Poole gets it terribly, horribly wrong

Monte Poole has written yet another screed about Lew Wolff and John Fisher. Three questions about this: 1) Would Poole be writing this if the Raiders had made the playoffs, giving him something to write about?, 2) Couldn’t he have bothered to ask Wolff about this?, and 3) Is Poole now tasked with the now-retired Dave Newhouse’s role as chief ownership critic?

Apparently the answer to the first two of those questions is a resounding NO. Poole’s grievous error comes down to this:

Months prior to taking co-ownership, while working as the A’s executive hired to find a suitable yard, Wolff proposed a “ballpark village” on land north of the current site. That’s rich. He realized such a project would require relocating 60 to 80 businesses. And, by the way, Wolff added that this village would require the creation of a new BART station, this one between the Coliseum and Fruitvale stations.

That was their pitch to Oakland. Judge for yourself the goodness of the faith within.

Meanwhile, Wolff said zilch about the land to the south, from the stadium perimeter through the parking lot and out to Hegenberger Road. There’s a Denny’s not much else, other than plenty of space, mostly paved.

Amazing how only a few years can bend someone’s memory. Here’s what really happened:

  • When he was working for Steve Schott and Ken Hofmann, Wolff suggested looking at the HomeBase site (a.k.a. “Coliseum South”). They wanted to split the cost on a $500k feasibility study there, with the Coliseum Authority (JPA) paying the other half. The Authority declined to pay for their share, and the idea died.
  • Wolff did not present the 66th-High “Coliseum North” concept until August 2005, five months after he took control of the franchise.
  • For whatever reason, even though Larry Reid and others from Oakland considered Coliseum South a possibility after Coliseum North collapsed, no one pursued the option.
  • The Coliseum eventually bought the property in 2010 years after HomeBase was destroyed in a fire, dedicating the land to a Raiders stadium redevelopment project.

All Poole needed to do was call or email Wolff. Or Guy Saperstein. Is it that hard? I suppose it is.

Mark Purdy gets a lot more of the history right, though he fails to include the Oakland/East Bay ballpark study of 2001.

66 thoughts on “Poole gets it terribly, horribly wrong

  1. MP is a joke (see his last few “can you please tell me something i don’t know” columns) and his bitter hatred of all things against the A’s regime are apparent in his “professional” “columns”:

    Monte Poole: The Oakland A’s are a travesty – San Jose Mercury News
    http://www.mercurynews.com/athletics/ci_19634325

    Monte Poole: Fisher and Wolff never wanted to commit to keeping …
    http://www.mercurynews.com/athletics/ci_19706864

    Monte Poole: A’s owners Lew Wolff and John Fisher detached …
    http://www.insidebayarea.com/athletics/ci_18187972

    The list goes on an on and is the some old tired rhetoric without any value or substance, just emotional opinions bent on stirring more regime hatred….yawn.

  2. Poole is bitter and chooses to ignore facts as he is a Pro-Oakland guy and does not want what is best for the team but rather for Oakland and the East Bay.

    The City of Oakland has been inept in every way and yet he points at the owners like the Pro-Oakland fans do in act of cowardice and ignorance.

    Purdy on the other hand states facts and why the relationship between the city and the team broke down in the first place.

    Poole is right that Coliseum North was not feasible because of 60-80 businesses but there was other sites what Wolff inquired about and was rebuffed on.

    250k for a feasibility study? That is downright wrong and you wonder why the A’s owners are pissed off.

    In the end Oakland will lose all 3 teams and Poole knows it. He is just venting as the truth is breathing down his neck.

    Like most Pro-Oakland guys he “can’t handle the truth”!

  3. I guess this all comes down to whether or not you believe, that at any point, Wolff was 100% committed to building a stadium in Oakland/East Bay. Wolff saying that the team should be in San Jose before he became owner certainly doesn’t paint a pretty picture in the eyes of those who are still deciding their judgement.

