Stand For San Jose lawsuit returns

In August I posted a note about the Stand for San Jose-vs-City of San Jose lawsuit. The lawsuit, which was actually the product of two consolidated cases, had been disposed in late July. No explanation was given as to why, though the timing was curious.

On Friday Stand for San Jose filed yet another suit against the City. Fangraphs’ Nathaniel Grow has more:

Curious indeed. SFSJ drops the suit after the A’s sign their 10-year lease at the Coliseum, then objects to the option agreement and files suit thereafter. I’m certain there’s no coincidence. Brent Mann followed up with a couple tweets:

We knew about the blood ties with Pillsbury, but a SF PR firm too? Couldn’t source locally, eh? That’s so Giants.

It should be abundantly clear by the ties to the Giants, along with SFSJ’s actions always happening on the heels of what the A’s do, that S4SJ has about as much legitimate interest in San Jose as the Giants do. With SFSJ’s use of Giants fans to prop up the lawsuit and the Giants’ sage advice to Jean Quan in trying to push for a waterfront ballpark in Oakland, this legal battle has become a complete farce. And if the A’s sign a deal to develop a ballpark at the Coliseum, any bets on how quickly this lawsuit will also evaporate?

All hail the SF Giants, great guardians of the welfare of San Jose.

73 thoughts on “Stand For San Jose lawsuit returns

  1. Option agreements happen all the time for land, be it for stadiums or office/residential developments. Long story short: NO CASE LARRY, AND STOP BEING SUCH AN A$$HOLE! A’s to San Jose…

  2. The Giants are militant about making sure San Jose NEVER gets Major League Baseball. Too bad only the folks in this chatroom and maybe a few others even care about what’s going on here. I still remember a San Jose City councilman wearing a Giants hat during the July 4th parade about 3 or 4 years ago, right when the Giants were stepping on the gas pedal in efforts to block the A’s from coming to San Jose.

  3. “And if the A’s sign a deal to develop a ballpark at the Coliseum, any bets on how quickly this lawsuit will also evaporate?”

    That’s kind of a foolish statement. If they develop at the Coli, then the option become erroneous even for S4SJ “concerns.” Don’t get me wrong, this is trollish behavior by the Giants, but that comment was still kind of foolishly out of place.

  4. The San Francisco Giants, always willing to be a good neighbor.

    • I wonder if they have State Farm…

    • Understandable why Giants owner Charles Johnson is so adamant about protecting his “investment,” as in getting Santa Clara County for free from MLB. He’s only worth $5.6 billion. It can be tough to get by on that.

  5. Wolff and Fisher are worth 7.5 billion.

    I used to think the Giants were doing Oakland a favor by trying to keep the A’s out of San Jose, but now it’s more of a curse having Lew Wolff muck up Coliseum City and a possible new state of the art stadium.

    Charlie Finley looks like a saint compared to the Wolff/Beane/Fisher regime.

    • re: Charlie Finley
      Charlie Finley wanted to move the A’s 1,200 or so miles away to Denver. Wolff wanted to move them 25 miles to San Jose. OK, Elmano, Whatever you say. And once again, HT is not the answer for the A’s. It is a DOA site that is not going to happen.

  6. The answer is Coliseum City for the Raiders and Howard Terminal for the A’s if Wolff really wants to stay in Oakland.

    • @Elmano – That’s $600 million – in infrastructure alone. All of it would be borne by Oakland and/or Alameda County. Let me know when you want to join reality.

    • Elmano… you’re the only one left still talking about Howard Terminal. If you love it so much, why don’t YOU move there.

  7. @E- you seriously think SF is trying to help Oakland- you mean just like Doug Boxer did with the W’s- gints won’t let up until the A’s suitcases are packed to any city outside of the Bay Area-

    • @GoA’s – I couldn’t agree more. If an A’s fan believes otherwise – they are very naive.

      • Me, too. The goal for the Giants is not an A’s ballpark in Oakland. It’s A’s gone from the Bay Area.

  8. MLB can put and end to this nonsense. However, they choose to continue to perpetuate the unprecedented division of one its shared two teamed markets into two separate unequal territories. Its impact is glaringly showing itself at the current MLB Winter Meetings.

  9. The giants owners don’t want the A’s in SJ, the CC or even HT – they want the A’s to relocate out of state. If MLB were to wise up (perhaps the new MLB commish will do this) they would flip off the giants and get a new ballpark going for the A’s. The giants are bad for MLB – their boring small ball style is a turnoff for most MLB fans – MLB’s popularity will really wane if other teams start imitating the giants small ball tactics, and pitcher friendly ballpark strategy. MLB owners evidently don’t get it – HR’s and offense are what fans want – that’s why the Yankees and Bosox draw well and achieve good viewer ratings . Fans also followed the game more during the destable ‘roids era.- Bochy ball is boring and bad for the game.

