Rosenthal: A’s not on January agenda, push forward anyway + Nightengale scoop

I’ll let Ken Rosenthal’s words speak for him:

In mid-November, I reported that baseball was trying to accelerate a decision on whether to allow the A’s to relocate to San Jose and that a meeting between commissioner Bud Selig and San Francisco Giants officials would take place within two weeks.

That meeting still has not occurred, according to major league sources. The Giants remain adamantly opposed to relinquishing their territorial rights to San Jose and the South Bay region. And the Athletics’ situation will not be on the agenda at the next owners’ meetings in January, sources say.

There is a twist to this. As I understand it, 20 days prior to any owner’s meetings, any owner can bring up any issue and put it to a vote. For a vote on the A’s territorial rights to be on the agenda, that request would have to be made by December 22-23. I don’t know if that was done, but I have heard that the infamous “blue ribbon report” (yes, the one we’ve been waiting over 1000 days for) was made available around the time of the GM Winter Meetings. That report would be good reading over the holiday break before getting into back to business and making a decision in January. I don’t expect this report to be available to the public, only to The Lodge. (Side note: I’ve generally gone away from the “blue ribbon” moniker as it paints the process as more formal than it may actually be.)

Despite the uncertainty regarding the scheduling of the decision, Rosenthal paints a picture of Beane and Wolff as moving forward confidently. Something has to give.

Update 12/24 2:42 AM – In an interview with Susan Slusser, Billy Beane continues to say that “he believes a decision is coming soon.”

Update 9:17 AM – Another similar article from’s Jane Lee.

Update 11:49 AM – Now, a tweet from Bob Nightengale

All signs and top MLB# sources say that the #Athletics will be granted permission by Feb to move to San Jose.

We now return you to the regularly scheduled roller coaster ride.
Update 2:18 PM – Joe Stiglich picks up the Nightengale scoop and runs with it.

75 thoughts on “Rosenthal: A’s not on January agenda, push forward anyway + Nightengale scoop

  1. So Baer says the Giants met with Selig and Rosenthal says they didn’t.

  2. Yeah, interesting…

  3. My question: who the hell is Rosenthal’s “source?” First this Guy/gal tells him the meeting between MLB/The Assholes is in “two weeks,” now the Guy/gal is telling him they haven’t met yet (?) And that the A’s won’t be brought up next month (?). WTF?! I ask this with all due respect to Rosenthal: he’s a stand up guy on the MLB network and appears to champion a decision soon and an A’s move to SJ. But his “source” is questionable. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: I’m sure Wolff/Beane already know what decision has been made (hint hint: brother Buddy and Reinsdorf). It will sure be nice when the rest of us officially know.

  4. And who gives a @#$%& how the Giants feel about loosing “their” territory. THE BEST INTEREST OF BASEBALL, not the SF Giants! Even the heathen himself Baer alluded to this a few weeks back ala MLB/all 30 teams operating as one unit. Besides, AT&T Park is located in San Francisco, not San Jose; quit your @#$%& crying about “your” territory. (What a way to go into Xmas; time for some serious eggnog and southern comfort 😉

  5. Yet, the Giants just opened a Giants Dugout store in A’s “territory,” Sometimes, territory is important, sometimes it’s not, I guess..

  6. Tony D. says:
    December 23, 2011 at 6:47 PM Tony D.(Quote)

    And who gives a @#$%& how the Giants feel about loosing “their” territory. THE BEST INTEREST OF BASEBALL, not the SF Giants! Even the heathen himself Baer alluded to this a few weeks back ala MLB/all 30 teams operating as one unit. Besides, AT&T Park is located in San Francisco, not San Jose; quit your @#$%& crying about “your” territory. (What a way to go into Xmas; time for some serious eggnog and southern comfort 😉

    Yeah Tony! That’s right baby! Screw the whiny, selfish, greedy Giants. The A’s were the ones who allowed them to have territorial rights so they can work on staying in the Bay Area instead of moving to Tampa back in the early 90’s. After they ended up staying, those rights should have been REVOKED by MLB anyways! Time for the Giants and their selfish, evil, greedy fans to give back to A’s.

    What the Giants think does not matter. What matters is what is in the best interest of the A’s organization and their future and if that is aligned with the best interest in baseball in general….which it sure as heck is!

