Sometimes I wonder if, given the lack of juicy topics, some of the local media default to writing about the A’s stadium situation. It’s not sexy, and it’s easy to write about without getting into any real depth. That’s exactly what Chronicle baseball writer John Shea did when opining about a new Coliseum ballpark.
Shea thinks that the possibility of a joint 49ers-Raiders stadium in Santa Clara should provide an opening for the A’s to stay there. The land is already there and paid for, as is BART and a ton of parking. Sounds simple enough, right?
Should the Raiders decide that they want to stay in Santa Clara long term, then yes, this could work out just fine and dandy. Except for a few minor details. Allow me to enumerate.
- The Raiders may only view Santa Clara as a temporary thing (10 years), with an eye towards building somewhere else in the future. The prime location would be the Coliseum, which as reported previously, has plans on the drawing board for a new football stadium and land purchased to support it.
- MLB wants this thing wrapped up by 2015. They’ve said so to both Oakland and San Jose officials. By waiting out the Raiders’ decision making process, they’re guaranteeing that a new ballpark for the A’s couldn’t open until 2017 or 2018 at the earliest.
- Why should MLB be subordinate to what the NFL is doing? The A’s have already suffered from that exact problem for the last 16 years.
- Who’s paying for the remaining debt at the Coliseum now? Certainly not MLB or the A’s.
- What happened to Victory Court? That’s the Oakland site that was chosen by both the City and MLB to move forward because of its location downtown. MLB has already dismissed the Coliseum and Oakland has gone along with it. Nothing has fundamentally changed to make the site more attractive. By going back and forth on sites like this, those involved look as if they’re not making a concerted effort. Instead, it looks like they’re grasping at straws.
- Wolff responds in the article to Shea’s idea by saying that he couldn’t privately finance it at the Coliseum site. And he’s right. A “rebuilt” Coliseum is out of the question since MLB would never go for it. And investing $450 million at the Coliseum is impossible for some time to come, given the state of stadium lending and the fact that it’s a “depressed area“.
The only thing that could drive this is if MLB outright rejected the A’s efforts to gain territorial rights in Santa Clara County. Even then, it really comes down to simple sentiment: Al Davis said before his passing that there could be a future for the Raiders at the Coliseum, whereas Lew Wolff doesn’t believe in such a future for the A’s. They’ve both spent a lot of time on this. After all this time, are they both wrong? Or is a quaint notion thrown out there on a whim more realistic? Somehow I find that hard to believe. Facts are inconvenient, I know.
newballpark.org 
re: What happened to Victory Court?
…Whoever has the answer doesn’t want to say, obviously.
re: MLB has already dismissed the Coliseum
…so, no Coliseum + no VC = A’s have to move somewhere else.
re: They’ve said so to both Oakland and San Jose officials.
…Huh? One local columnist keeps writing that MLB would never change the Giants territory. So why on earth is MLB saying anything at all to San Jose if it has no chance?
@pjk–Raiders go to SC+VC blows up+no SJ=sell to local owners who will build a new Coliseum, cuz there’s no other city to go to at the moment. Don’t need MLB approval for that.
@ML–a “rebuilt” Coliseum MLB won’t go for? How about an all new, tear the old one down, build from scratch one? There was talk with Schott about building on the Coliseum grounds, of course with mostly city money, but it makes the most sense if SJ and VC blow up. Better there than Fremont, which does not have a DT/Waterfront setting.
@jk-usa – Sounds great until you try to figure out who will pay for the $450 million ballpark and carry the $100 million in remaining debt for the demolished Coliseum. Got any ideas? Realistic ones?
JK: Not sure why you have such undying devotion to Oakland, which has done so little for OUR team. is it just that you don’t want to go 30 miles to games when you only go 3 or 4 miles now? It’s not that big a deal, really.
Since the typical passive-agressive pro oakland stooges have continue to be silent when asked about a feasible plan for an Oakland ballpark, here was proposal that concentrates on a risky development project that would reward the a’s but also require public funding:
Anon
October 3, 2011 at 6:16 PM
What the Oakland should do to keep the A’s (and what pro-Oaklanders can do about it) – by an A’s fan (me):
#1 – Stop with the penis envy: You are not as popular as SF, you do not have the corporate support as SJ. Recognize this first of all as this drives all other decision making.