  10. Marine Layer,

    How is that 600 million for infrastructure? You need 600 million to cap the site and build a couple of additional garages and footbridges over the train tracks. Oakland just renovated and opened up the south end of Lake Merritt for 27 million.

  11. I see. Thanks.

  12. The irony is that the stupid giants owners are likely better off if the A’s move to San Jose – The Haas ownership and the A’s (in Oakland) nearly drove the giants away to Tampa (even though the A’s desired that the giants stay locally and gave the Giants the so called territorial rights to SJ so the giants wouldn’t move to Tampa or elsewhere) the same scenario will likely occur again once the A’s build at the CC site.

  13. Perhaps refiling the lawsuit is the gints parting gift to bud- wanted to remind him of his ineptness – worst commish in history but when asked said he wouldn’t change a thing- wow

  14. This is why we need to support a team that WANTS to stay here, yes Billy fans its the Raiders.

    Let’s get the Bart improvements complete, the current stadium torn down and a new ballpark where it should be with or without Billy and Mr Venue, double barbaquer extrodenier.

  15. At AW…and what team is that- W’s gone to SF- Raiders not accepting season ticket orders for 2015- A’s would kill to have a choice- looks like all 3 want the hell out

  16. If the A’s move, most baseball fans, including many Oakland A’s fans, will not care or will get over it very fast.

    • If the A’s leave, I’m done with MLB. Forever. That’s how much I wouldn’t care.

      • @ pjk
        I could not agree with you more, if that were to be the case. I’m out.

      • look this is a San Francisco Giants Bay Area now…after the choke job and losing Lester and pretty much reseting again…I’m done…I’m a Raider /St giants fan and a lot of people in Oakland are the same way. Until Lee Wolff stops this San Jose thing maybe even having to sell but I want commitment

      • @ Vance
        It’s a multifaceted problem, on one hand I can see the SF Giants gripe after all, they were not compensated when the A’s moved to the Bay Area in the first place. (1968) I wouldn’t blame the SF Giants if they told Wolff; we will give you San Jose for a fair price once you factor in Oakland/East Bay, which we were never compensated for.
        Also a lot of people talk about Mr. Hass, and how he was nice enough to let the SF Giants have an opportunity to build in San Jose, the thinking being that the SF Giants should simply return the favor, now that the A’s are the team in the position of needing to build.
        I guess that thought may have some merit, but it overlooks the very real possibility that Hass, may have been looking at this from a business aspect himself, if the SF Giants were to ever become the San Jose Giants, Hass would have had the center/north portions of the Bay Area all to himself.
        He should have stipulated that the South Bay revert to its previous status, if the SF Giants were not able to build there.
        I’m sure most of the SF Giants fan base would have stayed intact, just as most of the A’s will, if they are ever granted San Jose, but in time many of the SF Giants loyal North Bay following would tier of going all the way to San Jose, and (or) eventually die off (sad fact of life), Anyway the A’s would be right there in the middle of the Bay Area, and most places in the North Bay would be 15-45 minutes away. It’s odd, in that, if the SF Giants were ever successful in the efforts to build in San Jose, it would probably be San Francisco that Wolff was trying to build in today, and not San Jose.
        My biggest problem with the SF Giants, is the don’t even appear to be willing to allow the A’s to move to San Jose, even for a fair price.
        That doesn’t mean I don’t have a problem with Wolff, but I have already written too much, so one problem at a time.

      • @Lakeshore/Neil
        Both the Giants not being compensated for when the A’s moved to the Bay Area and Haas giving the Giants the south bay so he can own SF and the East Bay aren’t valid arguments.

        The Giants not being compensated for the A’s moving, only impacted the owners at the time. All future owners had to factor the A’s into their purchase decision.

        In terms of Haas, you have to remember that at the time it was very likely the Giants were leaving the Bay Area entirely. If Haas really was just looking out for his own interests, he wouldn’t have helped the Giants at all. He wasn’t trying to force them out of SF, he was trying to keep them in the Bay Area.