    Sorry Giants….you lose!

  7. Another thing when it comes to this possible move. If the A’s are given the okay to move to SJ, then they need to respect the past and what was the A’s organization has accomplished in their time in Oakland.

    They need statues of former A’s greats and HOF players and they need to have Oakland A’s memorabilia all over that new ballpark in SJ.

  8. It’s too bad because Coliseum City, is a nice ambitious project, but can the city actually get it done? It’s highly doubtful unfortunately.


  9. @Tony D. – As long as Rosenthal is “pro-SJ” you’re not challenging his veracity. Then one something doesn’t go SJ’s way you challenge him. How about some consistency?

  10. RM, respectfully, what exactly didn’t go SJ’s way? At this point it appears the worst that will happen is we don’t hear anything come January 11. That sucks, but after nearly 7 years, what’s another couple of months. And again, I want questioning Rosenthal, just his source/sources. If anything, we should go by what Beane and Wolff think re the prospect of Cisco Field and the T-Rights being dealt (see recent trades and full rebuilding mode that has commenced). Besides, I think we can all agree that Wolff and Beane know more about this situation than any “insider,” sport writer. That is all.

  11. Meant “wasn’t” not “want.” Damn typos!

  12. My guess is that baseball has met with Giants, and I also think there is a strong shot that this gets dealt with in January. Not completed, but probably a big ball rolls. Kids, we gotta have faith.

  13. @ML,Thanks for starting this thread. I found the article and posted it but had to run. Glad to see its in discussion now. My first reaction is to get nervous. I’m tired of the A’s being the red headed step child. We need some sort of resolution.
    @ fc, thanks for mentioning the Baer interview. Did he give any other information other than that they met with MLB? I hate his bad perm.

  14. ML, any thoughts on why this might not be taken up at the owner’s meeting?
    What pisses me off about this entire deal is that you know the Giants front office is just loving all the negative press the A’s have been getting over the past few years; stuck in limbo over the ballpark; low attendance; not resigning free agents; selling off their star players. Quite frankly I don’t know how Wolff can take it without putting his fist through the wall. Sometimes I wish a big sink hole would open up and swallow ATT park. Then the Giants would have to go back to playing at Candlestick and we would then see just how many fans would be loyal to the club.

  15. Time for Wolff to man up and push the issue. If Selig is waiting for unanimity he’ll be waiting until long after hell has frozen over. They seem to have the votes, so lets make it happen, spineless Selig or not. Wolff has played the good little soldier long enough and it hasn’t gotten them anywhere.

  16. Wolff and Beane are playing poker in a really interesting way. At this point, it looks like the A’s are trying to have a 60-102 team and a top-three draft choice, which is likely to push their attendance below 1.2 million in 2012. At that point, MLB has two choices to avoid a huge cash sink for the revenue-sharing clubs — OK San Jose or buy the club back from Fisher and Wolff and figure something out, a la the Expos.

  17. Yes, Selig should recognize the greedy Giants are never going to concede. So either accept the 29-1 vote or buy the A’s from Wolff and start looking at places to move them.

  18. @pjk

    Exactly, just make a decision, period. Limbo is by far the worst thing for this franchise. Even a negative decision, where the A’s can’t build in SJ, is a vastly superior scenario for the A’s.

    Heck, I wouldn’t mind at this point if the decision was SJ a no-go. Then at least we’d know. At least we know the Raiders are moving to either SC or LA, and the Warriors look like they could move to China Basin. Which would leave Oakland with the A’s, and being forced to put all of it’s eggs in that basket. They would have the Coliseum site to themselves, and could either renovate the existing Coli (with tearing down Mt Davis, or tearing down the bowl, with making Mt Davis the main stand behind home plate, or they could build a new ballpark anywhere on the large site. Now, financing all of that is another story – redev funds, whatever – don’t know if it’s doable.

    But limbo is the worst thing for this otherwise proud franchise. Unfortunately, the cynic in me thinks this is all part of Bud’s master plan – to make the A’s a sacrificial lamb, bleeding them dry until death or moving, in favor of making the Giants Red Sox west.

    But the optimist in me says keeping the A’s a financial sink hole for MLB is a fools game, and Bud and all the non-giants owners want the A’s to become profitable and they know SJ is the way.

