Breaking News Maybe: Is There Actual Big News Around San Jose?
by Nico on Nov 19, 2011 4:53 PM PST
Email
PrintIf one can believe Fox Sports, Bud Selig might actually be about to do something about the A's and San Jose in the next two weeks. Is this a big story, finally leading to a conclusion, or is it just another chapter in the 3 year saga of "talk but no action"? I guess we'll know soon. Perhaps.
83 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Am I the only one laughing at the line about baseball trying to "accelerate" the decision?
I mean, it’s not like we’ve been kept in the dark about this for more than a couple days or anything.
Last of the Ninth - Photography
Why hold the fans in tension, MLB?
Regardless of the complexities of this issue, we all feel on pins and needles while we wait for Bud Selig’s final decision on the A’s stadium issue. Of course, what galls us the most is our powerlessness – regardless of our feelings on the subject, regardless of any opinions we express, of any polls taken – in other words, regardless of local public opinion, the MLB and Bud Selig go at their own pace, “business as usual”.
As far as the fans is concerned, what we care most is not even the Stadium, but the pride of being fans of a winning organization, one which already proved to be worthy of our devotion in the past by winning several World Championships.
I am impressed by all the blogs dedicated to the A’s, in a period when the franchise seems to be in suspense – I often find myself not being able to explain to my wife why I pore over the A’s news and discussions, trying to figure out the equivalent of a complex chess game of how to win in a losing arrangement of all pieces involved – players, stadium, manager, coaches, fan support, etc.
GO A’s! Maybe Fox Sports finally has an inside track into Selig’s mind . . . It would be such a relief to finally get to the end of this charade – at this point, it does not matter whether it is Oakland, San Jose, or anywhere else in the Bay Area. I just hope the A’s do not end up moving to Ottawa!
Yes. Being an A's fan is
kind of like drawing to a 4, 5, 6, 8 and reminding yourself, “You know I could draw a 7.”
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on Nov 19, 2011 5:59 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm sorry
7 was placed on the DL with a strained oblique.
by Apricot on Nov 19, 2011 7:27 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
'Cotty!!!!!!!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Wait.. does this mean MLB is giving the A's the OK?
“The team, according to one source, has agreed to expand the capacity of Cisco Field, its proposed 32,000-seat ballpark, as one of the conditions for a move.”
So… if the A’s meet the conditions, will Bud Selig say yes? When he wants something, he usually gets it done (Astros to AL West, Nationals, etc.)
I think it's more that the A's have agreed to expand the capacity
if a move is approved, making MLB happy and more likely to push for the move.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Nico,
I don’t think Bud works that way. The man is freaking brilliant. Selig has played this to perfection. The bay area is a challenge to get anything done. By playing out the string, he’s made everyone, and I mean everyone, literally salivate for a conclusion to the drama. Over the course of this whole charade, he’s extracted the best deal possible from the one location that could make the move successful. SJ is literally eating out of his hand.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
I'd be very curious to see just how much they can expand the capacity of the planned place
Especially since it looked like the location was a little limited in the basic imprint of the ballpark.
Last of the Ninth - Photography
I hope they don't push it much over 40,000
Parks with capacities above 50,000, and the new Yankee Stadium surely comes to mind, just don’t do it for me.
"Minutes from the last save opportunity...Balfour got 3 outs..."- Nico
by stranahanahan on Nov 20, 2011 12:04 AM PST up reply actions
From everything I've read about the proposed San José site
It cannot hold a large ballpark.
by OaklandSi on Nov 20, 2011 1:26 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
They may have to mainly build "UP"
And make the top tiers a few rows deeper.
The problem with building up is that they're right underneath the airport flight path.
There is a limit to the height, and there is a limit to how far down you can go and still keep people at “field level.”
by LoneStranger on Nov 20, 2011 11:22 AM PST up reply actions
Any increase in height is relatively infintesimal compared to the planes.