#2 – Seek public support: And not to just a small minority of A’s fan, but to the greater population at hand. State history, marketing opportunities, etc. The economic impact report was a good start. Take it and run with it through the entire city, county, and east bay region populace.
# 3 – Be open and transparent – If you are going to require public funding, state as such. If you haven’t started the EIR because of x,y,z reasons be open about it. It may be not be politically correct to sensationalize an A’s hearing, proclaim an EIR afterwards, only to see it fizzle or in limbo, but it is the right thing to do for your constituents. If your plan revolves around private financing as well, state so. Are you there to serve the public or to serve your own career gains?
# 4 – Reconciliation with the A’s owner – Sure, you think LW is a carpetbagger or needs to spend his own damn money on the stadium, but threatening with lawsuits and / or coliseum lease holdback isn’t going to make matters better. Perceptions of secret deals with MLB also won’t get you anywhere when the final say in the matter is with the owner himself. It is a business deal, so act professionally and business like, even if you think Haas would turn over in his grave if he knew the situation.
# 5 – Present the business ramifications for the A’s to stay. Discuss a possible joint venture with the Raiders, however feasible it may or may not be. Keeping in mind #1, entice the owners with attractive lease rates ($1 / year), guaranteed 20k seats for x number of years, or showcase a Santana Row East Bay Entertainment hub with development rights granted. Get signatures out in public supporting Oakland.
A call to arms for Pro-Oaklanders:
– Demand more government transparency from financial impact to city funds, EIR process,etc. Write to your district rep / mayor / etc. everyday seeking answers
– Take the enthusiasm and emotions to the public with fundraisers events, sellout a day exclusively for pro-Oakland folks, organize petitions for referendum on public ballpark funding, etc.
– Stop with the nonsense namecalling, put downs, comparisons, etc. Emotions are great, but when projected negatively usually has the opposite impact intended. State the case for Oakland and not “why others don’t deserve it”.
– Drive up the Coliseum attendance. Yes, this goes against the very backbone of your hatred for LW, but if you have already accepted that LW doesn’t want or care about Oakland, then you are in fact not supporting Mr. “Oil slick”, but instead making the case for Oakland itself. Showing business that they made a wrong decision leaving by presenting monetary loss is much more of a statement then continually berating the owners and the team itself. You show 22K average attendance in an antiquated venue like the Coliseum due to the phenomenal support of the Oakland/East Bay community, and I’m sure both LW and the corporations surrounding will listen much more profoundly then libeling and slandering with banners and columns. Go out with a fight. If LW still chooses other cities in the face of the overwhelming support then it only reinforces your notion that he had made up his mind a while ago and you tried his best. Feel free to go “carpetbagger” loco on him…
Move to Sacramento… Problem solved.
@Joel – How’s that? Sacramento has even less money than Oakland.
re: Move to Sacramento
…the Giants would love that. One of the execs, Baer I think, even publicly suggested it a few months ago.
Hi all, I’m new here on this site. I’ve read it for a while and have really enjoyed it ML. Thanks for keeping this up.
I’ve never had a problem driving from Mountain View to Oakland to watch ball games. I always looked forward to seeing my team play. The thing with this new ballpark is that I’m sure MLB wants it to be an event when people go to games. For example, there is a lot to do right around ATT&T Park. People have business thriving there. In the Coliseum location, there is nothing around. Unless we all want to party at the Arco across the street. Denny’s anyone? From what I have been reading here, doesn’t sound like Oakland is a viable choice right now. San Jose would offer a great deal. The ballpark is near the downtown area, and I’m sure people would want to bring business to the area.
I’ve always known my A’s as the Oakland A’s. But I’m not thick headed enough to want to lose them from the Bay Area. If San Jose is the answer, I welcome them to San Jose. Think about it people, WE’D LOSE THE A’s!!!!!!
