Bill Simmons of The Ringer (formerly of ESPN) popularized a term when the Seattle SuperSonics were purchased by Clay Bennett and moved to Oklahoma City. The term was “Zombie Sonics” and stuck with me all these years. The franchise, renamed Oklahoma City Thunder, hasn’t yet won a championship in OKC. They went to the finals a decade ago and had a good run of competitiveness in the early 2010’s, petering out as their three stars (Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden) were eventually traded. (Yes, there’s some symmetry with the A’s of that era.) Lately the Thunder is following up a fallow rebuilding period with a new run of competitive teams, though it’s remarkable that in the entire 15-year period the franchise has been in OKC, they had only four losing seasons.
I point this out because the A’s are entering their own Zombie Sonics era. Whether they stay in the Coliseum for one or more seasons or play their interim years in Sacramento, Salt Lake City, or Summerlin, the A’s are entering their own “wander the desert” phase while they wait for their future home in Las Vegas to open. Seattle fans cursed Bennett for his subterfuge and to a certain extent Howard Schultz for allowing the Sonics to be sold to a “thief.” Nevertheless, Bennett hasn’t exactly suffered despite the undoubtedly numerous voodoo dolls and burned effigies made to curse him. Keep that in mind as you wish for John Fisher’s demise. He may have to sell due to incompetently running the franchise during this entirely awkward transition period. Regardless, he’ll still make a mint selling the A’s even with the flip tax imposed upon him if he has to sell early, and MLB wants Vegas to work. They’re committed to make it work with or without Fisher.
This week, Oakland got a good amount of attention when it was revealed that the A’s are looking for a short-term post-2024 lease extension at the Coliseum. A’s ownership visited both Sacramento and Salt Lake City a couple weeks ago. It appears that the owners and Rob Manfred are running out of patience with John Fisher to commit to playing somewhere during these interim years. If the A’s play in Oakland, they’ll get to keep their $70 million annual haul from NBC Sports California, which would be TBD much less in Sacramento and zero further east. Oracle Park remains a possibility, though the Giants apparently aren’t interested in hosting the A’s for more than a handful of games at any stretch. Oakland officials led by Mayor Sheng Thao and her Chief of Staff Leigh Hanson are putting up a strong front, demanding an expansion franchise for The Town and a share of the A’s cable TV money. Oakland and sympathetic media are painting this as having the A’s over a barrel, but the truth is that this is pretty standard negotiation tactics. Both sides know what the other wants: the A’s, MLB, and MLBPA wants stability, while the City of Oakland wants promises that MLB can’t really provide in 2024.
Manfred recently announced his plan to retire at the end of his current term in 2029, which will bring his tenure to 15 years. Manfred, whose general vibe is that of a corporate lawyer, was never going to be the great savior of baseball that many fans wished for, bringing it back on par with football while getting rid of blackouts. He was hired to keep the ship of baseball moving in the same direction, which was marked in the late 20th Century by new ballparks and huge regional sports network annual payouts. The current generation of ballparks is due for refurbishment or replacement. RSNs are in a culling phase as more consumers cut the cord, creating a huge inequity between large and small market teams. The A’s are caught in-between, a large market team with small market revenues and TV ratings that will move to small market and cement its place as a revenue sharing recipient in a few years. Yet MLB and the owners are perfectly fine with this, voting 30-0 to relocate the franchise. Why? They’re gambling on the idea that tourist dollars will make up for the small fanbase. Is that fair? Of course not. It’s also unfair that Oakland has never built a ballpark for the A’s either publicly or privately, while lavishing attention on the Raiders and basically killing the prospects for major pro sports. I started my blog with the idea that the A’s would get some kind of ballpark in the Bay Area before I gave up. Sadly, the powers that be gave up before I did, and we all have to live with the fallout.
