Post to the Save Oakland Sports Facebook page earlier tonight – The City of Oakland is putting on a press conference/rally in Frank Ogawa Plaza on Monday, August 27 at 11:00 AM. Here’s the description of the event:
Mayor Quan – joined by regional elected officials, business leaders and sports fans – will share details on the “Oakland Loves Its Sports Teams” Week.
The “Oakland Loves Its Sports Teams” Week will salute the Oakland A’s and Oakland Raiders for being irreplaceable civic treasures that add significantly to the economy, identity, pride and culture of Oakland, Alameda County and the entire East Bay region.
Gotta show the teams some love, especially when both have leases that run out after their respective 2013 seasons. The blurb is right about one thing: the teams are irreplaceable.
Note – It appears that I have been taken off the S.O.S. email chain. Perhaps they chose to close ranks.
Yet. another press conference but not one penny for stadium or arena construction. Sigh…
Could ML’s suggestion that Wolff could refuse to negotiate a lease extension have Oakland backing off its “They have no place to go” stance, in which the city thought it would negotiate from a position of strength?
i’d be more impressed if some of these names of people knauss said he has with him to buy the a’s if they’re ever up for sale show up and say a thing or two. i’ve seen over the past months sea businessmen at local rallies to bring back the nba to the seattle area.
Yet another press conference. At least it’ll give the traditional SF/Oak media another opportunity to write about how Oakland is “viable” and Lew Wolff is an evil owner bent on destroying the A’s fanbase. Yawn…
Amazing how quickly they have dropped the W’s–from an economic development perspective an arena has got to trump a baseball stadium and easily a football stadium—
BTW, I wonder how folks in Fremont or Livermore feel about Oakland representing “their” pride and culture?…
Oakland may love its teams but the bottom line is, the traditional way to get ballparks and stadiums built is through large public subsidies. Oakland and the state of California simply have no money to offer, which leaves the two teams in an obsolete, 46-year-old stadium, with the city hoping these teams replace the stadium out of the kindness of their hearts, with their own money. But the numbers – as in, can privately built Oakland stadiums be viable – simply don’t add up. Mr. Rock, meet Mr Hard Place….
pjk, i think everyone on this blog understands your position after you’ve recited it for the 1,000 time. So i’ll make the same points i make back to you.
1. How is Wolff financing his SJ building? I mean specifically. Is there a public subsidy? Do you even know?
2. Oakland has the financial capacity and the will to finance it’s portion of this transaction. There has been no public discussion b/c (a) Wolff has foreclosed any possibility of an Oakland stadium and (b) the MLB Committee isn’t in a position to negotiate anything with Oakland. I’m sure you are smart enough to understand Oakland should not be putting a marker on this only to be re-traded later. Or put another way, it would be dumb for Oakland to negotiate against itself.
3. It’s quite possible that money is made available that is not technically “public” but is derived by a public source. This will assist in the vertical construction.
Hey letsgoas, no need for anyone to step forward to announce interest in buying the team. They’re not for sale and from what I hear the Commissioner isn’t a big fan of people jamming him over team acquisition. And don’t bother referencing the Dodgers example, it’s apples and oranges.
SS: We already know Wolff has $120 million committed from Cisco plus 75 companies signing up in support of the stadium. Has any company vowed to commit $120 million for naming rights in Oakland? No. If naming rights in Oakland sell for much much less, are owners supposed to make up the difference out of their own pockets? Apparently they are…San Jose is offering land and won’t pay for the stadium. You already know that…
@SS–good to hear that Oakland is willing to put public dollars into a ballpark—I look forward to Quan’s public comments that support that—what will be interesting is whether the voters of Oakland/East Bay support this knowing that when the Coli is knocked down they will still owe $100M associated with the Mt. Davis debacle—
pjk, do you know the Cisco deal is still in place? Have you seen the stadium naming rights agreement? That was deal was negotiated in much different economic times. I would be very surprised if that agreement wasn’t very specific as to an delays in opening.