Sacramento does have less money. But I don’t see why they would not be successful. It would cost considerably less to transform the River Cats stadium. It would be done before the 2015 date… I read awhile back that MLB players want to play in new stadiums even if a town is smaller. So they should be able to get decent players. And sacramento would support the A’s immediately. Also all freeways lead to Sac. North, south, east, west. So everyone from the bay to lake tahoe would be able to attend games.
@Joel – I wrote about the possibility of expanding Raley Field in early 2009. Take a look at it and let me know what you think. Yes, it would be less expensive. But it would be a lot more than the estimate I cited back then. I also have a hard time thinking there’s enough corporate/sponsor money in Sacramento to make it work. Moreover, I suspect that MLB and other leagues are looking at the struggles the Kings are having and aren’t looking at Sac as a savior.
If you look more closely to the kings situation. Sac was more than capable of taking care of them. The real problem there was the ownership. Trust me the maloofs will be gone soon. But not the kings. We will get a new arena which will also open by 2015. So that would be huge if both would open brand new at the same time. And Sacramento does have corporate dollars. The mayor had to get the kings 10 million more for them in just a month. When the ownership couldn’t do it themselves…. But anyways I’m just saying Sacramento would be a great alternative if MLB says that the A’s cannot move to San Jose.
@Joel – I wish I could share your confidence in Sacramento. I can’t.
Just as you said, it’s another fluff piece like the last one about the A’s paying rent in ATT.
@ Marine Layer – Do you believe MLB will let the A’s move to San Jose?
@Joel – Eventually, yes.
@ML–you’ve made TonyD one happy camper with your prediction on the outcome, but it doesn’t surprise me one bit. This Raider thing I believe will delay and complicate things even more. The state and local politicians will put more pressure on BS to give Oakland a shot. Still hoping for good news–any news!– on VC.
@jk-usa – Why should MLB wait for Oakland/Alameda County? They sided with the Raiders last year for a future stadium after they rejected a similar Wolff proposal for a ballpark at the Coliseum. They continue to run interference against Wolff and have chosen to go over Wolff’s head in their Victory Court planning. They are apparently not spending money on the EIR until MLB chooses them, yet people can’t even agree that VC is the right spot because of this Coliseum talk. Do you honestly think that MLB and the owners will think, “Oh, there there, Oakland. Take your time. I’m sure you’ll figure it out. It doesn’t matter that you’ve not supported the A’s time and time again.” Yeah right.
BTW – Oakland has had two years, actually longer given their initial talks with MLB were in the spring of 2009. What do they have to show for it?
…Doesn’t San Jose have some state and local politicians, too? Let’s see- 1 million San Joseans, 400,000 Oaklanders. Something tells me San Jose has a few more state, local and federal politicians than Oakland…Give Oakland a shot? Oakland has had its shot for nearly 20 years…. Remember when Diane Feinstein and I think some other Frisco state pol tried raised a fit about the 49ers leaving Frisco? Guess what – they’re still planning to leave, anyway….I agree with ML that MLB is going to have a hard time believing it should wait several more years to see what the NFL does, after the stadium was ruined for the NFL in the first place…So JK: Why this undying devotion to Oakland? Is it just to keep a shorter commute to games?
re: They are apparently not spending money on the EIR until MLB chooses them,
…this sounds about right to me. Oakland won’t do an EIR until it receives guarantees that the A’s will stay. Even if an EIR proves that VC won’t work and a new Coliseum ballpark isn’t viable.
East Bay officials should be looking at making the best plan for the Raiders in the hopes of keeping them. The A’s leaving is a foregone conclusion so long as things remain status quo and they could very well lose the Warriors as well. Might as well make an incredibly awesome complex at the Coliseum site and focus on that area instead of the multiple projects that they’ve half-heartedly endeavoured with.