    And so it goes.

  19. Just occured to me that at least we got some good news. The BRP finished their work and suddenly the A’s started their pitcher sale. So It is a pretty certain conclusion that the panel said SJ regardless of when Selig finally gets the balls to have a vote.

  20. Way, I mean WAY easier to deal SCCO to the A’s then consider the “nuclear option”-Montrealization scenario. Especially considering the Giants territorial claim to SCCO is rooted in them actually relocating here themselves and (now) unfettered selfishness/greed. Baer said it himself; MLB operating as one unit. Damn straight! Whether its January or a little later, relax my friends: a “decision”from is coming soon. Merry Christmas all!

  21. By the way RM, any idea what if anything would supersede the A’s situation at the 1/11 meeting? Seems like all other business has already been taken care of (Dodgers, Astros, CBA, etc.).

  22. re: They would have the Coliseum site to themselves,
    …Since Oakland expects the A’s to pay for their own ballpark, there will be no renovated or new ballpark there.

  23. Rosenthal says if the approval for SJ is delayed then the A’s “will continue to assemble one cheap young team after another, operating in accordance with their sinking revenues.” But, a few weeks back weren’t we told if this was the case that the A’s would not be selling off but competing year-to-year. Obviously the sell off is in full swing. So what gives?

  24. Post updated with links to Slusser and Lee articles.

  25. Tim Kawakami (@timkawakami)
    12/24/11 9:43 AM
    RT @BNightengale All signs and top #MLB sources say that the #Athletics will be granted permission by Feb to move to San Jose.

  26. Merry Christmas everyone. May the new year bring a new city, new ballpark, and new hope to the Athletics and their fans!

  27. Let me guess: February will be THE month of the South Bay. A’s to SJ announced, as well as the Raiders shacking up with the Niners in SC (after Super Bowl). Christmas in February…I like it!

  28. Also in February: Brad Pitt wins Oscar for “Moneyball”

  29. Sad news for Oakland A’s fans if this is true. This will take a major adjustment period.

  30. Sad that the team will be staying in the Bay Area instead of moving thousands of miles away? Sad that the team will be a whole 35 miles down 880 instead?

  31. sad day for the oakland only a’s fans. a’s fans who just want to keep the team in the bay area are rejoicing because we know for damn well the city of oakland has no viable plan to get a new park for the a’s franchise and sj is the only realistic option.

  32. Well said, letsgoas..

  33. @pjk Sad that this team will be leaving a community it has been in for over 40 years for financial gain elsewhere. Sad that kids in Oakland/East Bay like Joe Morgan, Dave Stewart, Ricky Henderson, Dennis Eckersley, etc. once were won’t have a team in their immediate region/hometown to idolize. Sad that the largest segment of African Americans in the area will be even pushed further away from MLB. Sad that so many Oakland/East Bay residents who lived and died with this team won’t be able to chant their hometown name with pride during a baseball game. Sad that the East Bay will once again get the short end of the stick, while a financially well off region gains. I can keep going.
    I understand the nature of professional sports and I know the reasons for the move, it doesn’t make it any easier to accept or make it just. People have a right to be sad, just as you have a right to be happy.

  34. Leaving for financial gain or to simply to stop bleeding money? The A’s were always known for community service, etc. They sponsor the Oakland Zoo, etc. What did Oakland do in return? Ruined their stadium and chased out a city manager for trying to get them a new one. Let the chips fall where they may. Kids in Oakland can still support the A’s, who will be a whole 35 miles away.

  35. @pjk You’re right, screw the people of Oakland, the A’s practically built that zoo and what did those miserable East Bay scumbags do? Nothing.
    Seriously, people are going to be sad/upset. Why are you trying to rationalize away their grievances surrounding this whole situation?

  36. Wouldn’t a February decision really just push things forward in terms of getting a ballpark proposal approved through the political process? I don’t see how it changes much other than having a clearer sense of direction from MLB. At least the Athletics may not be in limbo for much longer and may get their chance to state their case to the San Jose residents.

    As Fremont proved, it’s not over until it’s over.