  4. @ eb – I would liken this to a divorce proceeding. Maybe Wolf had an idea that Oakland wouldn’t work out, but tried his best to see how feasible the relationship could be. After giving several hints about improvements or separation to Oakland and seeing nothing happen in 15+ years, he made his mind to he had to leave. Would you fault him for that? Definitely both parties are bitter, but it seems Oakland only folks are trying to paint a picture that they have been trying, when in actuality it’s all been one political dog and pony show after another.

  5. Why is Poole bringing up Camp Parks? Wasn’t he chastising Wolff back when he was devoted to Fremont? Now Dublin is such a great site? Why even bring it up if his whole point is they didn’t give Oakland a chance?
    .
    Oakland had their one last chance to save face and they blew it. Placed their chips with the Victory Court site and didn’t even produce an EIR!! How much more time should we waste talking about Oakland? Quan is talking Coliseum City when MLB said the Coliseum wasn’t a viable site a year ago. What is the real agenda here? To save the team or save your ass?
    .
    Whether or not the A’s are granted rights to SCC, Oakland has proven they have lost. MLB is ruthless and they are not fools. One conclusion of the BRC report has got to be “anywhere but Oakland.”

  6. GJ10 nailed it big time! RM, any chance of a surprise come January 11-12 owners meeting? Would be nice to finally pop the champagne bottle.

  7. Amen, GoJohn 10. MLB does what is best fro baseball not what’s good for the host city. Now San Jose is what is best for baseball.

  8. Wolff and Fischer are trying to get the A’s a new stadium in the Bay Area, without asking the taxpayers to pay for it. But because the location they propose is a whole 35 miles from the existing football stadium where the A’s play, people like Poole hate them. Go figure…

  9. Since Lew Wolff has been in control of the A’s ownership group has the team shown any drawings of a stadium in Oakland? We have seen drawings of stadiums in Fremont and San Jose. No wonder the city government of Oakland thinks he is not serious.

  10. somebody explain to me how this guy keeps his job–as a minimum he has to be held accountable for getting his facts correct–in my world if I or any of my associates published something that had this many inaccuracies we would be fired–why does MP still have a job?

    @eric 19–show me an completed EIR and I am sure LW would have some drawings—fact is Oakland has never produced one of these in the past 15 years for any of the areas they drew circles around on a map–time for Oakland to get out of the way!!

  11. ML your 2005 link about the Coliseum North site you admit the stadium drawing is not tied to a specific site. So again Lew & Company is saying publicly that he has nowhere to go in Oakland because he has looked and looked and looked. Yeah right!

  12. Go A’s, do you think San Jose would have completed an EIR for a ball park if Lew Wolff said he was not interested in building a stadium because he respected the Giants rights to Santa Clara County. Secondly Lew Wolff publicly said he is against Victory Court even before Oakland’s city council voted to approve funding for the EIR at this site.

    • @Eric 19 – Yes, Wolff showed drawings of a ballpark and huge development at Coliseum North. Not of any other sites.

      My observation on the ballpark not being site-specific had everything to do with it being on a square lot. The idea was that there would be a large enough blank slate of land that the ballpark could be as small or as big as Wolff wanted. The same concept showed up in Fremont in 2006.

      In 2006-07, San Jose completed and certified the ballpark EIR even though everyone thought the ballpark would be in Fremont. The economy blew that concept up. Maybe you can answer this question for me: Why would Wolff be hell bent on San Jose from the get-go instead of Oakland or Fremont, where he wouldn’t have to payout of pocket for the ballpark, and he wouldn’t have to pay compensation to the Giants for territorial rights?

  13. @Eric–VC is only the latest circle on the map for Oakland–how about what is cited above by ML–why did Oakland not even contribute $250k to split a feasiblity study for Coli South? Yet they were willing to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in bringing back the Raiders and remodeling the arena for the W’s–come on man—VC is 15 years too late and about $500M short of cash—the shell game that the Oakland politicans are playing is getting really old—reality is they have no plan

  14. Oh I forgot one important item, in my previous comment. Mr. Wolff wants special consideration for purchasing an asset with certain restrictions. Now he wants those restrictions loosened for him because he is a good guy? Tell me ML, where does he get this sense of entitlement? He bought the A’s for $180M. Maybe he should sell them for $225M. Not bad for a 7 year hold while driving the team into the ground and alienating a fan base.