Sounds like RM is finally getting tired of the nonsense. It’ll be nice to finally be talking about an actual A’s ballpark instead of going around and around with some here. OT: Kyle Boeller? 😦
@pjk–I don’t live in Oakland, never have, but love the Town. It’s a cool place and my favorite city in the bay area (Berkeley 2nd, SF 7th). My wife was raised there; we have family and friends there and we spend a lot of time there. I’ve had 2 jobs over the years there in/near DTO; did my census training there last year at the Federal building; and have proudly served on 2 juries there. Love the funkiness of the place, the real people (unlike the phonies in SF), the cool architecture, Lake Merritt, The Museum, hiking in the hills, and of course I love the sports teams. Last night we ate at Miss Pearl’s Jam House at JLS and saw live comedy there. Had a great time.I take the good with the bad, and this place does have it’s problems just like most big cities. Losing a sports team, possibly 3, would be a huge blow. They should do what they can to try to save at least one, and I’m hoping it’s the A’s. 81 games a year is jobs for the locals. FWIW, I was all ready to spend $200 for Moneyball tix at the Paramount, but when I heard Lew Wolff was going to be there, I decided not to go. The fact that he wants out of the Town yesterday, I don’t want to be in the same building as him. Sorry, but that’s just the way I feel.
As for the commute, it doesn’t matter to me. I was raised in Sacramento and made 100’s of trips to the Coliseum. I work in the south bay (with mostly Giants fans) and having the A’s over there would be actually easier for me from work, but I still feel they belong in Oakland.
@ Genaro – I applaud you for seeing the obvious with the Oakland ballpark stadium situation: that it is already a lost cause. I hope you continue to scrutinize the SJ deal, when it finally materializes! You’ve been a much better contributor here that many of the typical “sideliners”…
@ Tony – Countdown is already beginning for the big celebration bro and pretty soon we won’t see the same cast of characters saying the same ol’ tired lines! 😉
@Anon–and what will happen if SJ gets shot down? Will we see the same cast of characters saying the same ol tired lines on the SJ side. Just saying, don’t count your chickens before they’re hatched, and epxect the unexpected.
Anon, thanks for the words; the reactionary way that Oakland/Alameda Co. Officials have faced the A’s leaving was always a sour note for me from the get-go with Dellums’ congressional threat being the last straw. If they were really serious, they shouldn’t have been resting on their laurels after Brown left office by deferring on the 66th avenue project.
.
JK, The only way SJ gets shot down is if they need a vote and it can’t pass; if there are no taxes involved, it’s a lock to get voter approval because the negative posture is too nebulous to make in a 30 sec ad when the affirmative is “creates jobs.”
@Genaro–how about the other vote to change the TR’s, needing 2/3rd of the owners to pass. I think BS has been working on it all along and doesn’t have the votes. Two team markets like LA, Chi and NY may be voting no. If Houston goes to the AL West, they may vote no to keep the A’s in a lowly position.
…too much going on with Wolff and the A’s these days to believe that a pro-SJ move by MLB is not around the corner. I wouldn’t be surprised if a vote to change the t-rights is nothing more than a rubber stamp maneuver…
re: .keep the A’s in a lowly position, Are you saying you’re more concerned with the A’s being stuck in a rut in Oakland than in seeing them win? The A’s are a financial drain on all of MLB- a heavily subsidized franchise not pulling its own weight – not even close. Makes no business sense to keep the status quo. You’re really grasping at straws, JK, for your undying devotion to Oakland. Can’t wait to read what you come up with next.
JK, I don’t think there’s really any arm-twisting that needs to be done, if Selig wants the A’s in San Jose, they’ll be there with the owners voting in the affirmative. You look at how they turned down the Piccinini group after being told by EB officials that 1. that was “the” group and 2. that they had to be voted in by a certain date and MLB was not going to agree to that.
..oops, a correction here: 3/4ths needed, or 23 votes, not 2/3rd’s. My bad.
@Genaro–them turning down the Piccinini group really pissed me off. They may of taken more of an interest in Uptown than Schott/Hoffman and things may of worked out different. BS putting in his buddy 5 years later, I knew something fishy was going on and the deck would be stacked against Oakland on all fronts.
Yes, the deck is stacked against poor Oakland, which ruined the existing ballpark, fired the city manager for suggesting a new ballpark, etc. Oakland the poor victim again…
JK, remember that Schott offered to go 50/50 at the Coliseum site but Oakland said no cash towards a ballpark, with IDLF saying “we have to focus on jobs and city services,” even though jobs would be lost if the A’s left. Uptown was never an option with Brown’s sole focus on housing.
