...the team.

I can still root for the team and dislike one of the players. I've done that before, but up to now it's been based more on performance instead of personality or anything else except for very rare cases.

I'll use Stephen Jackson of the Golden State Warriors as an example. After the brawl in Detroit that he was such a big part of, I wouldn't have minded if he was banished from the league forever. On one hand, I could see part of it as him having the backs of his teammates, but the larger part of me believed (and still does) that going into the crowd for any reason is inexcusable.

But, he was punished and he served his suspension. Now last year comes around and he gets traded to the Warriors, and pretty quickly he becomes a bit of a fan favorite because of the passion and energy he plays with. Yeah, he did (and still does) some things on the court that are dumb, but now I've seen how important he is to the success of the club after serving the suspension at the start of the season for the nightclub incident while he was still with Indiana.

The Warriors made him a team captain and he's taking on more responsibilities. He comes off as a great teammate, he's doing things in the community and while part of it may be meant to help improve his image, at least he's taking the time and making the effort. He brings the defense and a gritty toughness the team feeds off of.

In his case, he's making it easier for me to accept him and root for him because he does things I can appreciate. He also appears not to be the jerk and idiot I thought he was.

Milton Bradley is another example. Couldn't stand the guy until he came here, loved him in 2006, then when he went back to the same old crap this year I saw what 2006 really was to me: an anomaly. It could happen with Jackson, too. I hope not.

When it comes to Bonds, it's completely different. He's been in the Bay Area for a decade and a half with the Giants and during that time A's fans in general, while they may appreciate his abilities at the plate, have had a lot of time to see all the baggage that comes with him. People can say what they will about the media this, the media that - I say Barry Bonds is one of the biggest a-holes I've ever seen in the world of sports. As impressive a player as he's been, he is one of the last people I could ever bring myself to root for.

I've got a friend who absolutely cannot stand Mike Piazza and while she's a Giants fan first and foremost (which should explain the Piazza hate), she also likes the A's. When Piazza was here, she couldn't bring herself to root for him.

One reason I think my personal animosity toward Bonds is so strong is because we're in a two team market. It's that much stronger because the Giants are right across the bay. Imagining him in the green and gold is not something I can do.

To give an example of someone else, who would want to see John Lackey in an A's uniform? Yes, Sling Blade can pitch and he does it very well, but I despise the guy. As much as he'd help the A's, I never want to see him in an A's uniform. Again, same as Bonds as far as the end result goes.

At the same time, it's different with him. He's at the end of his career and has little left to offer as a regular bat in the lineup. He'd still be a potent bat but I think the only reason he's still even half the threat he is is because so many teams still walk him when they don't have to any more. He still put up some solid numbers last year but anyone watching him could see he's lost a step or two. At his age it's no wonder, but I fully believe it's only because of steroids that he's been able to last this long healthwise and put up the massive power numbers he has at such an old age when before the power surge he normally topped out around 40 HR a year. Then all of a sudden at age 35 he has five straight seasons of 45+. I know I don't need to go into all of those suspicions.

You might say "We're A's fans. Shouldn't we be used to the cloud of steroids hanging over our team? After all, Canseco pretty much did pioneer the steroid era." I don't buy that. Just because we've had players who have juiced in the past or are highly suspected of it doesn't mean we have to accept it. It's something I'm not happy about but I'm not naive enough to pretend it didn't happen here. We all know it did. So the idea is to go grab the sport's biggest - alleged - juicer of all? No thanks.

I just can't see the A's signing him except as a gimmick. Now that he's done with the Giants, now that he's facing a trial for perjury, here we go with ramped up talks about how the A's are the best chance for him because they're still local and just signing him for a year would fit in well. It'd get attention, it'd probably get some fans to come out, but at the same time I agree with the POV that the A's would be selling out by bringing him in. In the end they should do what they think helps the team the most, but we as fans have every right to shake our heads if it's a case like this.

Jeez, am I going all over the place or what? Point is, the A's are still my team. Signing Barry Bonds for a year won't change that and it won't change me rooting for them to do the best they can as a team. I just won't root for Bonds. He is not someone who will be getting my applause. Not now, not ever. I would hope anyone angry enough about it to cast their alliegance to the team aside would rethink it and at the worst just not pay much attention for a year then come back after that, but that's up to them. If anything, I'm kind of surprised there appear to be so many A's fans who are truly excited about bringing Bonds here when for so long the general consensus has been "Eff that guy."

I'll always love the A's.  It'll suck to have Bonds, but Rickey was pretty self-involved back in the day.  Reggie was a hot-dog before he hit NY.  Granted neither were the surly prick that Bonds is, but the Oakland clubhouse has had it's share of large egos (and hat sizes).  I really do hope that Bonds has somehow lost everything and will get cut in Spring Training.

As for the Las Vegas A's.  Do you still pull for the Devils or are you a Ducks fan?  I mean, I follow the Lakers down here in LA, and I like to see them succeed, but I still want the Kings (Sacto) to do better.  I watch the Angels and Dodgers, but still root for the A's.

