(Blank) Athletics of Fremont
by coberloco on Jul 1, 2008 9:22 PM PDT
60 comments
Lew Wolfe was on the Angels' broadcast of the A's / Angels game tonight, where he stated that the team would be known as, "The 'blank' at Fremont" stating that there were still some issues to work out before the exact name would be known.
Let's assume that they will keep the name A's/Athletics.
That leaves open the possibility of "the blank realistically being being either "Oakland", "Bay Area", or "San Jose".
Personally, I think it sucks.
I call the Angels, "Los Anaheimgeles" because of their name. Now we are going to do it too? What's next, "Dallas Rangers at Arlington"? "Bronx Yankees"?
What are your thoughts? Do you like it or dislike it? What do you think the name should be?
Have some fun with it or give a piece of your mind.
1 recs |
60 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Well...
...it will be nice to have company when the fans from other teams make fun of our names.
by Rev Halofan on Jul 1, 2008 9:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
None of the above
They could go with something like the California Athletics of Fremont, or Northern California, or who knows what else.
by karl_lien on Jul 1, 2008 10:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree
Beane has said before that they can go the route the Warriors do, like Golden State. Witht the name California, it can bring in more revenue in merchandise sales. If the Angels can use LA then there’s a chance it can be the San Francisco Athletics of Fremont. :-(
by What Would Rickey Do on Jul 1, 2008 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lew already said that Oakland will NOT be in the name
and frankely, who blames him? After all, Oakland does not come with a good image for a team, either with the City of Oakland’s image through out the Bay Area, State and Country, as well as being associated wth the Raiders.
In discussions on AN and the A’s Ballpark Blog, we’ve kind of narrowed it down to San Jose Athletics at Fremont and Silicon Valley Athletics at Fremont.
Though it would be very very weird if they change the Athletics name itself, which I don’t really see happening, but who knows?
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jul 1, 2008 10:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"Oakland does not come with a good image for a team"
There was a time when the whole Bay Area was proud (or jealous) of the OAKLAND A’s, and we had great attendance. If Lew was such a goddamn business genius he’d figure out a way to bring that back. I guess if Lew keeps telling you that Oakland and the Coliseum are bad long enough, you’re all going to believe him. Talk about drinking the Koolaid.
by Brian in 317 on Jul 2, 2008 8:13 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree that the most likely name is one not in the poll,
“Silicon Valley A’s at Fremont”.
It has the dual benefit of being all-inclusive/revenue friendly, and yet not directly claiming a city it isn’t connected to. That’s what annoys me about “San Jose A’s at Fremont” and “San Fran A’s at Fremont”.
"The painting was a gift, Todd. I'm taking it with me." -Wedding Crashers
by notsellingjeans on Jul 1, 2008 10:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That is the bar none worst name for a sports team in human history
God, I hope they do not pick that.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 1, 2008 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a five-tool bad name
- References an amorphous made-up geographic place the boundaries of which no one can agree upon.
- Will give rise to an endless number of Silicone jokes (though the Lima family may profit).
- Though I thought this impossible, will alienate partisans of both Oakland and San Jose.
- AT Fremont would join the pantheon of useless appendages, alongside “nipples on men,” and “a glove in Frank Thomas’ locker.”
- As the Rev correctly points out, would rob us of a valuable point we can laud over the Angels, leaving only our superior mascot, innate Bay Area coolness, and our more extensive collection of World Series trophies.
How do the angels get to sleep when the devil leaves the porchlight on?
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jul 1, 2008 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
My money's still on ...
The South Bay A’s at Fremont, with SVA@F as the next likeliest.
Mind you, I don’t like either. But it won’t throw me into a mikeAeian shame spiral.
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is difficult and painful for me to imagine
rooting for the SJ@F or SV@F A’s. If they eschew the A’s and go with something like the SJ Cybercats (the worst name in the history of professional sports) it will be all over for me.
Lew Wolff:
He closes down my favorite seats, the result of which is that I go to far fewer games than I did in ‘05 and prior.
This team-naming is shaping up as an incredible debacle that will bring shame to every A’s fan.
Lew is so proud of his idea that he crows about it on Angels’ tv, bragging about his emulation of the Angels’ franchise model (there is plenty to like there, to be sure, but not the things Lew emphasizes.)
The two biggest reasons I root for this team is “Oakland” and my love of the unis. My fanhood cannot survive a change in both. The inevitable name change will upset me greatly, and the venue change will also upset me greatly , but I can get over that. If they change much else beyond that, I am not on board, and that makes me sad.
I hope the Fremont pols kick up a fuss and delay this….
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jul 1, 2008 11:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why I'
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jul 1, 2008 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
m unhappy with Lew:
He has his business plan, maybe not a bad plan, whatever.
