but as far as fears go I fear...

1. A change of name to "Silicone Valley A's of Fremont" or anything of that nature. Last thing I want to do is have my team follow the Angels in their lame steps.

2. Change of colors. I like that we're original.

3. Team leaving the state, although Vegas would be nice, cause then they'd be closer and I could stay at really nice hotels when I go and see a game.

Unlike an outfield with Jack Cust, you've added an extra E to the erstwhile new home of the A's.

I dunno about lying awake at night, but I definitely fret about all the ballgames I won't be able to attend.  I'm figuring from 30/year down to +/- 7 or so with a Fremont move, mostly from expense, somewhat from proximity.  However, if they built a new park in Oakland that number would still drop, down to perhaps +/- 12, because of cost.

If they moved to Vegas or San Antonio, it drops to zero, which is the point where I (probably) start hunting for a new fave team.   Not because it's all about attendance, but because they will have jilted me past the point of forgiveness.

All that said:  I think relocation is very unlikely even if Fremont tanks, simply because all other markets are smaller and/or have bigger obstacles.  To owners, these other cities have far more value as a threat for leverage than they do as a possible actual new home.  Just ask the Marlins.

As long as Beane is GM

and would be slightly more local if the A's moved to Fremont, I want them to stay where I can see them.  Like FSU, I also fret over the loss of games I'll be able to go to (which would decrease even if their new stadium was right down the street from me).  But I'd still consider them my team even if they went all the way back to Philadelphia, simply because even though the Giants are considered more my "hometown" team, the A's are the first team I paid attention to when I became a baseball fan... so they're sort of my "emotional hometown" team.

While I may not lay awake thinking about this, it does occasionally cross my mind. As a Sacramentan, I was only able to attend a game or two each year growing up (typically the fireworks games). My mom's house never had cable, so I saw increasingly fewer games each year due to the growing lack of network TV coverage. More often than not, Bill King brought the A's into my home.

With Bill's passing and my move to Utah, radio and TV (save the one annual ESPN Yankees game and the rare FSN game against the Rockies) became distant memories. Struggling to pay bills as a college student and father, the internet TV specials are too pricey. MLB Radio's not a bad deal though, so every other season I convince my wife to let me get it. Every few months, when we're doing okay financially, I'll get a one-month contract of MLB.tv and catch as many games as my family will allow.

AN is my main source for A's info. Even with my somewhat limited exposure, the game threads and online articles make me feel like I'm there, following the team. How would AN handle a move? I'm sure Blez and the admins have considered the consequences of an out-of-state move (even an intra-state move would cause slight changes in AN demographics). If the A's moved to Las Vegas, AN would have a completely different feel. On one hand, a move to Vegas brings them closer to me (4-hour drive instead of 12; flights from Salt Lake to Vegas are dirt cheap). On the other hand, the Vegas A's are not the A's.

Given that the A's "must" leave Oakland, they must stay in the bay area in order to remain the A's. A move to Sacramento would keep the blue collar feel, but would lose some of the bay area charm. If they were to leave the state, I would have a tough time rooting for them (even with the current distance). Sacramento is my home town, and the A's are the closest I have to a home team. The Giants are basically equidistant from Sacramento, but the ritzy, posh feel of Giants fandom doesn't speak to me. As a side note, I'd rather have the Giants win it all than watch the Angels do it. There's just something about keeping it close to home.

I hope I'll at some point live closer to home. When I do, I want to be able to go to A's games. I'll make the 2 hour drive each way. The Fremont A's may have a great ballpark, but I will definitely miss the smells of the bay and the dull concrete look. It's all part of being a blue collar fan from northern California. I will still, of course, make the drive to Fremont. I will take the short trip to Sacramento. I can't say the same for Portland or Vegas. Once I'm living closer to home.