  37. @ eb – corrected for you: “Sad that Oakland has done nothing in 15 years so the A’s will be leaving a community it has been in for over 40 years for the survival of the Franchise. Sad that kids in Oakland/East Bay like Joe Morgan, Dave Stewart, Ricky Henderson, Dennis Eckersley, etc., yet the Oakland leadership and citizens have failed them. Sad that the largest segment of African Americans in the area was left for naught on the A’s of failed minority leaders like Dellums and Quan. Sad that so many Oakland/East Bay residents who lived and died with this team can’t commute a few extra minutes to see their beloved team. I can keep going.” So sad indeed Oakland….you reap what you sow. Onto to a new era for the new year! Go A’s!

  38. @Anon I know you’ll enjoy the A’s in San Jose, may you cherish them forever. But putting this nasty sports stuff aside, are you available for pet’s birthday parties or do you only do weddings/bar mitzvahs?

  39. Lol eb – your attempt at a personal attack exemplifies OAKLAND’s effort to keep the A’s weak, belated, and pathetic. Thanks for playing. Game over.

  40. @Transic – Not necessarily. MLB could announce the move, then set an arbitration hearing or negotiation session after that. That’s all that San Jose needs to move forward with the referendum.

  41. We’re going to hear a lot in coming days about how the A’s have been in Oakland for more than 40 years. We’re not going to hear much about how three of four ownership groups wanted to leave the place – either because they are all mean meanies or because they saw that major league baseball in Oakland was a challenging proposition, to say the least — and that Charley Finley regretted bringing the team to Oakland within a few short years after he got there.

  42. @pjk Three ownership groups also wanted to leave SF. Why don’t you want people to express their frustration?

  43. They wanted to leave SF because of the miserable ballpark situation. The A’s at one time had a very nice ballpark. And they have BART access, too. Now, the A’s have a bad ballpark, too. When Finley wanted to leave, it wasn’t because the ballpark was the problem.

  44. I hope news of the coming resolution is true. I’m an anywhere in Bay Area guy and just want to see a new stadium for the team. I understand the frustration of the Oakland and East Bay only people since they see this as a loss of identity, much like Brooklyn after 1957. Unfortunately, Oakland’s political leaders going back to the 90s have done little to show they want the team. The two A’s ownership groups during this time may be easy targets but they can’t take all the blame. Merry Christmas all.

  45. re: Unfortunately, Oakland’s political leaders going back to the 90s have done little to show they want the team.
    …Correct.. And one mayoral candidate last year, trying to say the right things to get elected, pledged “not one dime for the A’s.”

  46. It’s for the best… the Athletics are too proud of a franchise and too integral to the historical arc of MLB since 1901 to be left to languish in a dilapidated concrete purgatory, no matter how awesome the memories that are identified with them in that building. If the choice is to let the thing die on the vine at the hands of the greedy, idiotic Giants brass or have it see new and brighter possibilities in a brand spanking new palace just 35 miles to the south, well then I say let’s get that BART extension expedited and do this. We’ve long wondered what Billy Beane might do with a real budget, and we may be a few short years from finding out. Of course it hurts for the hardcore Oaklanders, but keeping the team in the greater Bay Area must be the priority ad it appears this will be accomplished so I can’t say I am unhappy with that fact. May this franchise always remember and emphasize all it accomplished it the 510 — which is quite a lot and a marvelous 40+ year run any way you slice it — and keep Oakland always in its heart and soul. May it also go on to greater stability and even loftier championship heights in the South Bay.

  47. @ML – OK. Thanks for clearing that up. So from February I’m guessing residents can give their binding opinion in July? (I’m not familiar with local law)

  48. Lol you people think SJ will work? Lol all those “big technology companies” are in love with the city and in turn the Giants. They dont give two licks about San Jose. That town is for the people who can’t afford Palo Alto. That town is just as ghetto as Oakland. Stadiums dont fix anything!! Look at beautiful Safeco field they posted loses this year and 2008. So what makes this different. You will need the East Bay’s help to sellout and make it work. Plus you dont have public transportation your two bit monorail you call public transportation doesn’t count. besides this is all a nonsense talk a ways because the city illegally bought the land to give to the A’s anyways so that court case will wipe all the work away anyways.