      • @ Slacker
        You bring up some valid points.
        RE: “The Giants not being compensated for the A’s moving only impacted the owners at the time. All future owners had to factor the A’s into their purchase decision.”
        If we are going to use that as a determining statement, then the same thing can be said about Wolff and Fisher, when they purchased the A’s, they should have factored into their decision, that they were only going to be permitted to build in Alameda and Contra Costa counties.
        I’m sure some will say it can’t be done in Oakland/East Bay, or the A’s will make more money in San Jose, but again Wolff and Fish should have factored that into the purchase, as you say subsequent SF Giants owners should have about the A’s move to the Bay Area in 1968, not trying to fight the SF Giants case for them, but as an open minded A’s fan (I try to be), I think we have to look at both sides of the issue.
        And the idea that Wolff has tried in Oakland (if he even has, is debatable), but to the extent that he has, that doesn’t give an owner of one team the right to encroach on another teams territory simply because they can’t make it work in the territory, that was assigned to them when they purchased the team, again they should have factored that in. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not supporting the SF Giants claim to San Jose, I’m just saying there is valid points on both sides.
        RE: “In terms of Haas, you have to remember that at the time it was very likely the Giants were leaving the Bay Area entirely. If Haas really was just looking out for his own interests, he wouldn’t have helped the Giants at all. He wasn’t trying to force them out of SF; he was trying to keep them in the Bay Area.”
        Two things can be true at the same time; Hass could have been looking out for his own interests, and simply not have been an ass hole like the SF Giants are being, just because Hass did not want to drive the SF Giants out of the Bay Area, as it appears the current owners of the SF Giants are trying to do to the A’s, doesn’t mean that Hass’s self-interest and the SF Giants staying in the Bay Area could not have been compatible, he did not have to be a tyrant to see an opportunity for his team, while allowing SF Giants to remain in the Bay Area.

    • I’m with pjk and Lakeshore/Neil – and would prefer watching the WTA tennis babes over MLB if that scenario occured – (concerning the giants – this fan would prefer to view an infomercial than the Giants and most NL teams)

  17. The Warriors are going/gone. Whomever stays in Oakland is going to own that town. As an ardent A’s & San Jose supporter, it almost, ALMOST makes it OK if the A’s are the last team standing in Oakland and get the long-term following and deep support they deserve.

  18. Also, MLB holds the cards about the SJ move – not the giants. If the A’s take the SJ vs MLB case to the SC and MLB believes they have good chance of losing the MLB ATE – they’ll likely throw the Giants under the bus.

  19. This is the one area that I blame Wolff on. He’s not publicly calling out the Giants for the crap that they’re pulling. He let’s the Giants say things like HT is a viable site, making him look like a jerk for not even considering it. Meanwhile the Giants create bogus law suits and no one calls them on it.

    While I was never a huge fan of Al Davis, if he owned the A’s, I think it’s safe to say that he would have forced the issue by now.

    • Wolff has stated unequivocally that HT is not viable. But proponents for that site are plain uninterested in the truth.

  20. @Slacker
    Exactly, Al Davis, love him, like him, hate him, he did not take no sh*t.
    Was that an appropriate use of commas? I’m not sure 🙂 (only 5)

  21. In terms of education and history, the Haas family giving up territorial rights of the South Bay has to be one the STUPIDEST “business” moves in the HISTORY of the United States. Can’t imagine who the idiots are that advised them on that.

    This screw up should be taught in every business class in America. For trying to be the “nice-guy” the A’s & their market share really got wasted by the decision.

    Henry Ford was right…….if you want a friend in business….get yourself a dog.

    • @Alex – At that time, the A’s were clobbering the Giants both on the field also attendance. If you recall, during the La Russa years, the A’s always outdrew the giants – and with big margins. In 1992, the A’s were 3rd in MLB attendance – and the Giants were quickly becoming a joke of a franchise and preparing for a move to Tampa FL. The Haas ownership possibly simply overlooked the giants and believed that the giants were an insignificant franchise (which is what the giants were at that time)

      • La Russa was manager of the A’s from 1986-1995. During that period, the A’s outdrew the Giants from 1988-1992. That’s exactly 5/10 season. I wouldn’t call that dominant long term attendance.

      • SMG – In the 80’s-90s the A’s definitely outdrew the giants for 6 consecutive years, frequently by huge margins. Also, if A’s vs Giants attendance stats are compared when La Russa managed the A’s – the A’s overall kicked the giants ass – there is no comparison.

        Also, when Lurie sold the giants to Tampa Bay – the giants beat the A’s only 9 of the 25 years at attendance (that’s including the non- LaRussa years) I

      • We’ve been through this and I’ve provided the numbers and sources before. One team never dominated the other in attendance over the long term until the past decade +, and then it was the Giants over the A’s. Misrepresenting facts is not a useful thing to do.