GoA’s, I didn’t say “public dollars.” I said “derived from a public source.” Very different. ML can explain it in case you don’t get the distinction.
None of you know all the details of this event. knee-jerk haterism doesn’t get anything done, or build good-will and trust between politicians, owners and fans.
@SS all depends on who is on the hook for the public source dollars….the last time Oakland issued bonds to re-do the Coli they were to be paid off with PSL’s–and not impact the taxpayer—remind again as to how that went and who is on the hook for the remaining $100M from the 1995 remodel—taxpayers of Oakland/Alameda County…
SS: Kind of grasping at straws, no? Cisco has never made any public statement that it is backing off the deal. In Oakland there is no deal for naming rights. It would be great if some company came forward and said “We’ll match the Cisco naming rights deal in Oakland.” But there’s been nothing but silence. If Oakland can only fetch say, half that much, owners have to come up with the other $60 million.
@ stanley- Your questions, in order:
1. No, there will not be a public subsidy without a vote in San Jose. The City Code (SJ Muni Code Chapter 4.95, section 010) states: “The City of San José may participate in the building of a sports facility using tax dollars only after obtaining a majority vote of the voters of the City of San José approving such expenditure. A ‘sports facility’ for the purpose of this chapter is to be any structure designed to seat more than five thousand people at any one time for the purpose of viewing a sporting or recreational event. ‘Tax dollars’ for the purposes of this chapter include, without limitation, any commitment to fund wholly or in part said facility with general fund monies, redevelopment fund monies, bonds, loans, special assessments or any other indebtedness guaranteed by city property, taxing authority or revenues. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the city from allowing the construction of a sports facility funded by private investment.” Any public subsidy would be in the form of a reduced price of the parcel of land as compared to the actual market price. Three years ago, that probably was a concern; now, in the current real-estate market, not so much. The only stumbling block for the Cisco Field parcel is how much pressure is to be brought on AT&T to sell their blocking parcel. Mr. Wolff has publicly stated that he waits until he has the funding already together prior to starting construction – thus the delay on the Earthquakes stadium at Airport West – and I do not believe he will do any differently with Cisco Field.
2) Oakland is not “negotiating against itself” in this issue – it’s standing on the periphery and throwing rocks into the pond and hoping that a wave or two will splash its way. One week, they’re supporting Coliseum City with a baseball stadium, the next week it’s without one, but the stadium is at Jack London. One week after that, we’re back to Victory Court. Without leadership in Oakland, any stadium plan is pretty much boned from the outset, no matter how much Clorox money you can pour into it.
3) Any money derived from a public source should be subject to a vote. See #1 above, it’s enshrined into the law in San Jose. With Oakland as jacked up as it currently is, do you think anybody in a position of political leadership is going to suggest that any public money be dedicated to the construction of a stadium right now?
Bottom line – San Jose’s been doing a lot of work behind-the-scenes and right out front on this issue, and Oakland’s been languishing. Right now, San Jose has the site and the financing – the only thing that’s missing is a resolution of the TR issue. Oakland doesn’t have the TR issue, but they have no site, no current EIR for any of the sites, no money, no leadership, and no plan. Those who hitch their wagon to the Oakland-only side of this argument do so at their own peril.
Oakland as a whole gets destroyed on this blog. You would think my City was the set of a disaster film. Oaklanders know better. Debate back and forth and speculate is what we do. but, rarely in this back and forth, does San Jose’s dirty laundry come into the mudslinging. Of course, no city with a million residents is perfect. I wonder why we don’t here about crime in SJ over here? A lot of discussion about Oakland being “broke”, “police and pension issues”, “occupy”, etc. You would think San Jose residents bathe Cristal!