  15. No, here is the rendering.

    Your answer doesn’t make sense. Wolff is now forced to go out of pocket half a billion dollars. He wouldn’t have had to do that in Fremont or Oakland back before 2007. San Jose didn’t have that kind of real-estate-pays-for-ballpark model available. It isn’t change for change’s sake.

    I don’t know if you noticed, but the Astros sold for over $600 million six weeks ago. Why should Wolff sell at a discount? And why would MLB allow that to happen? They want strong, self-sustaining franchises, not crippled ones.

  16. “Why would Wolff be hell bent on San Jose from the get-go instead of Oakland or Fremont, where he wouldn’t have to payout of pocket for the ballpark, and he wouldn’t have to pay compensation to the Giants for territorial rights?”
    Isn’t the general consensus on here that San Jose/Silicon Valley is the most lucrative area in the country for a baseball team? Perhaps Wolff weighed the rewards heavier than the risks. He does have a connection to the city and was intending on renaming the team, the San Jose A’s, even if he landed in Fremont, no? It would seem that his eyes have been set on tapping the South Bay market since the start, whether it was always at the expense of the Oakland/East Bay, I guess we’ll never truly know.

  17. @eb – Perhaps that’s the case. I ran some numbers last week, and my conclusion is twofold: 1) The only place to capture enough revenue to pay for the ballpark is in San Jose, and 2) Wolff wouldn’t go this route if he had Fremont or Coliseum North in place, since those plans had built-in methods to pay for the ballpark. Wolff got friends to speculate on land around Fremont in anticipation of the ballpark there. You don’t do that unless you think things are going to work there. You can believe all you want that Wolff didn’t try hard enough or had his sights set south the whole time, that’s fine. The numbers don’t back that up.

  18. Eric 19, why on earth do you go on with this? Does anyone on the ‘Oakland Only’ crowd give one cent about the facts? The facts are there. You’re non factual argument — and those of other ‘Oakland Only’ posters here and abroad — is long since exposed. Throwing any vitriol against the wall hoping it sticks is most definitely not going to work here.

    Maybe, just maybe if the ‘Oakland Only’ crowd would had held the Oakland Pols feet to the fire, the A’s may just be playing in a new Oakland stadium right now. But then AND now you and “writers” like Poole choose to let Oakland Pols off the hook and ‘make it up as you go’ to lash out at LW and anyone else that was a non ‘Oakland Only’ member.

  19. re: Maybe he should sell them for $225M.
    …Sell them at a discount to somebody who’s going to spend $750 mill of their own money in Oakland for a ballpark, land, infrastructure? Who’d you have in mind? Has anyone stepped forward saying, sell to me and I will build privately in Oakland. No, because there is no such person because such a project would be folly. Oakland wants a free ballpark – but nobody is going to give them one..

  20. I think for ardently Pro-Oakland folks the arguments are there to help cope with the fading prospects of the A’s remaining in Oakland. You need an Art Modell, a guy who always angling to move the team to make tons and tons of cash. The problem is three-fold, the political will of Oakland city leaders has been to give short shift of the A’s, the finances of baseball necessitate the A’s moving somewhere where they can build a stadium and earn back enough money to pay for it and lastly, they are moving 40 miles away, not 400.

    As the Purdy article points to and really, as the entirety of the history of articles, site analyses, financial breakdowns and interviews on newballpark.org have shown, the opportunities that could have been were stopped in Oakland and Fremont, and San Jose has been left as the most viable option. Every I has been dotted, practically every T crossed by A’s ownership, Given the situation in the housing market, Fremont is out, and given that Oakland city leaders have not done due diligence on ANY site for the A’s to stay, and since San Jose seems like the closest to fruition this is where we are at.