  49. If they call them the San Jose Athletics of Oakland im ok with that or the Oakland A’s of San Jose even better I’ll take the California A’s or Golden State A’s even the Bay Area A’s would be sweet

  50. For starters as far as corporate support, Cisco Systems already has signed on for a $120 mill naming rights deal and the Silicon Valley Leadership Group (featuring major tech companies) endorsing the project. As far as public transit, we have CalTrain, VTA Light Rail, Amtrak, Ace trains, bus service and, eventually , BART right next to the ballpark sight. Our current experience with major sports in San Jose is the Sharks – they sell out every night every year.. You might want to do a little research before posting on here.

  51. …ballpark site.

  52. Please explain how the city bought the land “illegally.” Did we steal it or something? (This ought to be good)

  53. @Jordan Brown
    Keep going, you are good.

  54. they’re gonna be san jose a’s. they’re aren’t going to keep the oakland name in anyway like the angels did when they went to their whole laa of anaheim nonsense. heck you don’t even hear people outside of socal using anaheim anymore when mentioning the angels.

  55. The sharks sellout because its the only hockey in Nor Cal so you get help from half of the most populated state in the country and how long have we been hearing about Bart to the southbay? My kids will be talking about Bart down there someday too!! Amtrack and buses are all over Oakland too so your point? The naming rights goes with the stadium no matter where it is Fremont Oakland San Jose it doesn’t matter. And just because a group supports doesn’t mean the companies will. Who cares if a tech company that will go boom and bust like 3/4 of all south bay companies do “support it” (no commitment to buy anything) The real money is in the city and techy transplants want the city not Oakland 2.0! no one at Facebook or eBay or hp is saying hey lets lure top talent and workers with San Jose baseball tickets. NO! They take them to the city because its world class.
    City code says you need to have voter support to fund a stadium. Buying land at market then selling it under thus taking a lost in the interest in a stadium is funding it. That is an open and shut case. You can say oh but they are not building it the A’s are doing that. It doesn’t matter the letter of the clearly states ANY tax payers money. Last time I checked a government body is funded by tax payers. Any money the city spend of this “land deal” is tax payer money plain and simple regardless what pot it came out of. The law doesn’t state and identify certain funds it just states tax payer money.

  56. @jb- naming rights are for SJ- Cisco mad that pretty clear when their CEO was one of 75 South Bay CEO’s who wrote a letter to Selig advocating that the A ‘s be allowed to move o SJ- and not sure what your point is on a public vote in SJ- everyone agrees with you and once SJ gets the green light the voters will vote- btw- the SJ deal looks even better for SJ citizens than China Basin was for SF- finally, more fortune 1000 companies are in Silicon Valley than Oakland and SF combined- and SJ is number 2 in the country for average personal income- anyone with biz sense knows where the opportunity is- and by all accounts- so does MLB (not to mention the freaking giants who are fighting tooth and nail to keep SJ)

  57. Jordan, If San Jose will be a major failure, why in the world are the Giants fighting so hard to keep the TR to Santa Clara County?

  58. If San Jose is soooo great why doesn’t Bart already go there ? Why is there no sorts teams there already expect MLS and NHL? Why didn’t the Giants move there in the past? Sure they have tons of companies but so does Portland Oregon. They have Nike and Addias but al they got is NBA. there are plenty of cities arcoss the country that don’t have MLB teams simply because the local population can’t support it ALONE. If you alienate the East Bay then your losing half your support group. SJ alone isn’t enough and that goes into any planning. Why would any company lose a footing in their branding in any region for nothing just help the success of rival competition in your business? That’s why they fighting. It has nothing to do with personal income or corporations and everything to do with why help out competition to your profits for no financial gain? I don’t know if you remember but the Fremont plan had a Cisco field too but then I could be mistaken that Cisco must have been a different Cisco systems.
    I’m sure the citizens of San Diego thought Petco Park was good idea or Safeco Field was a good plan for Seattle. Maybe the citizens of San Jose know something they didn’t. For every good stadium plan there is a nightmare and no one can predict if it will sink or swim and certainly no one seeking a stadium in San Jose so badly they are on this website could possible give a neutral perspective to the possible success AND failure of the stadium plan. Even Oakland sites and out of state sites can fail and succeed just as much. Jacksonville looked good to the NFL no so much now or Sacramento for the kings you cannot predict the long term success of a team its foolish to think you can.