David: San Jose’s history has been to find a site, get an EIR done and get a land deal done. In Oakland, it’s been decades of dismissing the A’s (see: Robert Bobb fired after Jerry Brown tires of Bobb’s ballpark preaching, Brown takes Uptown site out of the running, etc…) and jumping around from site to site to site – all of which already have been studied and ruled out. Just get a ballpark done in the Bay Area, that’s all we want. A new ballpark in Oakland would work fine for me – business as usual as far as getting to A’s games and who knows – I might end moving back to the east bay one of these days. But a lot of us in here, with good reason, don’t have a lot of confidence in Oakland to get this done. That’s it.
@david- go ahead and do a comparison of crime between the 2 cities- or leadership of one v the other- personally I could care less but your the one who brought it up- what I do care about is getting a ballpark for my A’s in the Bay Area- Oakland has had 17 years and still doesn’t have an agreed upon site or EIR completed for any site- absolutely frustrating is all I can say
@David Oakland elected officials as a whole gets destroyed on this blog. #FixedThatForYou
Still find it funny the Warriors are completely left out of the discussions. Oakland must realize they’re too far gone to do anything about at this point.
@GoA’s – dude i don’t care what the crime rate in SJ is. I know its low for a city its size. That’s not the point. This has been made into a contest between to “sister” cities, by supporters of the *current* Athletics’ ownership. St. Louis, Detroit and Chicago all have worse crime and murder rates than Oakland, so what? Oakland doesn’t have an EIR completed for a sight. Its hard to work with someone who won’t talk to you or tells you “don’t break your pick on this one”.
Ratto, Cohn, Dickey, Tittle, Poole, Newhouse and Now Don Knauss, don’t know what they’re talking about. One would wonder how they got where they are today, with such little knowledge of the business of sports.
@Dan I guess the question is, when will this be down to one team that Mayor Quan and the SOS group will be pleading to stay. I still think it’s the Raiders at the end of the day. They have always been the biggest priority in the city, at the Coliseum and they will continue to be until LA or Santa Clara become too attractive to ignore.
agree Dan–whole time Quan was consulting with Baer he was working behind the scenes to move the W’s to SF–talk about being duped…
….Quan really really believes the Giants want the A’s to get a new ballpark in Oakland – 12 miles away to compete with theirs. Mindboggling…
It’s not mindboggling, If you want to talk about leadership in Oakland, the last of that leadership was shown by John Houlihan and he embezzled money and was a convicted felon.
keep slinging the mud fellas!
Actually agree with David. Mud slinging, whether it’s pro Oakland or San Jose, means nothing at this point. What will mean something? An actual press conference by Selig/MLB on this issue…that’s it! Carry on fellas…
I wonder how much money ranked-voting has actually saved over the term of the office? It seems to me it makes it possible to elect someone with lesser qualifications and the inability to lead, and that has surely led to lost dollars for Oakland.
@ML – “Note – It appears that I have been taken off the S.O.S. email chain. Perhaps they chose to close ranks.”
You’re that pro-San Jose guy who runs that Anti-Oakland blog! They don’t want you knowing their secrets.
re: Ratto, Cohn, Dickey, Tittle, Poole, Newhouse and Now Don Knauss, don’t know what they’re talking about. One would wonder how they got where they are today, with such little knowledge of the business of sports.
..Yes, I agree they don’t know what they are talking about. Have any of them ever discussed the gigantic financial obstacles to privately financing a ballpark in Oakland, other than the usual “John Fischer is rich..” solution? Nope.
David… How many of those guys actually write about the “business” of sports?
Jeffrey – that’s not their specialties, but Poole for instance has been very hard on the Raiders business with the City of Oakland.
Christ, the first seven posts and majority after are potshots and venom. Who would’ve guessed? I love this blog, but sometimes it’s like Statler and Waldorf from the Muppets comment on here.
Anything that casts doubts on a new ballpark ever being built in Oakland = “potshots and venom.”