    I’m pissed at city leadership for making this decision as easy as it seems to be, Oakland is a great city, and could have been the long-term home of the A’s, had the City been interested in doing so. But that doesn’t look like it will ever happen. So why not consider a move of the A’s down the road that keeps them in good shape and keeps them in the Bay Area?

    As a Central Valley guy, it matters less to me location. But sentimentality always keeps me loyal to the city of Oakland. But, political reality shows what is possible and that appears.

    With the demise of CRA, there is no way for Oakland to provide needed assistance in the short-term, and long-term there appears to be no real commitment from city leaders to prioritize the A’s. If anything the Quan press conference proved that.

    So to Eric19, sure take everything with a grain of salt, but this site has been very diligent in providing a cold-eyed analysis of all options for all segments of the A’s fan base. Take it for what you will.

  21. The attitude of Oakland partisans is really starting to remind me of Montreal, whose fans to this day revel in the myth that they were arbitrarily screwed by MLB. Facts: (1) Montreal never had a credible financing plan for a new ballpark. (2) City and Provincial leaders made it clear for more than a decade that a new Expos ballpark wasn’t even on their list of Top 1,000 priorities. (3) No adequately capitalized ownership group EVER stepped forward with a plan to operate the Expos in Montreal. That’s why the Expos relocated, not because narrow-minded MLB owners didn’t like Quebec, or whatever stupid excuses Expos fans and their media acolytes continue to make.
    .
    This is basically Oakland’s situation today. No ballpark financing plan. No political prioritization of the issue. No East Bay billionaires stepping forward with a desire to purchase the team and make a go of it long term in Oakland. And to those Quebec-like problems, you can add the East Bay’s inability to identify and SECURE a ballpark location.
    .
    I don’t see how this ends happily for Oakland/Alameda County/Contra Costa fans of the A’s. But it’s not because of a plot or the owner’s “greed,” or anything else. It’s because of the sad political reality of the East Bay. The A’s are not being stolen. They have been thrown away.

  22. It COULD end happily if Oakland-only advocates didn’t act like a 35-mile trek to San Jose = a trek to Mars. Instead of being happy that the A’s would still be local, it’s this Oakland-or-nothing approach.
    re: The A’s are not being stolen. They have been thrown away….Correct. …

  23. Yeah there’s the big difference between the A’s and Expos situation. Expos fans lost their team in a 580 mile move to not only another region, but to another country. A’s fans aren’t losing their team and it’s only moving 35 miles down 880. Which is less of a distance than I drive to games now. But the similarities between the Expos fans and Oakland Only fans is pretty interesting. I mean both groups love to highlight Facebook membership numbers as a reason their team shouldn’t have, or shouldn’t move (and for reference, the Expos fan group has 127,000 members for all that it matters).

  24. When you only want to pay $6 for bleacher seats, 35 miles is a long way. Monte, and the Oakland only crowd act like the whole Raider thing never happened. Five years of hash marks, and yardage markers mucking up the field for playoff games that didn’t sell out were great reminders of where MLB was on Oaklands list of priorities. This grave was dug way B4 2005. LW,Tarps,BRC,and Quan are just a few of the last nails.

  25. In light of the lack of EIR for Victory Court, there should be this sign in the outfield:
    .
    OAKLAND LIED, THEY NEVER TRIED

  26. I’d be all for that. Time for some alternate views in the outfield.

  27. Let’s face it: The Oakland-only crowd is never going to hold their elected leaders accountable for wrecking the existing ballpark and doing less than nothing for the A’s. It’s all about victimhood and that requires placing any and all blame on the greedy capitalist owners. Hats off to Wolff and Fischer for putting up with this nonsense for this long. Others would have dumped the franchise back on MLB and walked away years ago, and we’d have to book flights to San Antonio to see A’s home games by now….

  28. ESPN says Selig is getting a 2-year extension. I have to think he’s going to do something – soon – about the A’s rather than let this fester for 2 more years.