  59. @jb- can’t believe I am taking the time tomrespond but since Santa is just finishing up at my house I have a feW minutes- BART is coming to SJ- in fact the first leg to Berryessa is expected to be finished by 2016- second- maybe you missed it but the ‘9ers are moving to Silicon Valley- expected to be there in 2014- Larry E has tried to buy multiple NBA franchises to move to SJ- one of these days I am sure he will succeed-and you ask why the giants aren’t in SJ- because voters rejected their publically financed stadium back in 1992- Oakland has never made any announcement about a naming rights sponsor-they don’t have one- and in case you havent heard-SJ is the 10th largest cit in the US- the SJ metropolitan area won’t have a problem supporting a ballpark-if anyone should be concerned it’s the guy who is willing to invest $500M of his own money to build a privately financed ballpark in SJ- and he is ready to go-btw- you mention the SJ land deal yetdon’t mention Oakland proposing 250M just to acquire and prepare a site….interesting

  60. Sorry but it is tough to read JB’s posts. They are not well thought out and are not rich in facts. He appears to be throwing out everything that sounds remotely plausible. To all the JBs out there, I beg you to first read these facts before posting to avoid looking misinformed and overly emotional :
    – The city of SJ has done nothing outwardly illegal. In secret is nothing but a wild guess.
    – The city of SJ will put the plan to a city wide vote (in what I believe is the best chance for Oakland/SF to derail the move to SJ)
    – The city of SJ is not paying for a ballpark. They will be providing a relatively small portion of the funding needed for the whole project (refer to the point about the city wide vote for the legality)
    – The A’s have a commitment for Stadium naming rights by a major fortune 500 company
    – Support for the A’s in SJ, including the very important corporate support, is a well founded belief based on the Sharks, 49ers, and the Giants playing or desire to play there. The A’s not being supported in SJ has no factual foundation.
    – Public transportation to the proposed SJ ballpark is not as good as the Coliseum.There are plans to bring BART to downtown SJ but it is very fair to have skepticism of that happening in a timely manner.
    – The city of SJ has put in significant and tangible work on a ballpark plan and site.
    – Oakland has almost no tangible work completed on a ballpark site. However, they do have 2 publicly announced ideas on where a ballpark could be located.

  61. Jordan, hopefully Furmam has a class on debating. You should take it…

  62. JB’s post is the usual: Attack San Jose, hold Oakland blameless for doing less than nothing for the A’s for 20 years, except ruin the stadium and firing the city manager for trying to help the A’s..Where does this mysterious $250 mill for site acquisitions come from in Oakland? Redevelopment money that’s going away? An MLB loan that has to be paid back? Will Oakland voters be voting on all this? What would happen if the A’s committed to Victory Court and then couldn’t come up with the $250 million? Pass the expense onto the A’s owners; of course.

  63. and then the city couldn’t come up with…

  64. I don’t think the A’s worry too much about losing the East Bay fan base considering they have about 4k per night, and that’s with the park already there. Maybe JB should just stick with being the Godfather of Soul.

  65. It’s simple. JB= troll. Merry Xmas everyone and be safe!

  66. JB, the citizens of San Diego do think PETCO Park has been a “good idea”. It has helped revitalize an area of the city that was beyond seedy and has provided millions in tangible benefits to the city.

  67. @Transic – The California primary is in June, which would seem like the best time in terms of efficiency for the City. However, since MLB is offering to pay for much of the cost of the election, I think the City will try to avoid the primary and schedule a special election earlier. By city charter, any referendum can only occur at least 88 days after it has been submitted. My guess is that whether the decision occurs in January of February, the election would happen no later than May. City has already put together the ballot language.

  68. If there was parity (= rev sharing) in MLB like NFL I’d like to see A’s stay in Oak. That’s where my heart is.

    But it’s not and this is what needs to happen to compete (and stay in Bay). Angels just got what? $3B TV contract. They will push payroll to $175M.

    It’s the nature of sports today. I don’t like it but might as well be realistic and get on board.

  69. @JB- The reason why BART does not go to San Jose already was because back in the 1950s Santa Clara County opted to build their expansive expressway system instead of the BART.

    It was a big mistake as asphalt is far cheaper today and the cost of steel has gone up considerably. It was a short sided move by the county back then and since there have been two votes to fund the BART with taxpayer money in Santa Clara County that have passed……Only a matter of time now.