That leaves Oakland in the pool of expansion candidates, though Manfred indicated that awarding expansion franchises was not going to occur during his term. Instead, he would help create the framework by which his successor would award the teams. Frankly, that’s the kind of prudent, boring planning I would expect from Manfred. His job in 2024 is to get the post-RSN landscape settled, negotiate the next national television deals (current ones expire in 2028), and squeeze whatever public funds he can from existing MLB cities. The Vegas deal opened the door for much of the discussion you’re hearing in Kansas City, Chicago (White Sox), and Baltimore, with more to come. Unfortunately, Manfred was never going to be Kennesaw Mountain Landis. He’s really the CEO of a $11 Billion company, and his charges are the 30 teams.
Then what does that mean for expansion? Preferably, MLB should expand to 32 teams and split into 8 divisions of 4 teams each like the NFL. That’s unlikely to happen before, say, 2030, for a simple reason. Many advocates of expansion like to cite the influx of franchise fees, which should be $2 Billion per team or more by the time it happens. The downside is future national revenue has to be shared 32 ways instead of 30, which is the current regime. Young leagues like MLS can go on huge expansion pushes to encourage franchise valuation growth while serving emerging soccer markets. That’s not going to happen in MLB, which is past its peak from a popularity standpoint compared to the NFL and NBA. There are no obvious new revenue sources to tap in baseball, thanks to the demise of RSNs and heightened competition within the sports industry. MLB’s scheduling model requires an even number of teams at all times, which complicates expansion efforts far more than for other sports. The 1969 expansion was spurred by Kansas City meriting a franchise thanks to Missouri Senator Stuart Symington threatening baseball’s antitrust exemption. That caused MLB to birth the Seattle Pilots before a proper MLB venue was ready, which then led to the Bud Selig buying the Pilots and moving them to Milwaukee, which had previously lost the Braves to Atlanta. Seattle had to wait until 1976 and the KingDome to get the Mariners. MLB plans its expansion efforts to avoid the late 60’s upheaval. 1969’s expansion was rushed by the A’s 1968 move and the associated fallout, which birthed the Pilots, Royals, Padres, and Expos as expansion teams in keeping with the expansion-in-pairs requirement. These days, MLB demands MLB-ready venues for expansion, which wasn’t the case with Sicks Stadium in Seattle. For Oakland to win a future MLB or NFL franchise, it has to launch a competitive bid that includes both a stadium with a large public financing component and a well-heeled ownership group. Or as Tim Kawakami put it yesterday:
That’s the market, and unfortunately for Oakland, the much higher price to be in the big leagues. Like it or not, Oakland is being relegated. It has a colorful history that peaked as a sports city decades ago. Now it’s making efforts to bring in minor league teams like the Ballers and Roots. Both teams pitch themselves as community-minded and not requiring big public subsidies. Which is all well and good if they can deliver, but remember that minor and independent league teams are known for instability and volatility. It’s the nature of the beast. Look at how many places the Roots have called home: Laney, CSU East Bay, and in the future, the Malibu lot next to the Coliseum if everyone else can get on the same page. The Ballers have a few months to refurbish the field at Raimondi Park in West Oakland into a suitable venue for their upstart Pioneer League team. Again, that sounds good on the surface, but what will it take to make it work? Oakland will probably have to drive out the homeless population, the same one driven out of the Wood Street encampment not long ago. There will be friction. They will need things like 24×7 security to prevent theft and vandalism, and rezoned parking around the park to get rid of people living in their cars there. In other words, gentrification. All for teams that don’t merit much local or regional coverage. If the whole point of building the Coliseum was to put Oakland on the map, the minors is what happens when the mapmakers reduce the font size of Oakland to something less prominent.
Personally, I’m in the Bay Area this weekend visiting friends and family. I plan to come back on May 8, the day of the doubleheader between the A’s and Rangers at the Coliseum. I figured it might be a poetic last visit to the Coliseum, as my first visit was also a midweek doubleheader in 1988, a summer sweep of Cleveland in which Dennis Eckersley saved both games and the A’s looked nigh invincible. If May 8 is the last doubleheader for the last season in Oakland Athletics history, I will be there. I hope it’s not the last doubleheader or the last season. Yet I have to get ready for the next phase like all other A’s fans. Change is inevitable, and denial leaves you hoping a minor league team will fill the void in your heart, or praying for a miracle.