@eb–because maybe after 17 years and counting and still not an agreed upon site in Oakland the last thing I want to hear about is another Oakland press conference to talk about the civic pride of Oakland and the importance of the A’s—-talk is cheap—show how important they are by actually doing something–when you have no track record of success you open yourself up to all kinds of pot shots–how difficult is it to put together a business plan for public review of how you plan on keeping 2 teams that require new stadiums totaling about $1.5B dollars-
Look, I’m as skeptical as anyone about Oakland’s ability to come up with even the bare minimum of support needed to pull off Coliseum City and a waterfront ballpark. That doesn’t mean that issue has to be pervasive in EVERY THREAD ABOUT OAKLAND. For chrissakes, give it a rest and come up with something relevant.
Let’s take dibs on what the press conference is about:
Proposal for each of the 600K Oakland citizens to donate $150 each to finance the new stadium (public subsidy!)
Officially killing Coliseum City and turning towards Howard Terminal is the new proposal
Announcment that Jean Quan has decided to sponsor the SF Gnats, since they’ve done so much to help her “cause” against A’s
City reversing direction and putting emphasis back on Victory Court again!
Announcement that Clorox and Chevron are committed to a $300M naming rights and sponsorship deal for new CC/HT/VC stadium and calling it the Noxious Tidy Whitie Bowl
Nothing to announce, just more hot air
What’s really ridiculous is how Oaklanders can accept being strung along for this political ride. Simply baffling….
Any takers for a can of Coke that the media even picks up that the W’s were omitted from the press release? Foregone conclusion I guess and/or too much focus on hating the A’s owners…..
@GoA’s I won’t defend the Oakland politicians, past and present, but Oakland is hardly the only city to bumble towards getting a new sports facility done. Just look across the Bay as an example. I know it’s painful for all A’s fans to see this limbo, but Oakland is at a point where it could lose all three of its sports institutions, a devastating proposition. I don’t know why they aren’t being totally transparent, but there are a lot of variables concerning which teams might stay, MLB rulings, etc. I also think a lot of posters on here are South Bay residents who really want a sports team to move to San Jose, namely the A’s. There’s nothing wrong with that, but when the same posters routinely cast a negative light on anything Oakland, it just comes across as vindictive and obviously self serving.
@eb–understoond about south bay posters—I personally want the A’s to have a ballpark in the bay area in an area that will afford them the greatest opportunity to compete—what is frustrating to me about the oakland posters is that no one wants to ask the Oakland leaders the difficult questions–including the media—and from my perspective that does nothing to help improve the credibility of what Oakland has in mind for any of its franchises. I also find it interesting that the SOS decided to take ML off their mailing list—more secrecy—what for?
It’s far easier to criticize that it is to organize and act. You don’t have to be impressed with SOS’s effort. I’m not. But, it’s still something. Is there even an organized pro-A’s to SJ group?
@Briggs – Yes, it’s called the SJ City Council and SVLG.
…and Baseball San Jose, at baseballsanjose.org
@Briggs – read up on Baseball SJ: http://www.probaseballforsanjose.com/ . Funny sideline Oaklanders would try to demean SJ residents, as most of us still go to A’s game now and favor a ballpark anywhere in the Bay Area. Our attitude is to stop with the self pity parties and ludicrous press announcements and do SOMETHING! Maybe it’s a regional thing to procrastinate so much, but as someone who oversees others professionally, it’s intolerable for me to see the A’s in such a state of limbo.
@Briggs – yes. I’m pretty sure Lew Wolff and Chuck Reed are co-presidents.
Sorry for the snark, but as LS and Anon mentioned, there is an actual group. It’s a little harder though, because SJ residents sort of have a promise of a promise to get behind. If the A’s don’t show, they haven’t lost anything. The pro-Oakland groups, on the other hand, have a tangible thing that they stand to lose. In any case, the only real group who matters are Wolff and Reed..
I’m talking about fans.