A great part about being a Sacramento Kings fan is that I can ask just about anybody on the street (when in Sacramento, of course) if they know the score of the game and get an answer. Everybody's got a Kings license plate holder or bumper sticker. I've never lived in Oakland, but I've instantly bonded with other A's fans in a very similar way. A's fans generally seem to know what's going on with the team. I often know more about the Red Sox or Diamondbacks than do many Red Sox or Diamondbacks fans that I meet.

My greatest fear, in regards to the A's, is definitely an out-of-state move. I'm okay with an in-state move that gets a new stadium if it allows the A's to keep good players for a longer period of time and invest more into the draft. Keeping good players will require a smart general manager (like Beane). More money won't mean anything unless we've got a GM that won't overpay for past production. I definitely fear the post-Beane days. When he leaves, I hope someone just as shrewd and objective (I know Beane's not perfectly objective; he has his projects that don't always work out) takes over.

That might be my longest comment ever.

"but there it is: I love things the way they are--decrepit stadium, cheap tickets, good seats, small-market team and all."

I really, really, am with you. All the proposed Oakland sites thus far in the thread are so good, the cheap, stupid housing that Jerry Brown built will be huge failures, and with rumors that the Raiders are looking for a new stadium site, I'm staring at the prospect of one major franchise left in Oakland, that doesn't have the cajones to call itself Oakland. If Fremont happens, if the Raiders move again, that corridor of 880 in Oakland is going to be the country's largest flea market once a wee Personally, as an Oakland native and resident, I am disgusted by this premise.

Disgusted!

You'll have to pardon my morning rantings. I voted for "it depends on how it's handled" because there is so much riding on the team name for me. This morning on KTVU, 49ers officials were quoted as saying that their Santa Clara move will not impact their team name at all. The Oakland Athletics don't have to stay in Oakland if they don't want to, but if they become the San Jose Athletics of Fremont or whichever name calls up the highest bidder, I will seriously consider looking for other ways to spend my time and money, and remember fondly of my time as an OAKLAND Athletic fan.

I mean, if they're willing to go THAT far, might as well come up with a new mascot, throw some red in the uniform, and redesign the whole goddamn logo. What the hell is an Athletic anyway? Aren't they all athletic? They're OAKLAND, dammit!

Granted, I'm not based in Oakland and never have been, so I don't have the local leanings of some, nor the decades of father and son outings to look back on...

I just have a team I like a lot, run by people I respect, and with guys on the field that I like to think play things the right way.

Them's the Athletics. They were in Philly once. They were in KC once.

And as long as they keep doing things the right way, wherever they go, there I am.

The A's are in the Bay Area. I'd consider staying in if they were in Sacramento.

If they are in Vegas... have fun with that.

Not sure there's much logic to this from any perspective since it's mostly an arbitrary choice. Some Qs for the no matter what people:

1. What if they moved away and changed the name?

2. What if they moved away, kept the name, but fired the management?

3. What if they moved away, changed the name, kept the management, but a new franchise came to Oakland called the "A's"?

4. Moved away, kept the name, new franchise in Oakland called the "B's" which then hired Beane?

Loyalty to the franchise as such or to the name strikes me as odd, but as I said there's not much logic to it one way or another.

and I was so jealous. The niner PR representative, said unequivicallly, that the team would remain the "San Francisco 49ers" period. no matter where they end up building a stadium in the bay area.

Why can't wolff have vision like the 49ers?

I hate the niners (big time Raider fan).

This whole name deal is polarizing the base (the fans!)

If wolff came out, and took a similar position (regarding the name) he would have more people, who might be ok with the deal.

but no wolff is in love with san jose. he could have his cake (fremont) and keep his base "happy".  

remember: both NY footballl teams play in new jersey. the detroit pistons play in auburn hills. other teams play outside of the city that their name historically came from.

wolff is going to fail so i'm good.