  29. Jesus I hope this doesn’t mean he delays another 2 years…

  30. Lone Stranger wins the thread.

    @Eric 19 – perhaps Wolff doesn’t want to sell the team. For all the Oakland-or-bust advocates, demanding the owner sell the team when he has no interest in doing so will be as effective as the Raiders’ pass defense in the last game of the season.

  31. @hcf – No idea. A’s fans of all stripes aren’t exactly loving Selig right now. Status quo for now.

  32. “It COULD end happily if Oakland-only advocates didn’t act like a 35-mile trek to San Jose = a trek to Mars.”
    .
    Very few people root for teams just based on distance to the ballpark. It’s about identification of the team with what you consider your home town or region.
    .
    The East Bay has a long history going back to the 19th century of rivalry with San Francisco and the rest of the Bay Area, almost like a Brooklyn vs. New York thing. There has never really been that kind of dynamic in the South Bay, except maybe among Silicon Valley newcomers. So I can understand why Contra Costa and Alameda County fans aren’t consoled by keeping the A’s within 35 miles, because it means wiping the name “Oakland” off the major league map and ending the club’s identity as an East Bay team.
    .
    But the point is they have no one to blame but themselves. It’s not like San Jose is offering MLB some over the top, all-expenses-paid-by-the-public deal in order to entice away a team that would otherwise thrive in Oakland. The East Bay politicians — and by extension, the people who elected them — have practically forced MLB’s hand in this. The have tossed their team into the garbage, and now they are angry because someone else wants to pull it out of the dumpster and clean off the gunk.

  33. re: The East Bay politicians — and by extension, the people who elected them — have practically forced MLB’s hand in this. The have tossed their team into the garbage, and now they are angry because someone else wants to pull it out of the dumpster and clean off the gunk.
    …Can’t argue with this. Oakland politicians’ strategy seems to be “MLB is going to force you to stay here so you MUST build a new ballpark in Oakland with your own money.” Wolff and Fischer, seeing the financial folly of that idea, are resisting and want to moove the team 40 minutes south.

  34. OT: ESPN also claiming Hugh Jackson has been FIRED as Raiders head coach. Never a dull sports moment here in the bay..

  35. …and Bug Selig never dies. Maury Brown is saying he is getting a contract extension. So much for retirement.
    .

  36. @simon94022-“Very few people root for teams just based on distance to the ballpark. It’s about identification of the team with what you consider your home town or region.”

    Indeed. Lifelong A’s fan and lifelong San Jose resident (excluding college years).

  37. I have a few questions for all of you guys who support the potential move to San Jose. I’m just asking out of curiosity and would infer nothing from your responses.

    How many of you are season ticket holders?
    See 10 games a year?
    5 games?

    Just asking…

  38. Season ticket holder, see about 30 games a year. I support a new stadium anywhere it can be done.

  39. I was an A’s season ticket holder until I had kids seven years ago.

  40. Season tix holder- share tix- currently see about 20 games per year- give the other 20+ as perks- prefer SJ at this point hoping to enjoy a newballpark with my kids before they are all off to college

  41. Full season holder 25+/- games each and every year since 1987. In 1988 I saw 60+ games. All the way from San Jose each and every time – no longer on 880 though. I take 280 to 92; off 92 as soon as possible and wind thru back streets to sneek over to 880. It’s a haul that I’m looking forward to eliminating. I go to 20+ Sharks games – I’m 7 minutes from the Tank. I’m still listening to post game radio after I get back to my home office. I can’t wait to be able to do that with A’s games. Additionally, I’m excited about the prospects of riding my bike on the weekends with my kids to A’s games.

  42. …Depending on my finances, probably 15-20 games a year + playoffs.

  43. Currently living in Gilroy with family, attend 2-3 games per year. Will be moving back to SJ come May-June. Will get season tickets once move to SJ becomes 100% certain.