-=-=-
P.S. – Based on Joe Lacob’s recommendation, I might head to Chuck’s Donuts in Redwood City today. I am in the neighborhood. Towards the end of this interview with Tim Kawakami, Lacob gives what is now his standard non-answer about the A’s.
P.P.S. – A list of recent teams that were forced to play in interim venues while new ones were built or existing ones were refurbished:
- Arizona Coyotes (2022-current)
- Toronto Blue Jays (2020-2021)
- Los Angeles Chargers (2017-2019)
- Los Angeles Rams (2016-2019)
- New Orleans Hornets (2005-2006)
- New Orleans Saints (2005)
- Washington Nationals (2005-2007)
- Memphis Grizzlies (2001-2004)
- Tennessee Titans (1995-1998)
newballpark.org 
The Chicago Bears played the entire 2002 season in Champaign, IL as well.
Oakland to John Fisher: What have you done for me lately?
Don’t forget the Vikings playing at the outdoor U of Minnesota field and the Seahawks playing at UW on the lake
The Rams played at Busch Stadium 2 for the first few games while waiting for the Edward Jones Dome to be finished.
The Ravens also played two years at Memorial Stadium
First of all, $#@% the S.F. lovin, biased as &$#@% TK! After all these years needed to get that off my chest RM.
I’m all for Vegas for the A’s, especially because after all these years Oakland still can’t do anything for anyone money-wise. That said, if MLB’s formula for success in Vegas in tourist dollars, that’s utter stupidity at its finest and a recipe for gate disaster! Are you kidding me?! It may “work” for the Raiders (even if they haven’t had a home game since they left Oakland), but MLB with its 81+ homes games, most during the work week, is a completely different animal.
So let’s see: you gave up a sure fire opportunity in $an Jose, with a naming rights partner, land deal, massive corporate support, deep pocketed investors and an existing fan base/TV rights deal just to take a huge gamble on an inferior market?! All just to satisfy ONE TEAM and it’s ultra-greedy owners?! Best interest of baseball my @ss! STUPID!!
You know RM, the more I watch European soccer, the more I despise American sports. Every city (or even districts of large cities like London) has its own football club firmly rooted in the community for generations, with never a worry about an owner relocating to another city/district in the name of greed. Must be nice..
@ML- you going to be like lame ass raiders fans and still root for the A’s in Las Vegas?
Your non belief that Mark Davis was right and two stadiums could have been built while each shared for 3 years with the niners/giants shows how naive you are.
I owe you one for 2011…….now see the true evil of the A’s ownership when they could just right now build at the coliseum? Own it all….
Davis loved that site and saw potential while the A’s cry when they own half the land and can make it work…….develop it. You are like selig, mandred and Wolff/fisher and throw in that dirt bag Kaval.
If the niners, dubs (season ticket holder to both) Giants, sharks, and A’s left?
I’d hate them forever……..”that’s the market”???
Please……..A’s have zero excuses not to build at the coliseum and stay. It’s guys like you that make laugh……ur blog is done. Let it go…..
Your apologetic attitude is awful…..
Sid, you should’ve seen the JPA meeting earlier today. They have a staff of maybe 3 people. They can’t figure out how to do anything. The city and county are waiting for the Coliseum Authority to die. The area around the Coli is barren. And you think the A’s should be champing at the bit to rebuild there? I once believed in the Coliseum too, but the only people who do now are scavengers picking the bones off the place.
As for me, I left the Bay Area in 2014. I go back 2-3 times a year. That’s my last remaining link to the place. If the Bay can’t get out of its own way to solve its problems, it’s not my worry. That goes triple for Oakland, which has made mistake after mistake in dealing with the teams due to feckless administration after feckless administration. They somehow lost In-n-Out, the most bulletproof restaurant chain in America. Run a city better, and maybe teams will want to build there.