      • additionally, to SMG’s point, the A’s counted tickets sold at a time when the Giants counted only people who entered the stadium. This was the case through 1992 when all MLB teams starting counting tickets sold. Odd that 1992 is the last time the A’s outdrew the Giants, isn’t it?

      • @SMG, Jeffrey August:

        The A’s drew a total of 20,508,024 fans between 1986 thru 1995 – averaging 2,050,802 during that span (including 2 shortened seasons)

        The giants drew 18,117,380 total for that same period – averaging 1,811,738 for that 10 year window. The A’s outdrew the giants by 2,390,644 fans during that time frame, and their attendance averaged 13% higher than the giants from 1986-95 – LOL

      • And seriously, your point is laughable at best because the Giants have massively outdrawn the A’s on an annual and total basis for the past 20 years. Whining about it now and cherry picking from seasons that occurred over 20 years ago is not helpful in any way, shape, or form. It adds literally nothing of value to the conversation.

      • @SMG – it would figure that you are a giants fan. I offer stats over a 10 year period on an exact ( per fan basis) My argument is that when La Russa managed the A’s – the A’s substantially beat the giants at attendance. And you offer only nonsense and naming calling to back up your claim – with no stats to back up your incorrect theory ( you are not using, much logic – very similar to the giants management’s illogical beliefs and actions. Their false group – “Stand for San Jose” – is a perfect example of their lunacy)

        The A’s averaged 2,050,802 per year during La Russa’s tenure
        The giants 1,811,738 per year during that time. The A’s enjoyed 13% better attendance than the giants during that time. The A’s drew 2,380,694 more fans than the giants did when La Russa was manager. (and I derived these figures from the same source you supposedly did – I am not ”cherry picking’ – My argument that the A’s kicked the giants ass at attendance during La Russa’s tenure is undeniable – LOL As I keep maintaining – the Giants owners group – along with some of their fans – are very factually challenged.

      • You are still adding literally nothing to the conversation duffer. And your fucking bullshit personal attacks and conspiracy theories are irrelevant. The A’s and the Giants don’t give a fuck about attendance figures from 20+ years ago anymore and neither should anyone here. It has absolutely nothing to do with the current situation or the situation going forward.

        ML, it would probably be wise to just delete this section of the thread.

    • Also the MLB rules are more similiar to clubhouse rules and not actual legislation. MLB could easily approve the A’s move and overturn the giants territorial rights.

      • Still of the opinion Duffer that the A’s move to SJ and overturning of T-Rights approved by MLB once San Jose realizes its not getting everything for free: Wolff buying all the land AND paying for the ballpark (hence disapproval by MLB last June on financial grounds). Hopefully in this area incoming mayor Liccardo will have more sense than Reed. Be creative Sam! Mello-Roos financing ala Levis Stadium and possible new site alternative to Diridon (North San Pedro, Adobe Parcels or now half of the Coleman/Highline site).

      • @Tony D. – the Giants are the buttholes though – MLB’s ongoing argument with the giants owners is how the Giants owners believe that their fanbase is going to shrink if the A’s move 40 miles further away from Frisco. Hopefully Liccardo (perhaps the chief proponent of the A’s to SJ) will help.

      • Agree Duffer.

  22. This is why we all should support the NFL, and keep the Raiders.

    The MLB is unbalanced with only the rich keeping their teams intact and the little guys like us left with GM’s like Billy Boy never to sign a fan favorite, how can we go on like this?

    The Raiders have said they want to stay here in 2013 and are now once again giving indication they want to stay! You have to have some leverage with LA and SA, c’mon this is a business and politicians need to be coaxed or they will not budge, lets face it.

    Keep these guys here and then we can sign Billy Boy and Mr Venue to a beautiful ballpark in San Jose near the Airport. The A’s deserve it (not Billy and Mr V), and the MLB team that stole our rights will just have to suck it up. Hello Giants, we are moving 40 miles AWAY from your ballpark.

    • Wow! I actually agree with AW on this; the Raiders forever in Oakland (where they belong) and the A’s in San Jose (at Diridon or any of the above mentioned sites).

      • Raiders especially after wiping the floor with the Santa Clara 4G Era might have gained more public support for keeping football over baseball…dont mind what Mayor Libby says…A’s please sir render to the Coliseum City project work with Mark Davis and split the Coliseum land in half airports done Oakland is on the rise please lets stop this sports beef if the A’s want Oakland citizens support and love again the age really need to stay in Oakland and keep super star players the Raiders are already on their way with Derek R & a good roster Oakland sports can do this but there has to be commitment

      • @Vance – Read the site. Get informed. There is no “sir render”-ing.