  44. Hopefully this reporter from the Tampa Tribune is a prophet…he wrote an article this week about status of a new ballpark in Tampa and had this line in it…..”With the Marlins set to play in a new stadium and the A’s moving out of Oakland, the Rays are the last team looking for a new stadium.”

    I am so tired of waiting…just about anything will do–

  45. Season Tix about 15-20 games a year plus spring training. Used to go to 30+ before I had kids. Also usually try to organize a large group to go to the game every year.

  46. I think the analogy of an ugly divorce is right on target. We have Oakland-only folks claiming victimhood and wanting the team sold to some benevolent Knight in Shining Armor who doesn’t exist; fans who want the team to stay in the Bay Area recognizing San Jose is most likely the only remaining option for the team to stay and want Oakland to get out of the way. Members of the same family fighting each other.

  47. I’m new to this website and more of a casual fan, so this might seem like kind of a basic question. But why does it seem like the pissing and moaning coming from east bay A’s fans about a move to the south bay is so much worse than what you hear from the 49ers fans? If you talk to most 49ers fans, they are just stoked to be getting a new stadium finally, even though its almost a 40 mile move to the south. Is this about the name? If they called them the Oakland A’s of SJ or something equally as cheesy, would that be better? And wouldn’t they (east bay fans) want what’s best for the team? At first glance, having a much larger, richer city to draw from, having fantastic potential for corporate sponsorship, and further separating themselves from the Giants, who’ve been dominating the fan base for at least a decade with their beautiful ballpark, all seem like they would be immediate pluses for a San Jose move. This isn’t the 1980’s- if you are going to compete with the likes of the Angels or Rangers, you are going to need every dime to keep good players. I’m not anti Oakland- I would very much like the W’s and Raiders to stay in Oakland (I’m in Union City), but moving the A’s to San Jose makes a lot of sense. Why fight it? Love the website; can’t wait to read more…

  48. richmond, my family are full season ticket holders 20 games a year give or take. I’d support a new ballpark anywhere in the bay area, but I feel SJ is by far the best available (and realistic) option and believe Oakland has had it’s shot for 15 years and blown it. They no longer deserve the team until they can come up with a REAL plan to save them and start putting money and an EIR where their hot air is…

  49. SJ, not a season ticket holder, but attend 5-10 times a year depending on how busy work is (especially with overseas travel)….

  50. Have had a 22-game plan the past few years but thinking of not renewing. Still would get to 5-10 games. Support San Jose mostly because it’s the only realistic option to not get my heart broken.

  51. re: But why does it seem like the pissing and moaning coming from east bay A’s fans about a move to the south bay is so much worse than what you hear from the 49ers fans? I

    …apparently, San Jose = Portland, San Antonio, Mars, Saturn, whatever, to some of the fans in the East Bay. A lot of the Oakland-only sentiment is based on “its us poor people vs. those greedy capitalist owners who want to take our team away,” and holding the city, which messed up very badly, completely blameless. I guess changing the name to San Jose gets to some people, while the 49ers keep the Frisco name even though they’ll be a half mile from San Jose.

  52. ML, just wondering if we’d see a post about Selig’s extension through 2014 and what that might mean for the stadium effort.

  53. @sfp – New post up. I don’t have much to say about it at this time. When it comes to the A’s, actions speak loudest.

  54. Full season ticket holder living on the peninsula. We go to 10-12 games a year.

  55. At this point if Oakland or any other East Bay site was viable in itself, MLB would force Wolff/Fisher to look at it. Let’s forget about financing here and Oakland politicians for argument’s sake.

    Selig does not want to deal with the Giants and if he could avoid it he would.

    Selig, the coward that he is would rather build in Oakland or the East Bay at all costs. The only way he is even considering opening up San Jose is because in the BRC’s report and in his own mind there is “no other way”.

    Selig would force Wolff/Fisher to build in the East Bay if even by some miracle it was possible. This delay is because no East Bay site has come up as feasible to the BRC and they have in turn told Selig a long time ago “the only site in the Bay Area is San Jose or total relocation out of the market”.