But he feels the need to rub his plans in the faces of actual A’s fans when such plans are anathema to actual A’s fans. He wants to replace current A’s fans with new, additional, South Bay fans. Fine. But don’t rub it in our faces.
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Jul 1, 2008 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yet you (and I) have no problem with signing Bonds for purely mercenary/utilitarian/capitalist reasons
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 9:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
Wolff ignores, at least while the team remains at the Coliseum, all the good examples Moreno has set in marketing and improving the ballpark experience. Then, as all but the most hard-core fans (and in some cases them as well) stop coming to games, he goes on TV and says, “gee whiz, I don’t know why attendance is so bad, I guess Oakland just can’t support this team.” And adds something about how he wants to copy Moreno’s team’s stupid fucking name.
A pox on all his condos.
"May a nit suck Cajun geese?" wonders Red. No, we see gnu Jack Cust in a yam.
by andeux on Jul 2, 2008 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wolff's Interview
Was a real slap in the face to Oakland A’s Fans. I listened to it, and I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. He took no responsibilty for low attendance figures. None.
by Colorado Fan on Jul 2, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what's more, this approach is penny-wise/pound-foolish
Crywolffisher seem to think they can CTRL-ALT-DEL the fanbase, and that SHINEE NEW STADYUM PLUS LUXXXURY BLING!!! will be sufficient to generate both a surge of initial sales (of season-tickets and homes) as well as reliable y-y sales.
I think Lew’s experience as a luxury hotelier is coloring his perceptions and projections of what it takes to make a pro sports franchise (which, granted, in this day and age does approach something more of a W Hotel-style affluent lifestyle experience) succeed. There’s a significant component that is much more consumer-oriented than client- or guest-oriented.
Arte, as you say, gets that. I don’t think Crywolffisher do.
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Golden State Athletics At Fremont
Yeah now that has a good ring to it
Brandon Marshall is a BEAST!!!!
by TommyTSlice on Jul 1, 2008 11:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm fine
with just Golden State Athletics
Procrastinators unite....tomorrow
by muffinpryde on Jul 2, 2008 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like a workout club
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on Jul 2, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Golden State A's
Procrastinators unite....tomorrow
by muffinpryde on Jul 2, 2008 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn't the warrior's
have that name legally locked up?
"...in baseball you wear a cap." -- george carlin
by Hot Cup Joe on Jul 2, 2008 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d prefer they just stay the Oakland Athletics. But if they move to Fremont and need to include it in the name they should just be the Fremont Athletics and drop all of this stupid “at” and “of” crap.
by drmmerchk on Jul 2, 2008 12:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Its hard to be optimist prime when...
a. Lew says our name is going to be _ at Fremont
b. Alan Embree’s name is announced
I feel the same impending doom in each case. Why do they have to screw with us?
"I'm seeing more and more Paul-baiting these days."
by OptimistPrime on Jul 2, 2008 1:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Alan Embree's At Fremont
I feel sick
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jul 2, 2008 2:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oakland.
At this point, I could care less if Oakland was in the team name. That city appears to want nothing to do with the team, and does nothing but dampen the teams chances for growth. We’ve been talking about a new stadium in Oakland since the Raiders came back, and it still hasn’t materialized. If Oakland could support the A’s it would be great, but when you have a contending team that averages less than 20k, thats pathetic.
Personally, I don’t get worked up to much over the city name. That is, as long as it gives fair representation to the city that has done the work to bring the team there. They could be the “South/East Bay A’s at Fremont” for all I care. What does matter to me is that we keep the name the A’s, which seems to be the case. More importantly than that, I hope we keep the green and gold with the white shoes. Thats one of the cool minor details of the franchise that stands out, but it seems like every new owner changes the unis to put their own spin on the team. Thats probably my biggest fear, in light of trying to sell more merchandise, Wolfe changes the colors to a bland unoriginal navy and white scheme.
What about Barry?
"Barry who?" Forst said, and I felt like I was in the middle of a knock-knock joke.
by KMoAsFan on Jul 2, 2008 7:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
As an NRAF,
and one who’s shamefully never crossed the bay to Oakland at that, I’m in love with the Oakland title. I know Oakland’s reputation, know some people from there, and understand that the city is giving no love to our A’s. Still, it will be a huge disappointment to change it. Just look at the beauty of this logo:
by dscel on Jul 2, 2008 7:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
East Bay A's
Though I personally would be able to work with this, it lacks the specific city limits inherent in just about every other MLB team.
I love my “Oakland” jersey and won’t trade it for anything. But I think we have to avoid the 2 cities in one team name.
I’m still praying for the Fremonters to rise up and say “not in my town” or something to that affect.
It's just more exciting with Billy Beane running the team.
by ru155 on Jul 2, 2008 7:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like it
East Bay A’s has been my favorite choice – it encompasses more than just Oakland, a town of population 200,000 can’t have a team named after it (unless you’re Green Bay), it rhymes, and using the whole Bay Area name would also include SF – can’t have that.
