Manfred: No blue ribbon panel for A’s

From Susan Slusser:

The commish is checking in with every team during the spring, so he should’ve expected this and other questions about the A’s future. While it’s encouraging that Manfred won’t hide behind a panel, that’s a long way from actually working things out. We’ll know for sure if Manfred becomes more hands-on regarding the A’s. If he is, that’s because he’s eager for a quick resolution. The same couldn’t be said for his predecessor.

29 thoughts on “Manfred: No blue ribbon panel for A’s

  1. maybe it is a step forward…..2017 is the year.

  2. Another “BRC” would be akin to the “special committee” appointed to investigate the attack on the nerds’ house in “Revenge of the Nerds” – an exercise in accomplishing nothing. The first MLB A’s panel’s findings were completely deep-sixed and never made public probably because Selig was too terrified to reveal them. Selig chose to hide under his desk and do nothing to solve the issue after his famous “A’s cannot and will not continue indefinitely” in their current situation statement – made six years ago this month, I believe…What I expect to happen next is Manfred will, if he hasn’t already, hear from Oakland that it is waiting for Wolff to “commit” to Oakland and has no intention of favoring the A’s over the Raiders. It’ll be the opposite of what Manfred wants to hear.

  3. This is not really surprising. Manfred has been the heavy so far. The guy who issues the threat. Her follow up tweet about working behind the scenes to “get an answer from Oakland” is not surprising either. MLB has a path it wants to follow and Manfred has been involved in shaking that path out for a loooooong time now.

  4. Manfred is only slightly less a coward than Selig. In the sense he knows what the BRC report entails so why embarrass himself?

    Nothing will change unless 1 of 3 things happen and Manfred knows it:

    1. Raiders build on Coli site, leaving A’s stuck on Giants heads indefinitely thus causing Manfred to do what Selig wouldn’t do, open up San Jose and start building there ASAP or leave them as the SF A’s forever.

    2. Raiders leave, thus A’s get entire Coli to themselves, tear down current Coli, share with Giants for 3 seasons, and build a cathedral they have wanted for years in Oakland and pay for it with the development. This is what MLB, Manfred and Wolff want.

    3. San Jose is granted cert, thus forcing Manfred to open up SJ. Now Wolff has leverage on Giants and MB. I think if this occurs Wolff would have to take San Jose and run…..only because SJ fought so hard they deserve the team regardless if the Raiders stay or not. It wouldn’t be right not do to so if it comes to this……least likely.

    In the end, everyone wants the A’s stay in Oakland. I get that, but right now the A’s are stuck until the Raiders decide what they want to do.

    Manfred knows it…..

    • Good synopsis, Sid. Although I’ve always been a pro-SJ guy, the idea of the A’s filling the void left by the departing Warriors and Raiders is really intriguing. The clutter of a too-small three-team market would be gone and the A’s would own the East Bay.

    • Anyone know what the status of the SJ lawsuit is? Assumed they would petition SC fairly quickly-

      • Its possible that the SC will decide if they will hear the SJ vs MLB case by August (with the emphasis on later)

    • Sid,
      You’re an “OG” on this site as well…HAPPY 10 YEAR ANNIVERSARY!

  5. What was it, three years ago when Bud announced the A’s ballpark situation was on the “front burner?” Bunch of junk. Probably just like Manfred’s latest pronouncement.

  6. Nothing will ever change until the Giants let us move to San Jose. This needs to happen sooner than later Giants, you’ve already won 3 titles, give us a break!

    • The Giants have been clear and consistent. They will guard their own self interests fiercely when it comes to keeping MLB out of San Jose. If MLB wants to move the A’s to San Jose, it is going to happen because either a: San Jose wins at the Supreme Court or at least gets its case there or b: MLB is able to find buyers for the Giants franchise who would be willing to let the A’s go to the South Bay. The current ownership has shown no interest and has no incentive to do so at the moment.