    That made Selig want to throw up as he knew what was coming with the Giants. He dragged it out praying for another city to step up and pony up a free ballpark so he could avoid the impending confrontation and voting them of the island.

    Now as one can clearly see Selig has no choice but to open up San Jose and let the A’s try. Not to mention he also had to make it look good that he was not playing favorites with his old pal “Lewie”.

    In the end that is why San Jose will get the A’s. Not because of politicians or financing but because there was no site in the East Bay that made sense to MLB.

    San Jose is the only way at this point for the A’s to succeed based on site alone. Of course now if you factor in politics, financing, economics, sponsors, demographics etc…..It is easy to see San Jose is a better choice.

    But MLB does not think that way, they prefer to keep the status quo and leave San Jose as Giants territory forever if they had a choice. But “all options have been exhausted” as Selig would say.

    • At this point if Oakland or any other East Bay site was viable in itself, MLB would force Wolff/Fisher to look at it.

      MLB doesn’t seemed concerned with this franchise, let alone the current state of affairs, let alone any particular site…

  56. @pjk- re: Thanks for responding. Yeah, I remember back when mayor Jerry Brown sold land that was great for an uptown ballpark to condo developers- but that seems like a long time ago now. It definitely seems like Oakland has had it’s chances. By comparison, it seems like SJ is hungry for a team, and didn’t waste time doing what was necessary. Surely the East Bay fans can see the difference. I just read that Oakland hasn’t even finished the EIR for the VC site. Compare that to SJ which was far more proactive- getting the report done early and buying land just for the odd chance nothing in the East Bay works out. To me, this isn’t about the owners, this is about one city having their S together, and another city kicking the can down the road. That’s my first impression.

    The name thing is tricky- the 49ers can kinda get away with it because the SFBA is the name of the region, and Santa Clara is a small suburb (albeit very close to SJ.) But the new A’s ballpark will be in downtown San Jose, and a 9 iron away from where the Sharks play. I think the fans have to be more realistic about the name…

    @Sid-re: you make some interesting points- it’s like BS is holding out for a miracle and would rather not deal with the situation- the longer they wait, the better it looks for SJ. I could also add that if MLB considered certain basketball markets like Sac and San Antonio, remember that MLB needs twice the people (ballpark vs. arena) to come twice as often (double the number of games) for an MLB club to be successful, so I doubt that they would leave the BA for a smaller market. Even though I want the W’s and Raiders to stay in Oakland, I just think that the A’s in SJ makes the most sense.

  57. at last check – about 3 weeks ago and more than a year after deciding to do the EIR on Victory Court – Oakland admitted to not even having started the process. Oakland’s strategy is to hope MLB forces the A’s to stay in Oakland and forces owners to build a new ballpark, so Oakland doesn’t have to. But Wolff and Fischer are not going to be forced.

  58. Pjk, well they know they can’t force Wolff to build. Wolff has already said if San Jose falls through he’ll likely be selling the team. And the most likely buyers will be out of state or MLB itself (either way it’s a death sentence for the A’s as a Bay Area team).

  59. The A’s had attendance near or above 2 million per year for nearly 8 years. 5 of those years hovering just slightly below the American League average. All that time the A’s cried and cried that they couldn’t compete.

    I say Horse Manure. Let Farmer Wolf and his ranch hand Billy take their team to wherever they want. But no more tax payer financed stadiums.

    The state of California is nearly Bankrupt, The City of San Jose can’t balance their budget….

    Build your stadium wherever you want. But use your own damn money.

    And keep your fertilizer to yourself.

  60. San Jose is not paying for the stadium. The A’s are. You know that, right?…A’s attendance has been in the bottom half of MLB attendance for 37 of the A’s 44 years in Oakland. Your Oakland A’s were AL runners up in 2006 and were rewarded with the 26th-highest attendance in Major League Baseball. Also, A’s charge cheap cheap pricing because there is little demand for their product in the East Bay. A’s behind-the-dugout seat? About $40. Giants behind-the-dugout seat? About 4 times that

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s