East Bay A’s, definitely.
by NYC A's Fan on Jul 2, 2008 8:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"East Bay" excludes San Jose conceptually
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As a Dead Kennedys fan
I could accept the East Bay Rays.
How do the angels get to sleep when the devil leaves the porchlight on?
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Jul 2, 2008 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Golde State A's has a nice ring to it
"just a beating heart ... plasma that we'll put into our uniform." - Billy Beane
by athleticsBB4life on Jul 2, 2008 8:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Oakland Athletics
The A’s aren’t moving to Fremont so don’t worry about it.
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Jul 2, 2008 8:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hm, I see someone hasn't moved past the "denial" stage
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jul 2, 2008 8:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve been denying it since 1972. The A’s aren’t moving to Denver/Miami/Phoenix/Denver/Sacramento/Portland/Las Vegas/Washington DC. I haven’t been wrong yet.
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Jul 2, 2008 8:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Do you really think the A's will stay in Oakland forever?
The team has had very little success as a business since moving to Oakland. Why do you think there is constantly a new idea to move the team? Eventually that pressure is going to give way and the team is going to move, whether it be Fremont or one of the cities you mentioned above. And the current owner is the most committed to doing so.
by GusanoQuemador on Jul 2, 2008 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Money
The A’s owners have seen the owners of other teams swindle the taxpayers to get huge public investments in their teams. The A’s owners want a piece of the action, too. They aren’t going to get it from Oakland. They can no longer threaten to move to Denver, Phoenix, Washington, etc., because those cities have teams now. They can’t move to San Jose because the Giants won’t allow it. It woudn’t be profitable for them to move to smaller markets so they’re left with Oakland or the suburbs. Suburbs like Fremont can’t afford to the give the A’s what they want so I think they’ll stay in Oakland.
Oakland has been profitable for them. I think the owners will find that if they commit to Oakland, Oakland will support the team better. So long as threats to leave are hanging over the fans’ heads, the locals will not make strong emotional or monetary investments in the team. The Haas family were the only A’s owners who recognized this and the A’s drew very well when they operated the team.
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Jul 2, 2008 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm still not sure exactly what you're trying to say
“The A’s owners want a piece of the action, too”
They are actually trying to use the sale of condos and homes in the development to fund the building of the stadium, not the use of tax dollars.
“Suburbs like Fremont can’t afford to the give the A’s what they want so I think they’ll stay in Oakland”
The A’s actually feel that Fremont is the most ideal place to put a team because of it’s proximity to so many population hubs: Oakland, Pleasanton, Fremont, San Jose, and Palo Alto.
“Oakland has been profitable for them”
Perhaps…But only because the team has historically had the one of the lowest payrolls in all of baseball since arriving in Oakland. That’s not the most ideal way to maintain profitability from a fan’s perspective as well as an owner’s.
“The Haas family were the only A’s owners who recognized this and the A’s drew very well when they operated the team”
In their best year they drew 2.1 million. That is not much for having the highest payroll in baseball at the time. I can assure you that they WERE NOT profitable that year, which is why the family probably became frustrated and sold the team.
by GusanoQuemador on Jul 2, 2008 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a ruse. They are almost certain to seek tax breaks which amount to the same thing. There is a reason why Wolff wants all of the stadium financing plans to be held behind closed doors and why he doesn’t want it put to a public vote. Whenever the financing plan is developed and made public, you can bet there will be public subsidies in the hundreds of millions.
You’re wrong about the A’s peak attendance. Attendance figures: 1989 – 2,667,225, 1990-2,900,217, 1991-2,713,493, 1992-2,494,160.
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Jul 2, 2008 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why WOULD he want a Public vote? What possible benefits could arrise from it, period?
And what would the public actually vote on?
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jul 2, 2008 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No doubt he would rather not have the taxpayers decide whether or not their money should be spent to subsidize a professional baseball team. But when he raises objections to it, it sends a pretty strong message to the citizens—I want your money but I don’t want you to have a say in how it’s spent. The public should be very suspicious.
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Jul 2, 2008 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I stand corrected about the attendance figures
But my point still stands. If they were making a huge profit why sell the team? If it was so sustainable to keep that kind of payroll and draw like that then why change anything?
We could run around in circles about the public financing point so I’ll just let that one go. There is always going to be a give and take between the private and public sector with these type of projects.
by GusanoQuemador on Jul 2, 2008 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It had a lot to do with Walter Haas's health
Mr. Haas was dying and the A’s made a series of unwise moves designed to keep their dynasty afloat so they could win one more for him before he passed on. They handed out some ridiculous contracts to reward players for their past heroics, the future be damned. The A’s became a team similar to the Orioles during Cal Ripkens last years—top heavy in players’ salaries and low in performance.