Fans are the citizens of SJ who voted for our elected officials to get shit done, not do press conferences. But hey, if you are going to go down the 45k FB fans, more power to you. But I think it speaks volumes that quite a few of us SB A’s fans (with no “TR” team of our own) can traverse 30 miles up 880N to support our team, when less than half can do the same in their own city. But I’ll concede and say that I’d rather have support from city government and large SV corps then no show cheerleaders.
Funny, I still think the best compromise is still Fremont. It allows East Bayers to save face with their ego and pride, yet appease SV corps with the vicinity. Why did the NIMBYs have to block it… 😦
@David, @Briggs, @ML – THANK YOU!!!!
@ The Haters – I realize this site is more aligned with San Jose. That didn’t deter me from coming in here and discussing my point of view. I have enjoyed DISAGREEING with some of you (for the most part it’s been civil).
I’m EFFING sick and EFFING tired of the Oakland haters. Seriously. Some whiney bitches do nothing but shoot down anything positive about Oakland for no reason other than those c*nts get together and convince themselves that Oakland is the worst place on earth. Yes, I’m talking to YOU. That is the definition of “HATER” – you have nothing good to say about Oakland but none (few) of you have the balls to go there for yourself, or even TRY to see something positive about it.
YES, Oakland has problems. Obviously. But only whiney asswipes sit there are toss more gas on the fire, or continally piss and moan about how bad things are. As small as it may be, Oakland and the people therein have 1000X more guts and dedication than any one of you scared yuppies from bigger cities. With so many haters constantly talking trash, you have got to be one mentally-strong mother effer to even admit you’re a resident of Oakland. I’m proud of every single one of them.
So, to the rest of you, sack up or keep hiding in other cities. We Oaklanders will stay here and wrestle this problem to the ground. The people and City of Oakland are trying to make improvements in any way they can, including adding ballparks to keep the teams we love. Considering how many other problems the City has right now, it speaks volumes that we are trying to invest in our teams RIGHT NOW at this very critical juncture.
Cue additional Oakland-bashing in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1….
Still wonder what their official justification for ignoring the Warriors was…
Which part of “How does it get financed in Oakland?” is bashing?
@LakeshoreOAK – You’re not going to engender sympathy for Oakland by turning around and unleashing attacks on citizens of other cities.
@LS – When it has little or nothing to do with the topic of the post.
It’s really strange to me, the “Keep the A’s in Oakland” movement has sort of spawned three distinct groups with different motivations and “ideas” for keeping the team in town. Two of them are clsoely aligned (the City Government and Let’s Go Oakland) and the third (SOS) is really just on the periphery being quoted in Monte Poole columns and such. You git part of the City Council that wants the A’s to build their own stadium in the Coliseum Parking lot, then you have Let’s Go Oakland who has been pushing JLS (or thereabouts) from the beginning.
David, before you get on me about this… This is not a shot at Oakland, or Monte Poole (though, this is: he doesn’t get the business of sport and I think it is stretch to call him even adequate at analyzing sports in general).
I think Oakland is best served by throwing their weight behind Let’s Go Oakland’s plan. Let the SOS guys serve as cheerleaders for LGO and let the City Government get the hell out of the way (because let’s be real, this City Government has been really bad at this for a loooong time).
LGO’s plan (this is an observation as an outsider) is really driven by some special interests (ie, Signature Properties) who bet big on a big development driven by a JLS renaissance (and vice versa, to some degree) that gets touted in papers but has yet to really produce much of substance (where’s Oak 2 9th?). They see a JLS area baseball stadium as a catalyst for that development and a path to actually having their bet payoff.
Just because their motivation is making their bet payoff, doesn’t mean there is no benefit to the City. There is huge benefit to the City if the waterfront becomes an extension of downtown.
I wish we’d here more about how the potential stadium benefits the A’s from these groups. Because most of what they preach is about how good it is for Oakland. Maybe that’s because of the fractured approach? I don’t know… But like I said a long time ago, if the A’s are to stay in Oakland it will be because of Doug Boxer and the crew at LGO and despite Jean Quan, et al. I just wish it would hurry up and be over…
re: That is the definition of “HATER” – you have nothing good to say about Oakland but none (few) of you have the balls to go there for yourself, or even TRY to see something positive about it.