  23. I used to root for the Giants and MadBum was a beast this year, but shit like this…..f$@& them!

  24. The Giants are being like this for a few reasons after thinking about it with a buddy of mine if you go through the history.

    When the Giants moved to SF in 1958, they were “swindled” by the Dodgers owner to move to Candlestick so they could move to LA. Horace Stoneham visited Candlestick in the morning and did not realize how bad it gets it at night.

    For 10 years the Giants suffered, losing money year over year and then the A’s moved to Oakland in 1968 to make things worse as the Bay Area at the time was not a 2-team MLB market.

    The losses mounted for the Giants and in 1975 they were on their way to Toronto when Bob Lurie saved the team.

    Lurie never turned a profit at Candlestick and the team was on its way out again to Tampa Bay when the current group saved the team in 1993. Lurie lost money 18 straight years.

    The current group went out and signed Barry Bonds, upgraded Candlestick in small ways (I.E. left field bleachers), even though they knew full well they would lose money.

    They continued to lose money and then privately financed their ballpark in 1996.

    They broke even the first few years of Pac Bell Park and only in the last 7-8 years they have “raked in the dough”.

    Now they are a power house but it took so many years of losing money and suffering at Candlestick before this current run came about.

    Even so, in 2014 the Bay Area can support 2 teams with new ballparks. Could the A’s do good in Oakland with a new spot? Yes, they would get around 30k of fans a night with a bad team. A good team could sell out consistently. Baseball is popular and people have money all over the place.

    The Giants greed is a by product of not only losing money for so long but until recently watched the A’s dominate them on the field. Before these 3 titles the past 5 years the A’s were far more successful and peeved the Giants big time.

    Should the Giants allow the A’s in San Jose? A big resounding YES. Because the market has matured and is now a 2 team MLB market by far. Even if they build in Oakland versus San Jose it still pencils out.

    This Stand 4 SJ lawsuit is smoke and mirrors as the 9th Circuit Decision is still in the air. Anyone wondering why it is taking so long for a ruling?

    People thought it as a slam dunk San Jose would lose, if it was such an easy ruling why is taking 4+ months for them to rule?

    Or could it be the Giants know they about to lose the 9th Circuit Decision and need run more interference with San Jose to muddle things up?

    I think it is the latter and the Giants have a bad feeling about the 9th Circuit taking this long to rule.

    Time will tell soon.

    • Yes, it’s a bit peculiar. All the court proceedings at the 9th circuit had us assuming a drubbing of San Jose by MLB. It may still work out that way. But why so long for a ruling?

    • I’ve heard the argument about the Giants not receiving compensation for when the A’s moved to the Bay Area being thrown out there several times, but it’s a straw man.

      When the current Giants ownership group purchased the team the A’s were already in the Bay Area so the price the owners paid already factored in the A’s. The A’s moving to the Bay Area only impacted the Giants owners in 1968.

      If the Giants want to use that argument, the A’s could use the same argument in that they never received any compensation from the Giants for splitting the Bay Area into 2 territories.

      The A’s moved to the Bay Area in ’68. The territorial rights were split in ’92. The two teams shared the area for 24 years. In 2016 it will be 24 years that the Bay Area has been split. MLB should just revert back to the shared territory in 2016 and call it even between both teams 🙂

  25. Even if the 9th Circuit court rules in favor of MLB – it still likely won’t mean squat. For example, during the 2010 American Needle vs NFL case – the 7th Circuit court ruled in favor the the NFL. The SC took the case and reversed the 7th Circuit Court’s pro NFL judgment by a 9-0 margin. The 7th Circuit Courts opinions and judgements obviously had no effect with the SCOTUS determination on that case. The Court of Appeals appears to carry little or no influence regarding SCOTUS decisions.

    • It does though if the 9th circuit rules in favor of SJ. My guess is that MLB likely won’t take the case to the Supreme Court. MLB generally fears exposure and potential further weakening of the anti-trust exemption.

      • Yep. How much more willing will MLB be to fight tooth and nail a major, prosperous city that really wants and can support a team, in favor of a status quo that favors an already fabulously wealthy team and devastates a welfare recipient franchise playing in a dump?

  26. Well I for one support stand for San Jose I feel that the San Francisco Giants have cornered at the baseball market in Oakland should take the chance of rebuilding the relationship with the community and the A’s. it’s San Francisco Giants territory

    • Vance,
      Why don’t you come back to this blog when you know what the @$#! you’re talking about! Thanks and have a great day.

Comments are closed.