It’s been a somewhat contentious week in the comments. Let’s cool it down a bit.
- The City of Industry NFL stadium’s financing plan is a little too 90’s optimistic for this era. (ESPNLA/Arash Markazi) Choice quote:
“You would probably be more likely to see Eric Dickerson suit back up for L.A. than see a stadium pay for itself solely with PSLs, naming rights and the NFL $150 million payment,” (sports economist Victor) Matheson said.
- A little further towards downtown, Frank McCourt is up to his eyes in debt – $550-600 million, not including the Dodgers’ recently approved $150 emergency bridge loan. After the Dodgers are sold and McCourt’s divorce is final, he could be left with very little. (LA Times/Bill Shaikin)
- Mark Davis, son of the late Al Davis, reportedly met with AEG about Farmers Field six months ago, but balked at selling a large percentage of the team in exchange for first dibs on the downtown LA stadium. (Yahoo! Sports/Mike Silver)
- On the other hand, given the Davis family’s cash position and the potential for estate taxes, the least expensive and most feasible option may be to go to Santa Clara. (Yahoo! Sports/Jason Cole)
- NBA commissioner David Stern is really putting the screws to the players, saying that if there isn’t a deal by Tuesday, games through this Christmas will be cancelled. I don’t understand the proportionality of these threats. That’s what makes him the Godfather. (NY Times/Ken Belson)
- Apparently it’s not just California cities that are under the gun regarding redevelopment. Reno’s agency faces a default if it can’t make a $2.7 million bond payment next summer. Property tax receipts are in the gutter, so the agency is looking to Washoe County for help. (Reno Gazette Journal/Brian Duggan)
- Peter Gammons tweeted on Wednesday that the Astros sale to Jim Crane will go through no later than the owners meetings, which are scheduled for November 15-16. Included in the ownership change would be the ‘Stros switch to the American League, which, given the release of the preliminary schedule, probably wouldn’t occur until the 2013 season (concurrent with a playoff format change if approved). Those owners meetings are shaping up to be a doozy, aren’t they?
- Come on Cal, you can’t be 0-for-AT&T Park (Presbyterian doesn’t count, does it?).
I’m working on a post or two for the weekend, so watch this space.
newballpark.org 
purdy was on tv today and said a likely scenario for the raiders would for them to maybe sign a 10 year deal to play in the niners stadium where they wouldn’t have equal money put into the project and maybe once those 10 years are up, they could come figure out something on their own regarding their long term location as a franchise. i don’t see why after ten years anthing would change. doubtful they could get a new stadium built just for them and by that time the city of LA will likely have two teams playing in their brand new stadium so doubtful they would be able to move there.
…
i mean if the raiders are gonna put some of their own money into the santa clara stadium, why even think about moving out of the venue after a decade.
For some reason I envision Al had some sort of plan in effect, in terms of the estate tax deal. I mean, he knew his wife was/is in bad health. Al doesn’t seem like one who would look past that. He wanted the Raiders to stay in the family long-term.
ML, posting any odds on whether the TR issue will be discussed/decided at the owners meeting? I’m guessing 3 to 1 that it will be voted on, and if it’s voted on, I’m assuming Selig has the votes to get it passed.
The beating up on everything Oakland this last week was the worse I’ve ever seen on here in quite awhile. Quite shamefull. I’ll cool it down on my Wolff remarks. The poor guy’s had a rough year all around.
I’m just so pissed that the Lodge lets a dud like McCourt buy the Dodgers, and turns down a more than qualified A’s group in 1999 with 1.2 bill in net worth. Piccinini has increased his wealth a lot since then with more acquired grocery stores. BTW, the Gap is closing 1/3rd of their stores in the US by 2013, but expanding in China. I wonder how that will affect JF’s wallet? No signing the Willinghammer now?
Roski’s plan may be overly optimistic, but I still think it’s the plan and ownership scheme that is far more compatible with what the NFL is looking for than AEG’s “we’ll sell the tickets, etc…” plan. Also more compatible with what an owner would be looking for since Roski’s not looking for a majority share or a discount.
The sooner MLB strips McCourt of the Dodgers the better for the A’s.