.
At the time that the Dolitch sale was being talked about, before and after the vote it was said that Selig ultimately wanted the A’s out of the Bay Area by people who now say it’s was always his intention to get them out of Oakland.
It’s a shame Selig’s disdain for Oakland. Selig should know how it feels to lose a team, the Braves. Luckily the used car salesman swung a deal to get the Pilots from Seattle. Well, I’m happy that he won’t get a World Series ring after St.Louis finishing them off tonight.
Sounds like Oakland could have had a ballpark for $200 mill or less and said no. Wow.
@ Genaro – I wouldn’t try to rationalize valid arguments, data points, and history with some folks here. They’ll never accept the facts and will continue to direct their bitterness at the wrong people when it’s the culprit is right there before their eyes: the feeble Oakland government. I understand the bitter taste that Dellums regime must of given you, but for a second there, I thought Quan could be the savior. Unfortunately, she’s now facing the battle for her political career after the resignation of Batts, so could care less about VC.
@ JK – it’s interesting that after all the facts and proposals are laid out for you (even by yours truly who’s supposedly SJ only), you continue to berate and attack people. As I said above, it’s too bad you don’t have the same passion to drive Oakland government as you do in hating others. I think the LGO guys could of done wonders if they somehow focused all their energy into a solution instead of negatively projecting their emotions. And if SJ does get shot down, then I hope Oakland has the cojones to make a realistic effort to keep the A’s or they’re gone….=( Either way, I’d still be a fan of the team….
…Oakland didn’t do anything after the team was headed to Fremont. What would be different if San Jose gets its shot?
@Anon–dude, you continually berate and attck to me to no end. I’m done with you, and this time I mean it, g-damnit!!. No more. I don’t like dealing with jerks in person and online.
So for now on PLEASE DON’T REPLY TO MY POSTS AND I WILL DO THE SAME!!
Thank you!!! Good night!!!
@pjk: Oakland did something even _before_ Wolff decided on Fremont which became ongoing; they were looking at the potential sites, and had 2 in planning (per a city councilperson I talked with face to face) and it turned out to be 3 even before most of the SJ talk over the last 2 years. This was followed by the popular choose or lose the A’s, in which each city council person and the mayor (Dellums by then) gave a 2-minute video talk on their decision. All but one idiotic one, if I recall said “choose”. Therefore, there are caring people, even if they screw up.
@ JK – It’s interesting that when the facts are continually presented forth to you, you will either a) ignore them and go on tangent attacking BS / LW / others or b) play the “woe is me and my city card” and then say you were “attacked” (thanks for stealing my lines above btw)…I spent a good half hour writing that original proposal above, and i’m not even a Oakland-proponent, could you write something somewhat tangible and feasible in the 1 min liners you enjoy so much? And sorry “dude”, but I will continue to critique you logical fallacies and hate inspired rants with my own opinions and counterpoints as i please. As I said above, if you could only harness all that hate for once and redirect it to something positive, i think people at Oakland’s City Hall might actually pay attention and do something (heck anything lol)”?! 哈哈哈
BTW – For those passive sideliners who continue to live in the past, I did another favor for you and tracked down Jean Quan via twitter (@jeanquan) and sent her a message (since she’s been known to go there frequently): “Hi Jean – Can you give us an update on the VC EIR? I’m very concerned about the A’s.”
@Anon: way to be proactive towards JQ; I’m not being sarcastic either, as some effort is better than none at all. Unf, I don’t think there will be a peep out of her about it, especially if (a) she still doesn’t want to go public [to the media] and after her meeting w/Wolff last month in which he pretty much flipped her the bird for the Coli and VC talk that she tried to put towards him.
@DavidL–i wonder if Wolff told her the same thing he told Dellums: “Don’t break your pick on this one”.
What a classy guy.
@jk “Better there than Fremont, which does not have a DT/Waterfront setting.”
.