The stadium wouldn’t be directly under the flight path, anyway. It would be a little westward. Planes routinely pass over the buildings downtown, which are all much taller than a stadium would be.
I know what you're saying, but there are regulations for emergencies and such, and the Diridon Area has height limits.
by LoneStranger on Nov 20, 2011 1:19 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe for escape routes out of the stadium etc.
But making it 20-30 feet taller shouldn’t be passing that limit. I’ve met the leader of the High Speed Rail plan going into Diridon Station and sat through his presentation. The proposed station will be pretty damn tall, and could be even taller if they go with gigantic support arches, which seems to be subject to an aesthetic choice, rather than a structural or height limit.
From the Diridon Station Area Plan, Section VI, a, ii:
Essentially, there are two corridors in downtown, one in the core east of Route 87 and one west of Route 87 (Diridon Station Area), within which the airline safety criteria, known as One-Engine Inoperative (OEI) surfaces, are more restrictive than the standard criteria used by the FAA to protect the airspace. OEI surfaces pertain to minimum required airspace needed for safe maneuvering of an aircraft in emergency situations involving aircraft malfunction. The City understands that the OEI surfaces need to be protected to maintain the Airport’s potential to provide sufficient and expanded air service to San José and Silicon Valley residents and businesses. The study has also illuminated other potential City actions needed to protect the airspace over downtown, including the possibility of limiting maximum allowable building height in areas subject to aircraft overflight. Generally, future building heights within the Diridon Station Area would not exceed the [h]eight of the HP Pavilion.
PDF: http://www.todmarketplace.org/Briefing%20Book%20SJ%20-%20San%20Jose.pdf
And from the SJ Arena website, the height is listed at 117 feet.
On ML’s site, he postulates the heights at ~90’ for the outfield and >100’ for the infield. It appears that it would be very close.
by LoneStranger on Nov 20, 2011 2:56 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think it would be too hard to add 6K or so.
The renderings of it looked smaller than it needed to be. Hopefully redesigning it would get rid of that stupid right field cranny and even out the size of the outfield. The left field line said it was only 302, but I guess there’s no way to know that for sure.
I don't understand this
What’s wrong with a small stadium? Is MLB just concerned about playoffs and the all-star game? I like small stadiums!
I've sort of thought it was a strange idea, too
Say the A’s really become a big deal in SJ and sell out games, like the Giants are now. You’d lose potentially 8K+ people and revenue every “sellout” if you were only at 32K as opposed to 40K.
"I'll guarantee this: The A's will have a better season in 2012." - George Zimmer
by cuppingmaster on Nov 20, 2011 2:11 AM PST up reply actions
Or if the demand is that high
They’ll just increase the prices so they won’t really be losing out on the extra money.
"Weakness on both sides is, as we know, the motto of all quarrels." -Voltaire
Yes, Fenway Park seats about 37,000. The Red Sox find other ways to make up for that.
I vibrated with joy that join A's. -- Kim Seong-min
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 20, 2011 8:07 AM PST up reply actions
Seriously... look at Fenway.
It’s awesome BECAUSE of it’s exclusivity…
Drew: 'Oh no.. That is certainly the meaty part alright, but it's not the thigh..."
Randy: "No... that bone is NOT connected to the thigh bone..."
www.fearthefin.com - Where masochism is defined.
I rushed the Furd's farm in 2009
www.californiagoldenblogs.com - Where Cal grads prove they learned something.
by SeanCrosby87 on Nov 20, 2011 8:10 AM PST up reply actions
And conversely, with so many seats at the Coliseum,
people aren’t pressed to buy tickets early. And if you don’t have your ticket on gameday, there’s a chance something else comes up and seems better at that time and you just don’t go. Also, people want what they can’t easily get.
by LoneStranger on Nov 20, 2011 10:28 AM PST up reply actions
Fenway seats 37k
So should an A’s stadium anywhere in the Bay Area.
by jeffro on Nov 20, 2011 5:11 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Payback.