Not only do the Raiders not have any interest in what AEG is peddling, AEG likely has no interest in the Raiders. It’s not the image they want to project. I’m surprised to hear however that they don’t think the NFL’s opinion that the Raiders stay in the Bay Area and double up with the Niners was strong. My understanding of it was the only reason that the Raiders were even talking to the Niners was at the NFL’s urging.
I sure hope Gammon’s source was wrong. Enough with the tweaking the game. Moving the Astros to the AL West would do several things I’m not in favor of. First we’d have interleague all year which is something I don’t want. Second it would severely diminish the need for divisions which have become part of the fabric of the game the last 46 or so years. And lastly many see this as the first step toward eliminating the pitcher batting and adding the DH to the NL which is abhorrent to me. One of the great things about baseball IMO is the distinct difference between the NL and AL in both minor rules and the style of play. So here’s hoping the Astros stay where they are…
As for Cal at ATT Park, no shock there. It’s the Giants stadium and is probably a curse to other teams.
I was at the CAL game last evening. It was not the (college) atmosphere that i was expecting. USC blitzed the Bears and I had no idea there wouldn’t be any beer served inside. It was my first time in there and I now understand why there were more folks across the street having fun than in the stadium. I know AT&T is a baseball stadium, but it sucks for football. I had tickets on the field below the “diamond-vision”. You can’t even see it from those temporary seats. No replays = no fun. I was underwhelmed by the park.
re: turns down a more than qualified A’s group in 1999
…Hasn’t it already been covered in here that that group did not have the finances to purchase and run an MLB team? And wasn’t that the Dolich group, led by a guy who wants another a joint Raiders-A’s stadium, a dead-on-arrival project as there will ever be?
Clearly, the current ownership group (worth billion$) does not have the finances run an MLB team …
David: So what did you think of the ballpark itself as a place to watch baseball?(No, it’s not a good place for football), we know that.) Now you know what the A’s are up against – with that ballpark and its Bay views only 12 miles away and already cornering the market for premium baseball seating in the region. My own kid wants to try out the Coke bottle slide but I can’t bring myself to bring him there. (A shame what’s happened to Cal’s football program. Have to wonder how many good recruits were chased away by the tree-sitter nonsense..)
pjk, tell him he’s not missing much, the Coke bottle slide is so slow it must have been developed by liability lawyers.
re: Clearly, the current ownership group (worth billion$) does not have the finances run an MLB team
…you mean run it as a money-losing charity by shedding their personal fortunes? Why should they? A’s ticket revenues don’t bring in enough $$ to support a big payroll even if players were interested in playing at the Coliseum. (I went to one of those free parking nights a couple months ago – a $17 value. The place was mostly empty. Maybe A’s owners need to provide house-to-ballpark-to-house limo service to get fans to come out?)
Would you guys cut it out, both sides. Can we have one thread that doesn’t devolve into the same Oakland v Wolff/SJ bashing bullshit?
David when you say you were on the field, where you in the temp bleachers they put in right field? Never occurred to me that those seats would be bad for football as they’re the only seats really designed for it. Maybe it’s because I’m used to going to Cal games and not having a screen to look at since they didn’t have a jumbotron until a few years ago. Still I can imagine if you are used to one it could be jarring. I’ve been to a pair of football games at Pac Bell previously stilling “behind home plate” and both times I found the biggest problem on that side is that the seats are too shallow and too low. I can’t imagine how it is for fans with the Cal bench in front of them from those seats.
As for the stadium itself what was your impression? I know for myself it is admittedly a nicer stadium than the Coliseum as much as it pains me to admit it. But I’ve found it’s quite overrated when compared to some of it’s contemporaries. People give it so many extra brownie points for being on the water that they often overlook some pretty glaring deficiencies when compared to similar Camden style ballparks.
@Dan – I haven’t seen all the new stadiums. I have been to Safeco and it was nice. I was underwhelmed because everyone call AT&T the “best” new baseball-only stadium. I actually found Seattle’s stadium to be better (although I was there for baseball, not football). They should put a screen up that you can see from the temporary bleachers.
David, I had the same reaction the first time I visited PETCO Park, it just felt like a nicer ballpark. It’s concourses were bigger and more open, integration with the city felt better, bathrooms were nicer, seats felt bigger, etc… it just felt like a better ballpark. Pac Bell feels to me a lot like Angel Stadium does down in Anaheim which isn’t good since Angel Stadium is 45 years old (either that or it’s a credit to how well they upgraded Angel Stadium). And yeah every list I’ve seen ranking the ballparks puts Pac Bell in the top 3, often at the top, and I think it’s the water that really does it. If they ranked Pac Bell purely on it’s own design it would probably land right in the middle of the pack where it really belongs near parks like Coors Field.