Better how, exactly? You may have noticed, the Coli is not on the waterfront and is nowhere near downtown Oakland. And, unlike Fremont, it is surrounded by ugly industrial properties and blight and is nowhere near the corporate customers needed to finance the ballpark.
.
“What a classy guy.
.
He IS a classy guy. If someone is asking you for something that just – is – not – feasible, better to tell the truth than to lead them on.
@ DavidL – Believe me when I tell you have I have sent countless emails to both JQ as well as City Council members due to my own frustration with the whole VC EIR issue (as i stated, my worst fear is that MLB says no to SJ and Oakland does nothing about it, so we lose the A’s altogether).
FYI – On Channel 11 news regarding the Niners and Raiders situation, former Niners and A’s Exec Andy Dolich says, ” There will NEVER be 2 stadiums built in Northern California. It must be shared.” WOW
@ DavidL – forgot to add, but don’t you find it suspicious that if LW give her the big birdie on VC, then wouldn’t she go public with that fact? I mean she is fighting for her political life now with her lowest rating in her brief tenure and she needs all the support she can get. Anywho, i’ll try her facebook but i think she’ll probably delete me =/
Wolff IS a classy guy – he is taking the only route, which is a very difficult route, to get A’s fans a new ballpark in the Bay Area without he himself having to go bankrupt. He could ask for public money, which he hasn’t done, or simply sell the team to people who’d move it far away. (I know, I know – if no bank wants to lend money for such a risky venture as an Oakland ballpark, Wolff could drain his personal accounts. Sell his house, maybe?)
Why is it that our multi-billionaire, majority owner, is silent on all these financial matters? Why is old man Lew buying up parcels of land, while Fisher remains in the shadows?
re: Fisher remains in the shadows?
….Because Wolff is the front man, the mouthpiece, for the group. Fischer is a silent partner. Let me guess – you want Fischer to come forward and sacrifice his personal fortune to pay for a new Oakland ballpark . is that about right?…Who has owned the Raiders? Al Davis and a bunch of silent partners nobody can name. Al only owned something like 47% of the team when he died…Maybe somebody should run an ad for a new A’s owner: ” Wanted – Millionaire to buy A’s. You will be expected to lose many millions of dollars and be despised by the team’s fans when you don’t want to go broke building a new ballpark in a spot that doesn’t make financial sense.” Does that about say it?
So, here is the deal… If the mayor of us city asks you in to talk. You go in to talk. If the mayor says “We think you can build it at Victory Court” and you say “I know I can’t based on these factors” and the fall back is… “Those factors don’t exist at the Coliseum” and you respond “Well, we have moved way beyond the Coliseum for these reasons”… What’s the problem with that exactly? How is that flipping the bird?
.
I am pretty sure if Lew Wolff wanted to flip the bird to Jean Quan, the best way to do that would have been to decline to meet.
.
Or he could have spray painted “show me the money” on a bed sheet and tied it to the bleachers.
‘To ANON: why don’t you email the city/county politicians – post your email on this website – and see if you get a reply?
To Marine Layer: when did the City of Oakland reject LW’s proposal for a new ballpark at the Coliseum?
I remember Larry Reid saying such a ballpark would be great for the area so I’m puzzled by this assertion.
A’s observer.
@A’s observer -2003-4, when Wolff worked for Schott/Hofmann.
The Coliseum Authority rejected paying for half of a site study in 2003-4.
A’s Observer, it isn’t that folks aren’t emailing Oakland City leaders, or that they aren’t getting responses. What is happening is that people are emailing Oakland City officials and getting responses to every question but “What is the progress of the VC EIR?”
.
Several folks who post here have forwarded me emails that show this consistently. If they want to post them, they can. I won’t.
I think Shea is right on … They could rebuild at current site much cheaper and public transit is much better than any alternative.
“I think Shea is right on … They could rebuild at current site much cheaper”
.
The Coli site will NOT be cheaper to build on if you consider the opportunity costs and construction cost increases which would result from having to wait 4, 5 or 6 extra years for the Raiders to leave in order to get started.
.
“and public transit is much better than any alternative.”
.