Lew damn well knows that if an actual stadium is built in SJ, it will easily fill a 42K stadium. Bud gives his buddy an easy way out as a means of thanking him for putting up with all this bullshit.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
The A's are certainly acting like they expect it to be approved, and the Giants are acting
like they want to extract the maximum concessions for yielding. Of course no deal is done till it’s done.
I vibrated with joy that join A's. -- Kim Seong-min
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 20, 2011 8:14 AM PST up reply actions
BTW, there was a newspaper article from ~1993, I believe
and it was about how the A’s gave up territorial rights in order for the Giants to stay in SF, as opposed to moving to Tampa.
I know it circulated around here several months ago, and I’ve been searching for it but can’t find it. Anyone happen to have a link to the article?
"Minutes from the last save opportunity...Balfour got 3 outs..."- Nico
I don't know about the link
But that’s a true story. Haas gave up the South Bay with the idea the Giants would move there.
"I'll guarantee this: The A's will have a better season in 2012." - George Zimmer
by cuppingmaster on Nov 20, 2011 1:18 AM PST up reply actions
Instead they tricked him.....the sneaky weasels
I vibrated with joy that join A's. -- Kim Seong-min
by WaddellCanseco on Nov 20, 2011 8:12 AM PST up reply actions
And he did it to keep 2 teams in the bay area.
There was a harmony between the two teams, and just a few years prior, we all saw that during the 89 series… It was fun.
But now? Shit… fuck that. The Giants can suck it for not returning a simple favour… bastards.
Drew: 'Oh no.. That is certainly the meaty part alright, but it's not the thigh..."
Randy: "No... that bone is NOT connected to the thigh bone..."
www.fearthefin.com - Where masochism is defined.
I rushed the Furd's farm in 2009
www.californiagoldenblogs.com - Where Cal grads prove they learned something.
by SeanCrosby87 on Nov 20, 2011 8:12 AM PST up reply actions
Fuck the Giants
I hope Selig tells them to go pound sand
"I'll guarantee this: The A's will have a better season in 2012." - George Zimmer
by cuppingmaster on Nov 20, 2011 1:25 AM PST reply actions 6 recs
I hope so too
But can he force them to give up the rights?
"Minutes from the last save opportunity...Balfour got 3 outs..."- Nico
by stranahanahan on Nov 20, 2011 1:34 AM PST up reply actions
Yes
The other owners can vote to drop the area T-Rights by a 3/4 majority. In practice, though, they sort of need to agree since the votes are almost always 30-0 for something.
"I'll guarantee this: The A's will have a better season in 2012." - George Zimmer
by cuppingmaster on Nov 20, 2011 1:38 AM PST up reply actions
I'm guessing the best they can hope for is 29-1
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Agreed
The A’s should give back to the giants the no fee that the giants paid for SJ rights. A complete refund of the zero dollars the giants gave the A’s.
Upside from Article
Rosenthal says
He has no such leverage over the Giants, but the Athletics have no obvious place to move outside the Bay Area.
That’s great news – means MLB probably agrees, the best location for the franchise is in the Bay Area. Screw Portland, Las Vegas etc. the boys will be staying close to home regardless.
It's just more exciting with Billy Beane running the team.
The only non-bay area place I'd even remotely accept is Sacramento...
But even that’s a huge push for me…
Drew: 'Oh no.. That is certainly the meaty part alright, but it's not the thigh..."
Randy: "No... that bone is NOT connected to the thigh bone..."
www.fearthefin.com - Where masochism is defined.
I rushed the Furd's farm in 2009
www.californiagoldenblogs.com - Where Cal grads prove they learned something.
by SeanCrosby87 on Nov 20, 2011 8:13 AM PST up reply actions
The fuck it isn't!!!
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 20, 2011 8:42 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Keep your damn logic to yourself
I live in Sac. The A’s moving to Sac would make me happy.