And yeah they probably should have added a screen, but since this is only a one year thing that’s half over no sense in doing it now. Cal will be back in the new Memorial Stadium next year.
Speaking of adding video screens, any word on the screen upgrades at the Coliseum LW mentioned in ML’s Big interview with him? I wonder if it’s possible to add a narrow score board just below Mt. Davis. I know, who’s gonna pay for it? Maybe the A’s/Raiders and the city/county should chip in. If SJ is shot down, and the A’s are stuck there for awhile, upgrades like would be nice for the fans.
Actually, I think it is overrated for baseball, too. The last time I went there (2006 – Ray Durham hit a walk-off against Huston Streeet – GRRRRRR), we had seats in the upper deck in the LF corner. My seat was pointed directly down the LF wall, so if I wanted to see home plate (you know, the place where all the action is), I had to twist about 45 degrees in my seat. Very uncomfortable. The sight-lines at the Coliseum are far better – I’ve never had a bad seat there. Sadly, most people go to the Phone Booth not to watch a baseball game, but show off their fake beards and panda hats.
re:…Sadly, most people go to the Phone Booth not to watch a baseball game, but show off their fake beards and panda hats
…and those people pay the same $$ to get in as diehard fans. Given the high expenses of running teams, pro sports now has to lure in the non-fans who don’t much care what’s going on down on the field. ATT Park has accommodations for these folks but the Coliseum doesn’t. No reason to go to the Coliseum except to – gasp! – watch a game…
ML… Does one of your posts have anything to do with this?
“Coliseum Area RFP – Due October 28, 2011
The City of Oakland seeks written proposals from interested and qualified individuals, development professionals, teams, and firms to prepare up to two Specific Plans or Development plans, and an Environmental Impact Report, for the 750 acres surrounding the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Complex and the business park east of the Oakland International Airport”.
@chris – No, though I saw that RFP when I went digging around a week ago. Broad sweeping plans like that will require years to complete. SJ just did one for the Diridon area and it took around three years even though nothing is being specifically built out of the plan.
pjk – a couple of points
1. The last thing about AT&T accommodating the casual fans is spot-on. For me, I go to baseball games to, uh, watch baseball, so I couldn’t care less about that other stuff. The reality, though, is that there aren’t many like me (which in many ways is a good thing).
2. I cringe to think of what nonsense will be in a new A’s ballpark regardless of which city it’s in.
Also, fark the Giants.
Link
http://www2.oaklandnet.com/Government/o/CEDA/o/BuildingServices/s/DevelopmentServices/index.htm
“If SJ is shot down, and the A’s are stuck there for awhile” – And this is what really irks me more than anything else….My worse fear is NOT the A’s staying in Oakland, quite the contrary. What I am most afraid of is that with Oakland doing absolutely nothing but showing some smoke and mirrors, and then MLB somehow having an immensive brain fart and decides to keep the A’s there, that they continue to dwell in an antiquated facility and left in perpetual limbo until they are either forced to a) move or b) contracted. this is why i am so discouraged about the passivity of the oakland crowd to not probe into the VC EIR inactivity (you can talk about organizing a smashmouth football game against sj partisans, but not call out Quan and company. Really?!). Anyhow, enough ranting….honestly, as a niners fan, i could care less about the Raiders. It would be nice if they moved to SC to help fund the stadium, otherwise if they move to LA, good riddance….. :X
“The sight-lines at the Coliseum are far better – I’ve never had a bad seat there.”
.
Now that’s just crazy talk. I’m invariably disappointed by my seats at the Coli; they always look a lot better on the seat map than when you get to the game due to the ridiculous amount of foul territory.
bartleby – what I was referring to was the fact that I can’t recall sitting in a seat where I have to contort myself just to watch the action. The excessive foul territory, of course, is another matter.
@ Dan “And yeah every list I’ve seen ranking the ballparks puts Pac Bell in the top 3, often at the top, and I think it’s the water that really does it. If they ranked Pac Bell purely on it’s own design it would probably land right in the middle of the pack where it really belongs near parks like Coors Field.”
