Oakland A's Relocating

Peter Gozintite said:
Fuck the As. I also read an article just now. The only thing secured is the land. They don't even have plans for the stadium drawn up, or an approved budget. There is no money in place to build anything. This is still not a done deal by any means
Click to expand...
Over the past couple of years that Vegas has been rumored as a possible destination, have you heard any local positive buzz about the franchise coming there?
 
RP-29 said:
Over the past couple of years that Vegas has been rumored as a possible destination, have you heard any local positive buzz about the franchise coming there?
Click to expand...
Pete hates baseball so you're going to get a biased response..
 
Oakland was one of the first 4 sports cities in the west coast and now they’re soon to have no professional sports in town.

Seals were contracted
Warriors moved across the Bay
Raiders left for LA, came back and then left for Vegas
Now the A’s are leaving town too

All other than the Seals were pretty successful while in Oakland.

I think the title of worst sports town in America goes to Oakland without much competition
 
RP-29 said:
Over the past couple of years that Vegas has been rumored as a possible destination, have you heard any local positive buzz about the franchise coming there?
Click to expand...
No. The only thing I hear is"we aren't paying for it"

If it goes to vote, and they want tax payers to foot the bill, it isn't going to happen. We almost got fucked royally by the COVID shit, when building the Raiders stadium.

With the economy in shambles, there is no fucking way the public will vote to foot the bill. Absolutely no way right now.
 
Illustrious Potentate said:
I think the title of worst sports town in America goes to Oakland without much competition
Click to expand...
Agreed; although you can't even really call it a sports town anymore now because there's no major sports franchises left.

I've read that the city itself has gone to complete shit over the past decade, too. These franchises seem to be a product of their environment. Maybe if Oakland has some major future revitalization similar to the last decade in Detroit they might someday become a sports town again.
 
Peter Gozintite said:
No. The only thing I hear is"we aren't paying for it"

If it goes to vote, and they want tax payers to foot the bill, it isn't going to happen. We almost got fucked royally by the COVID shit, when building the Raiders stadium.

With the economy in shambles, there is no fucking way the public will vote to foot the bill. Absolutely no way right now.
Click to expand...
Nor should they, even in a great economy. IMO, sports teams in the US should be like the ones in Europe, if a team want a new stadium, then they should pay for it.
 
rsw626 said:
Nor should they, even in a great economy. IMO, sports teams in the US should be like the ones in Europe, if a team want a new stadium, then they should pay for it.
Click to expand...
I guess it’s not my tax dollars, since I don’t live in Cobb County, but the new Braves stadium is one of the few things I wouldn’t have minded my taxes going towards.

We don’t need to take lessons from Europe. We’ve either kicked or saved the ass of pretty well every worthless country over there
 
rsw626 said:
Nor should they, even in a great economy. IMO, sports teams in the US should be like the ones in Europe, if a team want a new stadium, then they should pay for it.
Click to expand...
I get why some communities choose to do it - a sports franchise can pump extra money into the local economy, making the public investment worth the cost. It's heavily situational. Having billionaire owners demand public funding for new stadiums is ridiculous, though - especially if the proposed location of the stadium has no positive impact on the local economy.

For example, Lambeau Field directly effects the local economy - it's a huge boon for Green Bay businesses and the surrounding municipalities. American Family Field - on the other hand - brings very little direct local economic revenue to surrounding businesses as 99% of visitors drive in, park in the designated lot, tailgate, watch the game, then leave all in that rather isolated environment. Virtually no one visiting stops for fuel or food or a hotel room anywhere near the stadium. Both are great environments to catch sporting events, but the environments are very different. Public funding for Lambeau? Definitely. Public funding for AmFam? Yeah, not so much. (And that is actually a rather hot issue right now as our state government is trying to sell the taxpayers on funding AmFam repairs.)
 
RP-29 said:
I get why some communities choose to do it - a sports franchise can pump extra money into the local economy, making the public investment worth the cost. It's heavily situational. Having billionaire owners demand public funding for new stadiums is ridiculous, though - especially if the proposed location of the stadium has no positive impact on the local economy.

For example, Lambeau Field directly effects the local economy - it's a huge boon for Green Bay businesses and the surrounding municipalities. American Family Field - on the other hand - brings very little direct local economic revenue to surrounding businesses as 99% of visitors drive in, park in the designated lot, tailgate, watch the game, then leave all in that rather isolated environment. Virtually no one visiting stops for fuel or food or a hotel room anywhere near the stadium. Both are great environments to catch sporting events, but the environments are very different. Public funding for Lambeau? Definitely. Public funding for AmFam? Yeah, not so much. (And that is actually a rather hot issue right now as our state government is trying to sell the taxpayers on funding AmFam repairs.)
Click to expand...
Yeah, Lambeau is a unique situation, as the Packers are owned by the community so to speak, and it does directly bring a ton of money to the community.
 