…Looks like I don’t meet the definition. I was in Oakland twice in the past few weeks – at an A’s game and at the fabulous Oakland Zoo. I also argue against folks who believe it’s not safe to set foot in Oakland. But do I think Oakland can get a ballpark done? I’m not seeing any evidence that it can. Press conference after press conference doesn’t get shovels in the ground….
@ML – Disagree, but I understand your point about staying on topic.
Is the meeting really a press conference–where we expect to get news about something–or is it going to be more like a rally?
Dan, The Warriors are left out because they aren’t playing anytime soon? I am guessing, but I took the PC to be about celebrating the A’s success this season and the Raiders impending season. Not really about venue development or the like.
@ML – you’re right. But I’m so frustrated with listening to people and their incessant hatred of Oakland. You can go read my historical posts – I think I’ve been fair and civil. At times, I’ve admittied a mistake or agreed with others in here. Yet some of the poster here cannot say the same.
A man can only take so much. If I lost it every time I heard a ridiculous, off-color comment about Oakland I’d literally go insane.
lakeshore… You don’t know any of us I am assuming. You really should stop pretending you do.
@Jeffrey – what are you talking about? I don’t claim to know any of you personally.
@pjk – Clearly, you are an Oakland advocate. How could anyone misread your position?
Here’s an idea: why don’t you think of a way Oakland can come up with the money, instead of (again) saying, “I dont think they can”?
@ Lakeshore, per your request, here you go on how to get it done in Oakland. Enjoy!
interesting observation about the press release–it targets only the east bay–“The “Oakland Loves Its Sports Teams” Week will salute the Oakland A’s and Oakland Raiders for being irreplaceable civic treasures that add significantly to the economy, identity, pride and culture of Oakland, Alameda County and the entire East Bay region.”
Whether it be the gints, ’49ers, or Sharks they always refer to their fan base as the “Bay Area” or more broadly “Northern California”—
@Lakeshore–you miss the point for many of us who are advocates for a new ballpark for our A’s. It has nothing to do with hating Oakland and loving SJ–it has to do with which city is more capable of delivering that ballpark in a reasonable period of time. Oakland after many years has yet to prove they are up to the task—which is where my frustration towards Oakland and its leaders is directed–not because I am hating on Oakland-
lakehore- for not knowing any of u personally you sure make a lot of generalizations about where we are from, what our motivations are, etc. That’s my point exactly.
im not surprised you were taken off the SOS email chain. it seams like a lot of pro oakland people, including i few ive talked to who are involved with SOS, hate you and this website. personally i love this site and i think marine layer does an excellent job of putting out a lot of info in an inbiased manner.
lakeshore, i apologize for the typo in your name above… my “s” key is flakey. No offense intended.
hate? Really? Wow! Pretty sad if you ask me (I don’t like being chained up by the Giants TRights, but to say I “hate” the Giants would be going overboard)
Pro San Jose folks, why don’t you come up with a financial plan to get the territorial rights from the Giants. If you did, you would have Cisco Field would be open my now.
LOL – way to deflect the issue, again! I come up with a proposal and all i hear is silence, and now you’re going to ask us to resolve a business dispute? Bro, I would be more concerned about your own matters before trying to talk smack about other cities or as i alluded to above:
So you, SS, and Lakeshore still haven’t responded to my previous inquiry: if you guys are so certain about the feasibility of Oakland for a new stadium venue, would you then support guaranteed revenue/attendance for it to the A’s/Raiders? Still waiting…..
Ethan: Because Selig, in his infinite cowardice, told the Giants and A’s to work it out amongst themselves even though the Giants have no incentive at all to negotiate. We can be sure the Giants, if they are even setting a price, have set it in the 9-figure range. Selig’s plan is akin to a runner and catcher being told to negotiate whether the runner was out or safe.