.
Having been to 25 out of the 30 current MLB parks (and having been to a 26th for a Dolphins game), you make some good points. I also agree that Petco is a terrific, underrated ballpark.
.
However, you really can’t divorce location from consideration of the park – it’s a gigantic factor. The views out the outfield and the vibrancy of the surrounding neighborhood are a HUGE part of the experience, more so than for any other sport. It’s a big reason why the Phillies ballpark – first rate in all other respects – doesn’t crack my Top 5 parks. It’s also why I shudder every time some says “just build a new park in the Coli parking lot.”
.
Safeco is “ok,” but suffers from the same problem as the other retractable roof parks: To me, they all feel kind of barn-like and closed-in. I don’t feel like I’m outdoors, really, even when the roof is open – and being outdoors is a big part of the baseball game experience for me.
.
FWIW, my Top 5 parks would be PNC Park, Petco, Wrigley, Camden Yards, and – yes – AT&T. And yes, location factors in a lot.
Have to agree with Bartleby there. While there are a few seats at Pac Bell that are bad due to the occasional errant rail or a few sections in the upper deck outfield that aren’t pointed the right way, on the balance the seating at the Phonebooth is much better than the Coliseum. It’s just not possible to have a “good seat” when you’re so far away from the action. That said, Pac Bell seems “close” compared to a place like the Coliseum, but conversely it feels very far from the action compared to some of its contemporaries like say PETCO Park or the two antique stadiums in Chicago and Boston. It really was striking to me as I visited all 5 California ballparks this year. The Coliseum of the 5 was undoubtely the farthest away and felt the farthest away but did have the benefit that everyone is pointed more or less in the right direction toward second base or so. Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium both had a similar feel distance wise from the field which was closer than the Coliseum, but where I sat in both stadiums down the line you do get a bit of that older stadium issue where seats aren’t quite aimed the right way. Pac Bell improved on it and was closer still but not to the extent I would have expected a new park to be, particularly over Anaheim. And then there’s PETCO. I took in quite a few games in San Diego this year and never found a seat that wasn’t angled toward the action and they were all by far the closest to the action of the 5 California ballparks. It really put Pac Bell to shame, particularly from the upper deck in terms of proximity to the baseline.
I just hope wherever the A’s build that they aim for that level of intimacy that the Padres have down in SD.
Bartelby, is Fenway one of your 26 you’ve been to? I just ask because you didn’t have it in the Top 5 you list and was curious if it was because you didn’t like it or because you hadn’t been…
And I agree you can’t divorce location from an overall ballpark experience. The water is undoubtedly a huge boost for Pac Bell in any review or ranking. I was speaking more from a pure design standpoint that Pac Bell has some deficiencies that wouldn’t be as overlooked if it had been placed elsewhere in the city. Conversely if you put say Coors Field in Pac Bell’s place I think it’s ratings would automatically go up and be as high if not higher due to it being on the water. I like that you list PNC on your list at the top. PNC to me is a far superior park due to both a better design than Pac Bell and an even better location with both the water of Pac Bell and the city view of several other ballparks like PETCO wrapped into one package.
@Dan and bartleby – while I haven’t been to as many ballparks as either of you, PNC Park is also on top of my list. Now, if the Pirates could just field a team …
@ML – The JLS train accident is relevant, but the new Coliseum Area RFP isn’t newsworthy?
@David – Not until we actually see who is selected to do it and the scope of work. I’d be more inclined to cover it in advance if we saw something coming out of other similar efforts (Victory Court EIR, Raiders plan EIR). I didn’t write about the Diridon Station Area Plan until the Good Neighbor (outreach) process started. I can’t imagine something like that happening for the Coliseum Area Plan until early next year at the soonest.
questions re: Coliseum RFP
* Is MLB interested in another ballpark at the Coliseum or already ruled it out? Doesn’t MLB want downtown ballparks these days, not parking lot ballparks?
* Could Wolff develop a Santana Row-like baseball village in the Coliseum parking lot to go with a new or renovated ballpark? Would it be a profitable venture? Bring the downtown to the ballpark.
* Presuming the Raiders go to Santa Clara, can the existing Coliseum be renovated satisfactorily for baseball-only and who pays for it?