I understand you had a different connection (in your youth) with the A's than alot of us on here did, but what's the difference between the Vegas A's and the Fremont A's?  Either way, they're still the most travelled franchise in baseball, and possibly sports, history.  For better or worse, they've seen alot of miles.  That history should be embraced.

My friends from Philly bemoan the losing their city seems to suffer from.  Whenever they get too bitter I always remind them of the five titles the Philadelphia Athletics won for their miserable city.  Of course, the other 45 years or so there were mostly abject failure.  But I only tell them that when they're feelin' good about the Eagles or talking about fucking Rocky.  

After all it's AN, not OAN.

And Blez, "in my 35-years of sports fanaticism"?  You don't type a day over 25.

I've got 10 bucks that every one of those letter writers wasn't going to games anyway.  The douches (like Paul Stewart) that claim to speak for everyone are even worse.  

None of them will be missed in the Coliseum this summer (2008).

A serious improvement to the lineup, and make everyone better around him.  I have actually talked to Barry Bonds, for about 30 seconds.  While waiting at a red light he pulled up next to me and we had a little chat.  He was very nice and nothing like what all the sports writers say.  I personally believe that Barry is a nice guy, its just that he does not like the media, and can you blame him?

Blez states...

"I just don't like players that are so wrapped up in themselves and not the team.  That's the thing that bugs me the most about Bonds."

Really? Cause I really don't care about all that.  The thing I care about most is the fact that he may have been a sterroid user.  But unlike the media, I choose to wait and let the REAL TRUTH come out in time.  I choose not to make judgements based on what the media says, cause half the stuff that they report is fake or blown out of proportion anyways. (Susan Slusser Anyone?!?!)

In fact, I think that everything Bonds does gets blown out of proportion by the media.  Many of the players around the league that have had contact with Barry, have nothing but good things to say about him.  I cant tell y'all how many hitters have had one session with Barry and come away better hitters, and better baseball players in general.  That is his quintessential effect as a teammate.  He makes everyone around him better, and thats what fans should care about, rather than little things blown out of proportion by the media.

I would like Bean to sign Bonds if the price makes it worth while.  Maybe then Chavy and Swish will become better hitters and the A's could actually compete next season, if everyone stays relatively healthy of course, but thats for another conversation.  Whatever direction Billy chooses I will never abandon my team regardless of the situation.  I am from Oakland, and will live and die with the decisions made as all true Oaklanders would.

Go A's!  See You In The Bleachers!!
OakFoSho

But, I'll be a bit upset at having to cheer for the man. I don't believe, yet, that he'll actually be a overall benefit to our team. The circus that surrounds him will be an intense distraction to our younger team.

I'd cheer his homeruns, applaud his RBIs, and be happy when he scores runs for this team. But, as soon as he leaves, I'll be waving him goodbye. :)

But, that's the future.

Here's hoping he doesn't come to our love-able A's.

Take any group of 25 people that has nothing specific in common other than that they've been star athletes since at least high school. If you spent time getting to know them all, how many of them would give you the impression "Jeez, that guy's a jerk"? At least 2 or 3? Ok, now look at the A's 2007 roster. Ok, that's more like 50 than 25, but the point is, someone you rooted for last year, someone we all rooted for, is a selfish primadonna a-hole who thinks they're God's gift to professional sports.

Who? I dunno. Aside from the actual games, we just see these guys on 5-second sound bytes on sports news. Why don't we know who it is? Maybe they're smart enough to see what happens when you piss off the media. Maybe they're more talented ass-kissers than Bonds. Maybe they just aren't good enough players to have cameras shoved in their faces 24/7 so we never get the chance to LEARN what pricks they are.

Every single athlete, jerk or not, is a human being, and like all the rest of us human beings, they have good days and bad. You catch me on a bad day, I'm not liable to have a kind word for anybody, but since I'm not an athlete you want signing your kid's baseball, how would you know?

Bonds used steroids? Yeah, probably. When Javier Herrera makes it up to the bigs, are we going to run him out of town? Because unlike Bonds, Herrera was actually caught using. What's the objection, he cheated? Not like there's a history of doing that in the sport or anything, right? He's a bad role model? See above. And if you're that worried about your kids, how about giving them some better role models than star athletes?

He's not nice to people? I've heard more than one story like OakFoSho's of them encountering Barry and him being perfectly nice. And I've also heard that sometimes he doesn't want to talk, shakes his head and walks on by. I can believe both of them. I dunno, maybe I'm not watching this game on the same emotional level as some other people are, but as nice as it is to hear that guys on my team a wonderful people, good samaritans, active in the community etc, I'm not watching these guys to fill an "awwww" quotient in my life. I'm watching baseball and hoping it'll be good baseball.

Barry Bonds plays good baseball, at least when he's hitting. Even if he's the biggest jerk in the clubhouse (which is by no means guaranteed), what the heck do I care? I'm not in that clubhouse.

