will be taken care of next week… 😉
@ST–“The only saving grace has been the TR, but that will be taken care of next week…”
Oh really? I don’t think so. There will be no decision till at least after the first of the year, maybe early February. The BRC has a lot of work still left to do. Bud keeps saying that and I actually kind of believe him! The longer it takes, the better it is for Oakland.
JK- Your comments and retorts are to the point of being comical these days. You keep on insinuating that you know what will transpire and what the BRC has and has not done to date. Yet, you still have not addressed the major issues I outlined above: single location, city government consensus, and of course, the major obstacle: funding!
@ST–I don’t know what will transpire, but neither do you guys. Pure speculation. Why don’t you beat up on Mr. Grunwald a little more.