* What about those Raiders? Oakland has fawned all over the Raiders while dismissing the A’s. Will that still be the case?
How many “new” MLB stadiums are downtown? I know the Royals and Angels are not.
Angels and Royals are renovated, not new. Rangers have a new stadium that’s definitely not downtown. Yankee$ and Mets stayed in the Bronx and Queens, respectively, rather than go to Manhattan. But the Pirates, Marlins, Twins, Padres, etc are downtown.
…Of course, the Queens and Bronx certainly wouldn’t qualify as the boondocks, with those places having population densities that are probably amongst the highest in the country.
My favorite spot to watch baseball is section 217 @ the Coliseum
Top 5 stadiums I have been too: Fenway Park, Camden Yards, Coors Field, Petco Park and AT&T.
David, of the parks built since Camden Yards era started only 3 are not within 2 miles of the heart of their downtowns and over half are in the hearts of their downtowns. Arlington is 16 miles out (the big outlier), Miller Park is 3 miles out, and Citizens Bank Park is 3 miles out. In each case however they were built adjacent to where their predecessors had been located and built with no less than 50% public funding. The two parks you list Kaufmann and Angel Stadium are not new ballparks…
@jeffrey–i love 217 too. 215-219 is fine with me. No season tix for me anymore since 2006, but when I do go to games, I buy in those sections, about 4-5 rows up, aisle sets for easy in and out.
@pjk–slimeball hypocrite Selig builds his new park next to the old park in a non-downtown area in Milwaukee. Struggling DT Milwaukee could of used the park there, but Selig profits from the big parking lot revenue.
I could be wrong, but I believe the tailgate culture is huge in Milwaukee, even for baseball. Having a downtown yard for the Brewers would have definitely been a huge hit on tailgating. Not sure if that’s the main reason for no downtown ballpark in Mil. Anyone know?
…it was the big parking lot at the original Milwaukee County Stadium where the Braves played that had teams like the Dodgers salivating over big parking revenues – in the mid-’50s. That was part of a chain of events that led to the Brooklyn Dodgers becoming the Los Angeles Dodgers. Now, MLB wants ballparks downtown again.
@ Dan I have been to Fenway, although not since the renovations it has undergone under its current ownership. While it definitely has some charm associated with its funkiness and long history, I found it not that great a ballpark experience overall. Cramped and narrow seats, dirty, pillars blocking your view from certain sections, and the same problem with seats angled away from the playing field that has been discussed on this thread. Possibly some of these problems have been ameliorated in recent years. I hope to give it another visit sometime soon.
But I will say, I found the attitude of the locals I talked to in Boston when I was there was very different than the locals in Chicago. In Chicago, everyone loved the place and thought it should be renovated. In Boston, they felt nostalgia and affection for the place, but most felt its issues were unsolvable and were more than happy with the idea of blowing it up for a new venue.
Similarly, I found Tiger Stadium superior to Fenway. In Detroit everyone loved Tiger Stadium, and would have loved to see it saved. The big problem there was its location.
FWIW, the current parks I have not been to yet are those in Houston, Atlanta, Kansas City and St. Louis.
Tony, it had nothing to do with tailgating. It had everything to do with it being “free” city owned land that was available and the city offered to pay 66.6% of the cost of the stadium.
Bartleby, Yeah you’re gonna want to give it another visit. I’ve visited it both pre and post Henry ownership Fenway and based on my earlier visits I’d definitely agree with your assessment of pre renovation Fenway. However since the renovations it’s cleaner, the “piss” smell is largely gone. The newer seats are much nicer though like all old parks they’re still not angled toward the action. The attitude of the locals has also changed. Most that I talked to wouldn’t trade it for the world now that it’s no longer a dismal place to see a game.
So it’s okay for Selig’s Brewers to remain and build new in a non-downtown setting, but the A’s can’t do the same at the Coliseum? I still say that should be the way to go if the Raiders go to SC and VC looks as bad as everyone says it is. Bart is there, our great history is there, and a cool new park with great views, more intimate seating, wider concourses, big video screens, etc… would do wonders for the ballpark experience everyone keeps yammering about on here.. Outside of the facility isn’t great, but there’s hope down the road with the big master plan for the area.
I always thought Kauffman stadium was way underrated. The fountains and green backdrop are gorgeous. I would take a stadium like that any day, to heck with being downtown or not.