    Your assessment of San Jose is incorrect. The South Bay itself is a sprawling metropolis with rich affluent people and corporations that Oakland and the East Bay for the most part does not have…..Plus the Giants have cannibalized the corporate sponsors in that area already.

    In San Jose, the A’s would be a big market team being 50 miles way from SF in a rich area. Why do you think the Giants protect it with their lives?

    The last thing the Giants want is the A’s to be on equal footing as right now they have a distinct upper hand…..A new ballpark in Oakland does not solve the this lack of balance. If you came from outer space and had to place to 2 ballparks in the Bay Area, you would not put one in Oakland.

    Even if a meeting occurred between the Giants and Selig it would have been in private with no media knowledge. It is safe to assume they have spoken as the owners meetings are coming up and the fact Billy Beane is making so many trades already is a sign of what is to come.

    The Giants are going to get voted of the island…..they know it full well. They will be compensated by MLB and they can pay off their ballpark and add payroll with the free handout.

    Stand for San Jose and their frivolous lawsuit is proof enough of them knowing what is coming.

    San Jose is a far superior city than Oakland. They are estimating fans will spend 15 dollars per person per game on top of ticket sales. In Oakland they estimate 5 dollars per person per game on top of ticket sales.

    Why is that? It is because the South Bay has the highest per capita in the nation and is the richest metro area in the country as well….simple stats.

    In the end the A’s needed to build in Oakland years ago when Pac Bell was around the corner. Instead the Oakland politicians betrayed the team in favor of the Raiders and other interests. In the end Oakland will lose all 3 teams because of their ineptitude.

    San Jose is “new money”, the people in East Bay can travel to the games or they can abandon the team as if they moved to San Antonio. Either way the A’s will build a new fan base in an area that is largely untapped with no options.

    San Jose is too far from both Oakland and SF to go to games consistently. I am a life long Giants fan from SJ and I will for sure buy 25 games a year for the A’s because I can get home without having to drive an hour.

    You East Bay people are going to know how it feels to be an hour away like us South Bay people are now…….Or you can just go to Giants games like most East Bay people do now.

  70. more than a few times the pro oakland crowd have pointed out to what the opinions of those at athleticsnation thinks about the whole a’s to sj issue. in the past they’ve said that those at AN want the a’s to stay but over the weekend they put up a poll on whether or not they feel the a’s moving to sj will happen? results at this time are overwhelming that those voted see the a’s moving to sj is pretty much inevitiable?

    84%…780 votes yes
    8%…..76 votes no
    7%…..70 votes who cares

  71. I think in every movement there will always be a select group within that movement that is diehard to the extreme. They are very heavily emotionally vested in the outcome the movement is advocating. I suspect a vast majority of the ‘An Oakland Stadium for the Oakland A’s!’ are resigned to the A’s leaving Oakland. They may still hold out hope (it is true that nothing is ever done till it is done) but they deep down know the situation is all but lost (it’s never an awesome feeling to be powerless to do anything about something you believe in). But then there is that select group such as JB. To him/them it is personal, the argument has become almost entirely a right side of the brain function. To that group, keeping the A’s out of SJ is preeminent. Even if they love going to A’s games, if the A’s don’t play in Oakland then they want them to move to the other side of the world (a prime example of right side of the brain thinking). This type of emotional state is what results in the kind of posts that we see from JB. A post that is based in such blatant, and imo purposeful, misinformation.

    I believe these type of posts could have been marginally justified a while back due to some of the facts not being so conspicuously evident. However, the facts are now well entrenched in the public domain. Now the only explanation for misinformation is what I indicated above. The only other explanation I can come up with is the JB’s are minions of a clandestine Giants’ operation. I know that seems far fetched and very tin foil hat, but It is known that Microsoft, right and left wing organizations (among others) have used people to troll discussions and insert misinformation as a tactic. I’m not saying that is the case, I am saying that is the only other explanation – as far fetched as it seems — for blatant misinformation based posts such as JBs.

  72. God bless those people with their “Keep the A’s in Oakland” banners. They are truly great fans. Unfortunately, those banners are always surrounded by tens of thousands of empty seats.

  73. Either way, I’m watching the A’s on my flatscreen. As far as the Raiders go, I enjoy the Redzone channel. no commercials. Go to L.A. Go. Who cares?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.