Blez, I agree with you that adding Bonds would boost the gate totals in 2008 but what happens in 2009 when Bonds is gone? Do the A's keep those casual baseball fans that came over to watch the spectacle that is Bonds?

We know the A's will lose a core group for a very long time if they sign Bonds. Can they keep enough of the newcomers to make it worth while beyond 2008?

which is, of course I'll continue to root for the team. I'm an Oakland Athletics fan.

I renewed my season tickets, as usual.  As for where the line is drawn where I would abandon the A's... god, I don't know.  If signing Barry Bonds isn't it, maybe that line doesn't exist for me -- at least, it probably doesn't exist within reasonable behavior (and I do consider signing Bonds to be reasonable baseball business behavior).

I'd still HATE the signing, and I won't cheer for the f%#!er.  And I'll be really, really happy when he's gone.

if he can help us win one more game, welcome to our new DH.

A small bump, sure, but I'm not sure it'll be significant.

I think even the casual SF fan is more about the ball park and city experience than about Bonds.  Bonds is the story the Giants sold them; now it'll be a different story (..though I'm not sure what that would be...maybe the Cain/Lincecum thing..maybe just the sushi).

The point is, I think those people would still rather go to AT&T Park and watch a crappy team than come to the Coliseum to watch a good team with Bonds.  I think it's just like the Cub fan mentality -- the team sucks, but it's about the park, community and city experience.  The Coliseum doesn't offer that, Barry or not.

I am sure this was another rumor floated by the Bonds camp. No one is going to sign him; it certainly won't be collusion, but the Giants were the only team willing to deal with him previously due to their financial straits in mortgaged AT&T Park. No other team would put this guy in their uniform, at least until his legal troubles are resolved.

As is the feds' pattern when they go after high-profile criminals, they are not going to blow this indictment/trial. Bonds will be found guilty of perjury, he will end up on MLB's suspended list, and he will go to jail. The A's won't sign him, etc.

In the theoretical world, I would be against the signing for many reasons: 1) Bonds is a clubhouse cancer, and this goes back to his days at Arizona State; 2) Bonds represents everything that is wrong with major league baseball, and the A's don't need any more connections to illegal PED use; 3) The A's shoestring budget wouldn't mesh with Bonds' egotistical demands for money, even if he just wants to hang on for 3,000 hits; 4) The fan reaction would be mostly negative, and since the A's stink on the field, they really can't afford to lose too many more fans; 5) If the A's are going to spend money on a free agent (or six?), they need to spend it on an everyday player who will be in the lineup for 162 games. That isn't Bonds.

On a personal level, I detest Barry Bonds and everything he stands for. Through 1998, I could respect him as a ballplayer for his abilities. Post-1998, he's become O.J. Simpson in my mind.

If the A's sign Bonds I immediately cancel my season tickets. I'll still go to a game or two (mostly for my 11 year old son)--but some casual Bay Area baseball fan or Giants fan will be welcome to my season seats.
 The fanbase will be impacted badly. Wolff will undoubtedly make some more money but think about all the "Bonds only" followers at the Coliseum. Yuck.

is only baseball, either you watch or you don't.  Like it or not, Baseball is a Billion dollar industry, and the fans, who claim they will leave, will be replaced by the many more who will come to see the train wreck, not including the increased media.  Everyone always talks about NOONE EVER TALKS ABOUT THE A'S, now we can get a player, who wil get the A's talked about, and you don't want him because he used steroids.  I frankly don't care what he used, he is not a role model for me, or my children, and even when we go to the games, I will cheer. I refuse to believe that everyone on this site, has not done one thing, in there lifes, that could be seen as dishonest, or cheating.  Never cheated on a test, on your taxes, got something from a store, that the clerk either didn't ring up at all, or rang up the wrong price.  Who are we to decide what is morally reprihensible.  He has to live with his choices, and until the courts convict him, at that time he will be roommates with Mike Vick, but as long as MLB lets him play, then he hasn't broken the MLB rules.

it was hard to deal with bill romanowski on the team. that guy is not only into steroids, but a vile human being (spitting in a guys face on the field). What I had to do was learn to root for the (team name) on the front of the jersey.

Ill jump in...

1. Who here has met Barry personally?

I have and have spent time with his friends and family. All great by the way. Anyone else?

2. Is Barry still on steroids?

No.

3. Still hitting jacks w/ OBP above .400?

Yes.

4. Is his price going to go up after they decide when the court case will be?

Yes. He is cheapest now. Buy now. No play no pay no problem.

5. Do I want to see the A's on the top of the freakin list to the right?

Yes.

6. Was I there for the 1989 World Series?

Yes.

7. Was half of the flippin team on it?!

YES! (Half of freakin baseball was juicing)

8. Do I want a team of lovable losers with Byrnes and Scutaro at every position?

No.

9. Go Billy Get Barry.

Ill buy season tickets to watch Barry play and watch the A's compete against the damn Angels. I already have front row seats and ill buy more to see Barry win with the A's

10. GO A'S!