Jk, I’m with you, they should build at the Coliseum site if San Jose falls through and VC remains the apparent mess it is… IF Alameda County and the City of Oakland pitch in the same amount of money the 3 cities that didn’t build downtown did. Namely no less than 50% of the funding for the new ballpark (Philly – 50% public, Milwaukee – 66.6% public, Arlington – 80% public).
@Dan–okay, sounds good, BUT as an AC taxpayer I would insist on a new ownership group ASAP. They can take the overrated BB with them. Maybe he can be GM of Wolff’s exciting Earthquakes.
How do I say this nicely: THE A’S AREN’T GOING TO BUILD AT THE COLISEUM! they’ll build in Fremont way before considering the Coli. It ain’t happening! Sorry.
And no, not a dime of Oakland or AC taxpayer money would go to such a dream (see current economy for details).
How do I say this nicely: FREMONT AIN’T HAPPENING!! They tried it there already and it blew up. It’s the Coliseum’s turn now if SJ is denied. No more going back revisiting Fremont.
@jk “So it’s okay for Selig’s Brewers to remain and build new in a non-downtown setting, but the A’s can’t do the same at the Coliseum?”
.
I agree it was a travesty where the Brewers build their park; it should have been downtown. However, the Brewers economic situation and the A’s economic situation are very different. First, as others have pointed out, a lot of public money went into the Milwaukee park. Second, the Brewers don’t have to compete with the Giants.
.
The A’s simply must have a desirable site location. As I’ve said many times, the City of Oakland as a whole isn’t viable economically for a privately-financed ballpark simply because of its underlying demographics/lack of corporate base and proximity to AT&T Park. But if you were somehow determined to try to build and compete with the Giants there, no way would you do it at the Coli site. It would be economic suicide.
.
“Outside of the facility isn’t great, but there’s hope down the road with the big master plan for the area.”
.
There really isn’t. Like it or not, Oakland is not San Francisco. AT&T Park helped revitalize an industrial area, but it was right on the water and within walking distance of downtown. The Coli is neither of those things. And Oakland overall is not the destination San Francisco is.
.
The “it worked for SF, it’ll work in Oakland” mantra we get from the Oakland-only crowd with respect to the ballpark is misplaced. Compare the experience of Jack London Square and Fisherman’s Wharf.
@jk How do I put this nicely: Negotiations with big-box stores is a surmountable obstacle. Lack of the target customers needed to service your mortgage is not.
@ JK – I agree with you that the Coliseum should be transformed into an entertainment hub venue to parallel something like Universal City Walk. That would be badass…however, everyone is already opposed to this from MLB, LW, and Oakland government and there’s no money or corporate sponsorship….btw – you can keep you Raiders, we’ll take the A’s and 49ers! :X And you don’t get to be offered 12 million a year or made a book and movie about by being “overrated”…
Jamarcus Russell made 32 million and he was clearly overrated. Beane hasn’t done anything special in his tenure as the GM of the A’s. One ALCS in how many years?
@ David – And with what measely budget has he been given? By your own accounts, the Yankees are clearly the best franchise ever and Brian Cashman is your hero, right?
I’d like to see BB go to a big market team with oodles of cash to spend. We’d see if he’s the real deal or not. I’m tired of all these excuses lately. Small budget Moneyball team made him what he is today, stroking that big ego of his. It looks like the one that got away, Wash, may get his ring this year, and I couldn’t be happier for the guy (even though I can’t stand the Rangers, but good for him).
@Anon – may I question the GM of the Oakland Athletics, without receiving verbal attacks from my fellow A’s fans?
.
… and no, f*@k Cashman. I root for the A’s only. Geren needed to go and BB needs to follow him.
“.btw – you can keep you Raiders, we’ll take the A’s and 49ers! ” Wow, South Bay folks are getting cocky, picking and choosing as they see fit. That’s cute.
So much for cooling down in the comments.