When the older expensive players faded and the team stopped winning, attendance declined and they stopped turning a profit. If Walter Haas’s health hadn’t taken a turn for the worst, I suspect the A’s fortunes in the 1990s would have been quite different.
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Jul 2, 2008 10:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the end is nigh
"The Athletics at Fremont" is pretty bad
by ArakSOT on Jul 2, 2008 9:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It’s not impossible but there are many obstacles in the way of a move to Fremont. I don’t think the A’s will be able to clear them.
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Jul 2, 2008 9:26 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I have similar doubts
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 9:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it will happen
Its just not going to be for at least another 6 or 7 years. One thing I haven’t heard anyone talk about is that this ecenomy has to be just killing this deal. Keep in mind that Lew is trying to use the sale of the condos and homes in this development to fund the building of the ballpark. How is that going to work when no one is buying homes right now?
by GusanoQuemador on Jul 2, 2008 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've brought that up a couple of times
vertig0/marine layer has been addressing the economy/housing market in more knowing detail than I could at his newballpark blog.
As he’s said numerous times, though, the Bay Area is, if not entirely immune, at least highly resistant to/lagging the national housing downturn.
I’m not sure if a 7-year delay is tenable for Billewwolffisher.
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Housing market
vertig0 has probably addressed this as well, but my sense is that downturns in the housing market hit newer construction like what Wolff is planning a lot harder than existing housing. This seems to be true on both the macro level (newer developments in eastern Contra Costa falling a lot, while homes in the older neighborhoods of Berkeley/SF keep most of their value) and on the micro level (single-family homes in my neighborhood are still selling fairly quickly, while the 3 overpriced condos they just built on the lot next to us have been sitting on the market for a while without any takers).
Putting hundreds of identical new units on the market now seems like it would be a very poor gamble: even buyers who would want them at the listed price might be tempted to hold out, hoping that prices fall. Essentially, the developer/seller is competing against himself. Of course, Wolff could very well start his project now anyway, hoping that by the time construction is completed the market will have already rebounded. He probably has a lot better sense of how likely that is than I do.
"May a nit suck Cajun geese?" wonders Red. No, we see gnu Jack Cust in a yam.
by andeux on Jul 2, 2008 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They are supposed to be building Luxury Townhomes
with the few Condos being nearer to the Ballpark, probably in that building in Center in the reditioning.
facepalm.jpg
by Zonis on Jul 2, 2008 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Townhomes"
are basically condos with a fancier name. Insofar as there is any difference, it has nothing to do with the point I was making.
"May a nit suck Cajun geese?" wonders Red. No, we see gnu Jack Cust in a yam.
by andeux on Jul 2, 2008 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, but they won't be on the market "now"
Even factoring in likely plans to try to advance-sell as many units as possible, I doubt they’d set up a sales office more than 3 years in advance of potential occupancy.
I do see the advisability in pushing out the groundbreaking date to time the eventual upturn in the market—but at what point does pushing it out further and further become a money-loser/deal-breaker?
I’m not at all in the “it won’t happen, period” camp—but I do have my doubts.
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Billewwolffisher
Haven’t heard that one yet. Awesome. But you have to find a way to include Crowley in there. Crillishwolf or something like that. Other people are better at that type of thing than I am…
by GusanoQuemador on Jul 2, 2008 10:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Crywolffisher
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bait and Switch - __________ A's of Fremont
Wolff keeps throwing Fremont a bone when he refers to the to as the ___ A’s of Fremont. He’ll probably pull the plug on that as soon as the Stadium is built, and just call them the San Jose Athletics. Lawsuits will follow, and the City of Fremont will file for Bankruptcy 5 years later.
Gotta get that Stadium Built.
by Colorado Fan on Jul 2, 2008 10:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What are the chances they change their name completely?
San Jose South Bay Sox of Fremont
by SwisherThresher on Jul 2, 2008 11:04 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
he should partner with Arte
The Los Angeles Angels North of Fremont
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jul 2, 2008 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
These little host cities need to grow up
Be happy with the increased revenue. Who cares whether your name is in a ridiculous string of 40 cities? New Jersey doesn’t bitch about letting the Giants and Jets play there.
I really hate that my team is gonna have some idiotic name like… well, like that team I hate with an idiotic name.
Ryan Sweeney: I probably irrationally embraced him before you did.
by Joey C. on Jul 2, 2008 11:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why can't we not have a city?
Something simple like the Athletics Baseball Club (of Fremont)?
No, it didn’t work so well for the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim, but when you’re named the Mighty Ducks it’s difficult to overcome.
"The hard... is what makes it great."
by Jjjsixsix on Jul 2, 2008 4:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
Related FanShots on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