RP-29 said:
The Raiders have a much greater national following than the A's do. The average prospective Vegas fan isn't gonna care about the franchise's history; I think they're gonna care a lot more if the franchise is their own instead of their step-franchise.
Click to expand...

no, fuck that. they gotta stay the A's.
 
navamind said:
Fuck the A's owners and fuck Oakland. Sad to see this happen to such a storied franchise.

That being said, I will not miss the Coliseum. Just a travesty of a stadium.
Click to expand...
Well I am 61 and grew up in the Bay Area. Loved going to the Coliseum and seeing those 1972, 1973, 1974 teams in person. Last great team before free agency took over and they were gutted. But being 11 in 1972 good times. A true dynasty at the time. Long since have lost interest in baseball but great memories. Also remember going to games in 1978 when 1000 or so fans there. Odds were good for a foul ball. All those years in Oakland the "fans" never really took to them like the Giants unless they were great. Oakland just not a baseball town. Never was. Lucky they lasted there this long. Are the A's owners some of the richest in baseball? Can anyone confirm? If they suck in Vegas we'll see what happens. Really no suburbs in Vegas like the Bay Area to support an 81 game home season unless they are great in a 35K stadium. We'll see.
 
Illustrious Potentate said:
Oakland was one of the first 4 sports cities in the west coast and now they’re soon to have no professional sports in town.

Seals were contracted
Warriors moved across the Bay
Raiders left for LA, came back and then left for Vegas
Now the A’s are leaving town too

All other than the Seals were pretty successful while in Oakland.

I think the title of worst sports town in America goes to Oakland without much competition
Click to expand...
Charlie Finley owned the A’s and Seals. I think he made the Seals wear white skates. The Seals funded the A’s where Finley sold to fund the A’s at the time. I believe Seals made one if the worst trades early on when they made a trade with the Canadians that ended up Guy Lafleur. Seals probably would have been successful if founded 15 years later and/or Charlie Finley wasn’t the owner. Finley one of the worst sports owners ever and he owned 2 Oakland teams.
 
MrFlyingV said:
Well I am 61 and grew up in the Bay Area. Loved going to the Coliseum and seeing those 1972, 1973, 1974 teams in person. Last great team before free agency took over and they were gutted. But being 11 in 1972 good times. A true dynasty at the time. Long since have lost interest in baseball but great memories. Also remember going to games in 1978 when 1000 or so fans there. Odds were good for a foul ball. All those years in Oakland the "fans" never really took to them like the Giants unless they were great. Oakland just not a baseball town. Never was. Lucky they lasted there this long. Are the A's owners some of the richest in baseball? Can anyone confirm? If they suck in Vegas we'll see what happens. Really no suburbs in Vegas like the Bay Area to support an 81 game home season unless they are great in a 35K stadium. We'll see.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of people in vegas
 
RP-29 said:
Whatever A's fans still exist are undoubtedly bailing on that franchise as of today. The franchise would be better off completely rebranding themselves in Vegas - drop the Athletics nickname and start over as if it was an expansion franchise.
Click to expand...
Won't happen and really shouldn't happen if you follow the A's history. They started out in Phila, then moved to Kansas City then onto Oakland. Remained the A's the entire time
 
Illustrious Potentate said:
It’s up to ownership to pony up so they don’t have to sell off their good players and be in a perpetual cycle of selling, rebuilding and contending for a few years. They need to sign some top free agents and extend some home grown stars.

Don’t be the Marlins, the Yankees would fall out of favor in New York if they were ran like the Marlins.

It’s gonna take a culture change and a philosophy change, but a name change is irrelevant
Click to expand...
You gotta know your market. The Yankees' model works because of their market. The Yankees' model also works in Boston, LA, and whatever the Angels currently claim to be.

I would think LV would be pretty hungry for baseball and its not a major stretch travel wise from the neighboring states.

That being said, the major pro sports have long attempted to separate themselves from the organized gambling world and that is no longer a factor. Now that they are fully embracing it, there is a major cash haul waiting for them
 
Last edited:
rsw626 said:
Nor should they, even in a great economy. IMO, sports teams in the US should be like the ones in Europe, if a team want a new stadium, then they should pay for it.
Click to expand...
In theory that sounds great. However the European economy isn't our economy. Plus, most of our major league franchises receive some subsidies from the Federal and/or state governments. An emphasis on minority hiring isn't just a nice thing to do by these teams, there are financial strings attached and this is just one example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top