I tried. But all they want to do is piss and moan at each other about how lame the other city is…
Gentleman, I tried to hold the snark back, but essentially picking and choosing other cities’ teams before any of the major hurdles is crossed seems slightly douche. Yes, I have thrown a stone back. *hangs head*
@eb – “Wow, South Bay folks are getting cocky, picking and choosing as they see fit. That’s cute.” – Not only are Oakland backers passive, they’re sensitive as well lol! You expect a Niners fan to want to see the Raiders in our backyard? Instead of worrying about other cities, you might want to actually come up with a strategy from keeping your teams from leaving…./wink
@ David / JK – You two are so blinded by your bitter hatred of the present regime. Maybe we should just call you the Capt. Ahab boys…and David, if you take opposing opinions, why go there in the first place? /signed “fellow A’s fan”
Geez… C’mon guys. Go A’s.
regarding at&t, the first design of the park was for it to face north or northwest which would’ve given it the view of not the bay but of the downtown sf landscape and the bay bridge. i wonder if the park would still be viewed as one of the best parks as like many others have noted, the watefront view is the main reason why the park is so revered. imo if it had been built as it was first designed with the bay view not there, it wouldn’t be any different than any of the other new parks built with a backdrop of the downtown area. as for the park itself and it’s negatives, brought it up last time but at&t was built on the smallest parcel of land for any of the newer parks os they couldn’t have the wide open concourses. it really is a park to draw the non die hards and as bad as it sounds, they and not the die hard 10k fans who attend the coliseum and even candlestick when they played there isn’t what the owners want.
…
if and when the a’s get their park, hopefully they also aren’t boxed into that area where they too have to have narrow concourses although that “rf wall” is one of the things that is a necessity due to the park being “boxed” in next to that curved street behind the rf wall as the analysis was made last summer when the first images were released.
…
https://newballpark.org/2010/08/27/marine-layers-cisco-field-analysis/
https://newballpark.org/2010/09/06/diridon-capacity-estimates/
So here’s an article from Tracy Seipel that says that Wolff will now buy the remaining parcels “to force Selig into a decision:” http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_19118284?source=rss
.
Even more evidence ML that not only has San Jose been OK’d, but that Wolff’s unloading of the Rosewood hotels has allowed him with enough cash to go ahead with the plan and have the BRC “finally” make a decision.
In case anyone questioned the resolve to improve their situation and get something done, Wolfe and Fisher are endeavoring to do what no other ownership group in the modern history of professional sports has done. Moreover, no other professional league franchised ownership group has had a bigger challege from more sources of resistance, including the franchisor itself. No championships or titles or awards will ever compare to this act of leadership and courage that is being led by these people. Make no mistake, this effort is not being done for money or for personal gain, but is being done for all the right reasons.
Genaro – Thanks for the link. I found this a bit unethical as i think it violate city/state laws concerning open bidding of public property: “On Tuesday, the San Jose City Council, acting as the San Jose Diridon Development Authority, will meet in closed session to discuss the price and terms of payment for an option agreement the city would offer Wolff for the sale of six properties.” However, I think they make up amends by this : “Because the land was purchased with agency funds, Reed said, he wants to make sure they will be returned to the agency “to comply with whatever the requirements are under state law.” Looks like there’s a lot of backdoor dealings in the works, hammering away on the finals nails of the Mausoleum coffin….
Anon, you’re welcome; yeah I’m not really sure what to think about the closed session as you figure they wouldn’t announce it without considering the legalities of such a move. It’s just good that there’s going to be some resolution with the off-the-field matters because the on-field needs deserve full focus.
“No championships or titles or awards will ever compare to this act of leadership and courage that is being led by these people” Hmm, not sure the people in Oakland/East Bay would agree with that statement.
Rayburn’s Son – that’s great news and I agree with you completely. I think Wolff is doing a great service to this franchise and region, and I feel lucky to have him as the A’s owner. Some people will never see that because in their opinion he’s doing it on the wrong side of some arbitrary and imaginary line on a map. C’est la vie.
“he’s doing it on the wrong side of some arbitrary and imaginary line on a map.” So tell me, aside from being able to view games in San Jose, how would this be “of great service” to Oakland/East Bay? Is it going to help economically, give a civic boost, what? I’m legitimately curious.
Great service being that the A’s stay local in a far better location (downtown vs industrial), in a brand new state-of-the-art stadium without dependence on public money to build it. That’s huge, unprecedented and a tremendous service to the Bay Area. I am concerned with the health of the region as a whole and of the A’s franchise in particular. Both are served very well with a new stadium at Diridon. Both are also served well with a new stadium at VC. I will be equally happy if that were to happen.