Therefore it’s viable!
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Nov 20, 2011 8:48 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I've scrutinized this argument for days and can't find a single flaw.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
But your post was made within 30 minutes of Grover's
Does that constitute days?
Al Davis 1929-2011 Just rest in peace, baby
"Da greatness of Da Rooster" - RLangford
Follow me on Twitter @FernandoRGallo
That's my thinking, too.
And therefore, the A’s should sign Albert Pujols.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
Yosemite A's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Trying not to rec a "F**k the Giants" post is like trying not to look at boobs."
Its all about money
Here how it will go. Giants how much will it take to allow the move. Giants want 500 million. To high. Numbers pas back and forth. The A’s end up paying the Giants around 140 million. A’s get San Jose and extra package of Zito.
Seems fair. At least they didn't make us take Rowand too.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
My take...
A larger stadium means lower seat prices, which means that more people can afford to come to the park. A smaller stadium limits the crowd to wealthier patrons, who might decide, because of proximity, to move their box seats from AT&T Park down to Cisco Park. Less expensive seats would allow them to keep both.
I like the idea of a bigger park and less expensive seats. I don’t know why anyone here at AN would want to be shut out of seeing A’s games, either by exclusivity or price.
exactly
and i have doubts that many wealthier patrons will choose going to a game in San José over going to San Francisco.
I think it all depends on the park and amenitities. If they are Silicon Valley types they just might.
AN Tailgate = Euphemism for food porn.
And the fact that Cisco Field would be brand-spanking new,
and likely in the backyard of many of those wealthier patrons.
Let’s just say that there is a reason that the Giants are fighting this.
by LoneStranger on Nov 20, 2011 3:10 PM PST up reply actions
That's a strange sentiment
Santa Clara County has 1.8 million people, the loose geographic definition of Silicon Valley has around 2.4 million. Are you saying they would choose SF over SJ because of the City’s cachet or some sense of provinciality? As opposed to a brand new facility with better weather?
This is where the distance becomes a factor
It is hardly a choice for a consumer in San Jose when considering where to go for a game now, especially the premium seat buyer.
If their choices were drive to state of the art stadium in 10 minutes or 45… It becomes an actual choice
by jeffro on Nov 20, 2011 8:05 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
It's a funny dynamic.
SJ has more actual “backroom” clout than SF by far. For those that doubt, I offer the following cliche, “Follow the Money.” There’s a certain element of “civic pride” that’s surely going to come into play over the next few years. SF will always be a quaint tourist town though. Perhaps the SJ “natives” will speak fondly of it, though they never go there. No reason to really.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
Agreed to an extent
32K is too small, but anything over 40K is too big. Something like 37K would be perfect for SJ. However, I don’t think that box seats would impact normal fans very much, if at all. I have trouble even finding the boxes in the renderings.
Depends what's meant by "box seats"
I’m thinking more in terms of season ticket packages I guess.
40,900 seats at AT&T Park
That sounds about right, given that around 3,000 of those are nosebleed seats.
That's a pretty idiotic thing to say, frankly.
I mean if you believe that, then don’t buy a fricking baseball team.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
You shouldn't talk to OaklandSi like that.
She didn’t….oh.
by LoneStranger on Nov 20, 2011 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
I shouldn't personally attack a moderator?
Why n—
{banned}
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Bud already has 75% Ownership Approval of A's Move
My sense is: Bud already has the consent of 75-percent of MLB owners to move A’s to San Jose. I doubt he would enter into discussions with Giants if he didn’t. Remember, he’s the ultimate “consensus builder”. He doesn’t get directly involved in things or make statements or even allow his intentions to reach the press unless he (virtually) controls all the cards.
I bet he approaches the Giants saying, “Hey, it’s in the best interests of the entire sport of the A’s move to SJ and all but a handful of owners agree with that. Now, I don’t want you to be too upset about it and cause discord, especially after we just negotiated this great CBA, so, here’s what I and LW and the rest of the league is willing to offer you as compensation…”
From there, it’s probably a matter of dotting “i’s” and crossing “t’s”.