I don’t think a lot of people hate Oakland on this blog, I think a lot of people hate what the coliseum has become, and more directly hate the civic leaders that have made this situation get to this point. I like Oakland, I just am having ah hard time seeing A’s being competitive financially there as opposed to South Bay. By that I mean, tough to sell out stadium, maximize tv deal and corporate sponsors. But even if A’s left, id still go visit. I’d consider living there if I were to move to the bay.
@Ethan – MarineLayer did a post about TRights valuations: Here you go:
On a non-stadium issue all i have to say is NO!!!!!!!! A’s need to find a number one pitcher ASAP.
@Mike2 – We have a #1. His name is Brett Anderson.
Anon I don’t think how Oakland is going going to announce how they are paying for anything until MLB and the A’s say they are going to stay in Oakland. No need to throw out numbers. There are plenty of ways but a specific plan needs to be in place.
Now San Jose folks if the A’s are so important to the city, where is the financial play to pay off the Giants. Will you guys come up with a private plan to help Lew Wolff take care of the Giants. What is your plan San Jose to pay off the Giants.
WTF?! First, the A’s are in Oakland now and supposedly part of the heritage there, but you’re saying why start a dialogue on how to fund a stadium until a MLB decision is made? Why announce CC, VC, and HT then? Why make noise that its the OAKLAND A’s now?! Secondarily, why does SJ need to pay anything to the Gnats? If anything, as PJK alluded to, SJ should sue the Gnats / MLB for monopolistic practices. There are things that the city can control, like EIRs, land acquisition, corporate support, etc. that are already taken care of. Things that SJ cannot will be decided by the powers that be in MLB. If Oakland wants the A’s so bad, then do f@#$in something about it. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I’m not SJ-Only, I’m pro-A’s-stadium-NOW for the A’s, whether it’s in Oakland, Fremont, or SJ, but selfishly prefer SJ since it would ease my commute. I’m just tired of the typical Oakland only stance of, “LW is a carpetbagger, because he hates Oakland”, yet don’t see any sort of plan on the Oakland side besides… *gasp* press conferences! Sorry if this analogy offends anyone, but this is like a divorce. If you don’t do something to convince the Mrs. to stay, she’s going to go to greener pastures especially after neglecting her so long. So, if you can’t convince her to stay by guaranteeing you’l be better or have any sort of plausible concrete plan, don’t blame others if she leaves. Just like in the mirror…
San Jose should pay off the Giants? Here’s a better idea: San Jose should sue MLB and the Giants to invalidate the anti-trust exemption. Then let the Giants pay San Jose for damages resulting from lost economic opportunity while the Giants denied San Jose major league baseball
Tell yah what Ethan; just worry about Oakland, and let us “haters” worry about San Jose. How does that sound?
Anon just ended the debate. Until the real news conference occurs…
Great rant Anon, think you hit all the fine points of the what ifs and what should have been done by now.
Territorial rights have no role in this stalemate. Ok whatever!!!
Deflection, ignorance, denial, and lack of responsibility. This is your way and in general, the
“Oakland Way”. And you Oakland pundits wonder why we criticize you…..
Ethan writes: “”I don’t think how Oakland is going going to announce how they are paying for anything until MLB and the A’s say they are going to stay in Oakland””
Did I misread that? You think MLB/LW should just commit their time, effort and money to Oakland……. then hope that Oakland can come up with a realistic and beneficial plan? Again, did I misread that or are you that out of touch?
The idea that Oakland shouldn’t sell a $$$ plan to make LW/MLB voluntarily choose Oakland….. that is an idea that isn’t making it happen for Oakland. It is an idea that wholly relies on the A’s being forced to stay in Oakland due to no good alternative. Wow! Way to really grab the bull by the horns and make something happen! But in your defense, your way of thinking seems to be in sync with Oakland Pols.