      • Well, either that or Lew hasn’t come close to SFG’s price for opening up SJ.

      • Sierra Spartan nailed it! But it’s now appearing that Wolff either has to pay up BIG now for SJ…OR wait until after 2020 for SJ to open up; based on recent quotes from Fisher, Liccardo and Beane to name a few. Heck, even the A’s “10 year” lease supports this notion. Manfred may just turn out to be the commish that Selig never had the balls to be. Stay tuned…

      • What comments support that? I haven’t read any that don’t take a serious amount of twisting to support such a specific conclusion. Especially when San Jose is only mentioned as “we can’t talk about pending litigation.”

      • Liccardo mentioned over at SJ INSIDE “when this thing crosses the finish line in 10 years (2024)” in reference to a SJ ballpark, Beane talking about “7 years out” re an A’s ballpark and Fisher recently preaching extreme patience when it comes to a new A’s ballpark. This is what I based my “conclusion” on, and let me also add that it’s really just an oponion…which everyone here is entitled to.

        Re San Jose, interesting that Manfred won’t comment about it citing ongoing litigation. You’d think he’d just come out say San Jose is a dead issue… (?)

      • No. He wouldn’t just say “it’s a dead issue” when he is being sued for anti trust violations. That’d be really dumb.

  7. The A’s know full well their priorities concerning how and where they want to build their own new ballpark. At this point, the A’s have no choice but to wait for various scenarios to transpire . Only then, will they possibly be in a better situation to get the best new ballpark deal for their interests. Hopefully, we are getting to that point.

  8. The MLB commissioner could be demonstrating that MLB is out of the loop about the A’s/Oakland status. MLB officials are puzzled that Oakland officials could be favoring a new stadium for the Raiders (over a new stadium for the A’s) and possibly partially financing it – which they believe would be odd because an A’s ballpark would be used 81 times a season – an NFL stadium only 10 times. Most local fans know that Oakland officials have traditionally favored the Raiders over the A’s – so choosing to go with new digs for the Raiders should not be puzzling.

    • @duffer

      Perhaps MLB is in the loop, and on board with Wolff’s strategy of waiting Davis out, and indicating that they may turn on the San.Francisco Giants.
      Ok, all kidding aside It’s highly unlikely that MLB doesn’t understand all the complexities of this situation.

      • @LSN

        I concur. I just read an article that said New City is expecting both teams to be at the negotiating table with Oak/AlaCo. It also said the A’s have “9 years remaining” on their lease. All while showing pics of Coli City with the Warriors arena across 880.

        I laughed so hard my apple juice went through my nostrils and projected 18 feet across my living room and hit my dog while he was sleeping.

        If LW/MLB have no plan B based on the Raiders, then I promise to dress like Lady Gaga in public for a week. If people actually believe Wolff, Manfred, and even Baer have not been discussing this for a LONG time, I will eat 5 ghost peppers while dressed like Lady Gaga for 2 weeks. If people believe SJ is not the backup, along with a T-rights payoff amount agreed upon at least in theory, then I have to think of something even more bizarre to do.

        Schaaf said the Arena will stay for concerts. Perhaps I am wrong, but that building just might get in the way of new “plans,” right? Schaaf also offered both teams to present competing plans to compare with Kephart. AFAIK, Davis has no plan and the A’s haven’t presented one. So Coli City, which BTW Wolff has rejected, will be the only thing presented for Oakland? Why hasn’t Schaaf, or whomever, set a deadline for serious proposals. I add in “serious” because that would surely gauge the level of interest, no?

        The key here is that these people plan ahead. Years and even decades ahead. While we useless eaters are looking for the next great toy and continue buying lottery tickets, these people are planning, and arguably already know, what the next 20-30 years will look like for them.

        Perhaps I am wrong and late to the party specifics. Someone enlighten me please.

      • @Djhip

        I couldn’t agree more.

  9. I just simply hope Manfred stays true to his word.

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 )

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.