Giants will get 3-5 years of mortgage underwriting, A’s get new stadium, MLB has a cash-cow instead of a revenue-sharing leach for the next 30+ years…
Case closed.
I'm never gonna do it without the fez on!
My guess is Selig doesn't have the votes
that’s why he planted these recent stories from Gammons and Rosenthal. Selig is covering his ass.
" Sleepy Floyd is Superman!!!"
What are you talking about?
Selig has never lost a vote. And he never will. When it comes time for someone to cast an actual ballot, the “fix” is always in with this guy.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
In the Rosenthal article
he mentions that Selig told Wolff when he bought the team – “not to expect to move to the south bay”. That’s covering your ass. Gammons talking about Beane going to the Dodgers is noise for the Giants. As if any team would be scared of a GM.
" Sleepy Floyd is Superman!!!"
There is one other player in this end game: the OACC. The A's lease is up in 2013, right?
So, the A’s have publicly (and in my opinion, a year or two too late), made their plea to Bud to “sh*t or get off the pot, because we now can’t even offer a contract to players we’d like to keep, because we don’t know what our future is going to be”. The A’s are just one vote out of 30; so, too, the Gnats. We tend, as followers of the A’s, tend to feel like the Gnats have all the cards, with their completely bogus “territorial rights”. There are a couple of owners (foremost amongst them, the Yankees and Mets- because "their* territorial rights are all that keeps a ‘small market team’ from wanting to move to northern New jersey) who will go with the Gnats’ position. So the Gnats have SOME cards. Selig has a lot of cards, because he has sheparded MLB thorough a period of gigantic improvement in its finances. The A’s have a very few cards; paramount amongst these is their potential to grow from a “welfare case” to at least a revenue-neutral team.
But these are not all the cards. The OACC owns at least one important card. Suppose they absolutely/completely/no/ifs/and/or/butts refuse to extend the A’s lease? What then? Must the Gnats, after already being humiliated about their not-so-sacrosanct “territorial rights”, be also forced to share their home park with the A’s, until the A’s get the South Bay? Or, must the A’s be forced to embark on baseball’s equivalent of the march on Moscow?- a two-to-three year march in the wilderness of playing all one’s ‘home’ games (i.e., getting the bottom of the 9th- but nothing else) 0n the road?
I can’t imagine a scenario in which baseball (MLB) has any leverage with the OACC. Can you?
"Feel so bad, feel like a ballgame on a rainy day"-Lightnin' Hopkins
by justANotherAsFan on Nov 21, 2011 6:35 PM PST reply actions
The city of Oakland wouldn't say no
That’s free money that they desperately need. In the extremely unlikely event that they do, you can bet that MLB will force their hand some way or another. Plus, it would only fortify the A’s claim that Oakland isn’t a viable site.
As far as an owner vote goes, the sentiment amongst the reporters that have covered it is that there is at least 75% that would side with the A’s. It doesn’t necessarily mean that big market teams will vote against it to protect themselves. It’s two entirely different scenarios. The A’s aren’t moving from somewhere else into an established market. They’ve been in this market for over 40 years, and I believe most owners would be able to see the difference.
From what’s been going on, I think it’s almost assured that the A’s get to move down there. It’s more of a matter of when and for how much compensation. The Giants really don’t have as much leverage as it seems. If the owners approve it, they can do jack squat about it. If it’s not approved, MLB still trys to push it and the Giants try to take it to court, I don’t think they have too strong of a case, considering that territorial rights don’t actually exist, and there’s precedence (Baltimore/Washington) of coming to a compromise. I don’t know how truthful Wolff was being, but he mentioned during a game in September that they found the documents for allowing the Giants to pursue moving to SJ, and were pretty confident that they would not hold up in court.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