With Amtrak, Light Rail, Caltrain and ACE at Diridon right now, it is highly debatable whether the Coli is actually better served by transit. Regardless, assuming HSR and BART arrive in DSJ at some point, that will not be the case in the future.
.
Not to mention, the Coli site cannot generate enough revenue to fund the construction, theoretically cheaper or no.
I would argue in this economic environment there are no guarantees future construction costs will increase dramatically. Remember the construction industry has been crushed lately and developer (the A’s ownership group) could see the construction companies give them competitive, aggresive bids. Am I wrong on that.? Combine that with the low interest rate environment that we are in right now.In Lew Wolff interview with Carl Gaurdino he mentioned a $400M for Cisco Field, not $450M. In a related question, what are the infrastucture costs at Diridon? ML do you know? Have you speculated on these costs for Cisco project?
@Ethan – I remember the cost for the Autumn Parkway project was $35 million. That’s the only infrastructure piece on the slate. Some of that has already been used/spent because of initial engineering and construction work. There are eminent domain proceedings that have been approved but not yet completed, IIRC.
Yuck, building at the Coliseum site is one of the few places that would eliminate most of the joy I would have felt from getting a new stadium. Well, unless the entire area was completely redeveloped to be a sort of second downtown. Of course if they’re going to do all that, I’d prefer to just be downtown.
@ Dude I couldn’t agree more. And in the current economic environment, I don’t see redevelopment of the Coli site in the cards anytime soon. If someone had the money to invest, it would be better spent in the JLS area.
I agree the Coliseum site isn’t the greatest and is way better for football than baseball, but to have it empty if both the A’s and Raiders left (and possibly the W’s) would be the pitts. It was the envy for years as a great successful, profitable complex, but not anymore I guess. Still, a shiny new park with all the amenities there would suffice me, and hope the master plan to develop the area will be done before we’re all too old or dead to enjoy it.
“Yuck, building at the Coliseum site is one of the few places that would eliminate most of the joy I would have felt from getting a new stadium.” Really? It’s seemingly not going to happen there, but if a brand new, beautiful stadium was built with views of the Oakland hills I would be more than thrilled. That area certainly isn’t picturesque but I have not heard or seen almost any reports of constant crime. I still don’t understand the need to have a Starbucks or Momo’s next to the ball yard. If I want to eat/drink, I do it at the park. Before Mt. Davis, I was more than happy with the Oakland baseball family orientated experience.
Make it the best non-downtown stadium in the leauge. Picnic areas in the outfield like at Petco; cool sports bars in the park if they’re not outside park; an Oakland Sports museum, even if the Raiders move out, it would still be cool. The possibilites are endless becasue they have the space for it, while Cisco is crammed in a tiny plot.
Yeah, I have to side with Dude on this one. The Coliseum complex is the relic of another era. Why do you need a Starbuck’s or Momo’s? You don’t. You can have a Sliders like at Camden Yards. Really, the point is to have a vibrant area around the park. I’d invite you all to go to a game in Boston or Baltimore and see what the area around the park is like before the game. There is nothing on the West Coast like it.
@Jeffrey- agree- the “experience” around both those parks is awesome- as is Wrigley
Maybe. I have gone to a game in SF and I wasn’t caught up in the surroundings. Are Boston and Baltimore drastically different? In any case, I was just saying that I would in no way be upset if a shiny new park was built on the Coliseum spot with or without the surrounding businesses.
@Anon: once again, I respect your efforts towards JQ. However, if she really doesn’t want to go public with anything, I don’t think that anything that any of us say will change that. That is not to say that I respect Chuck Reed for seemingly nagging” Selig about a year ago; whether that was true or just the way it came out in the media, hard to know. In any case, JQ doesn’t seem to be saying anything about the A’s on her FB site, so I think all we can do is wait this out until that big meeting after the WS. Whatever MLB says, Oakland will have to either get its butt in gear, or issue a statement of failure. I may be pro-Oakland, yet won’t lose sleep over trying to ignore what could happen negatively to that city, regarding the A’s.
As for your question Anon, not sure I know the answer, yet you raise a point that cannot be ignored.
eh, it is tremendously different in Boston and Baltimore.