I've spent the last 14 years between Idaho and Oregon after moving away from CA at the age of 9.  I love the A's, and I love how they help me remember my time back there.  A move to Fremont, assuming the name and color stay the same, doesn't really bother me.  But, if after all these years of the A's telling me to root for the jersey and not the name on the back, I'm not going to be pleased if they make those changes.

I've followed the A's since 1989 when I moved to the Bay area, kept following them in NYC for 4 years in the 90's, and now I'm in San Jose. I would love to see the A's closer to San Jose, but more importantly if they are any where near the Bay Area that means I can always go see them if I want to. I'm a little tired of all the comments disparaging the A's moving to fremont, like there are no fans worthy of this team south of Hayward or something.

I don't care if they move, I live in North Carolina but have always loved the A's, and a move won't stop me from being a fan. Maybe they could come to NC and MLB could redo the leagues and divisions, since the AL and NL aren't of equal numbers anyway.

I would still follow the team briefly but it would fade after a while of not being able to see them on tv and going to the games.

And I would NEVER, EVER root for any team that belongs to San Fran F**king Cisco.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...

I would like to see two things happen:

1. Revisit Oakland.  Wolff's decision to cross them off the list right now seems like a personal and petty decision, not a business decision.  As FSU stated earlier in the thread, building a stadium in Oakland is not impossible--it's just harder and somewhat less lucrative.

2. If Oakland cannot be considered, move to the largest media market in the country that doesn't currently have  a baseball team, and which could still capitalize to some degree on its proximity to the Bay area...

Sacramento!

I rooted for the Raiders for 13 years and accepted with open arms (and walled) upon their return.

And I am also a (don't kill me Bay Area folks) a Laker fan.

Now I will say it's easy to root for a team long distance when they're winning (that's bad, I know).

What I mean is that when the Raiders had lean years in the 90's, I didn't suffer as much because the local papers weren't serving a daily (weekly) reminder of our demise. And it was easier to shrug off because you didn't spend 60 bucks + beer to watch a lousy team.

Wins however can be enjoyed from anywhere, though much preferred in person, or at least locally.

Then again it's different now in the Blog World because we can rejoice or drown our sorrows no matter where our teams are.

What was the question again?

Seriously though, I just can't see myself as anytihng other than an A's fan.

I was a Hartford Whalers fan...until they moved, changed names and team colors.  They won the Cup, and I was like, confused

I was somewhat of a Houston Oilers fan.  They moved, still followed them a bit.  Then they changed the team name and uniformed.  I was like, eh.  

I dunno.  If they become like Sacto Bees or something and became yellow and black or something, I'd probably lose interest.  If they became the San Jose Athletics, I'd probably still root for them.  

and well thought out poll questions, they really run the gamut of ways to handle it.

For me, it would mostly be how they handled the move and where it was.  Anywhere close and I would probably remain a fan no matter how it was handled.  If they move to Oklahoma City or Charlotte, it would depend on how I thought management handled it.  In that case, I could see myself maybe adopting a local team that I didnt dislike (Angels).

Either way, in any move, I would probably care a little bit less and root more for players I liked and the guys on my big fantasy team.

It took me a long time, but I've finally gotten used to the business angle, and no longer allow myself to get suckered by too much emotion, when it comes to baseball.  I've chosen to follow the team, for good or for bad, and where they play really isn't that relevant anymore.  Shoot, it's not like the owners, or even the players, have shown any commitment to me as a fan, so I see no reason why they should expect it from me.

Of course I'd prefer they stay in Oakland, but I'll be fine if they don't.

... we're all Oakland, anyway.

good thread and poll, bbg. Our readership on the Drumbeat would react differently, a lot higher percentage are Oakland loyalists. One thing that distinguishes AN from other A's blogs, I think, is that there are more A's-fan-forever-wherever fans and less of the Oakland-only people. Those are people from Oakland who are overwhelmingly politically liberal and like the blue-collar/cheap seats aspect of the A's, sort of like White Sox fans. They dislike the Giants for the same reason Sox fans hate the Cubs.
I'd be an A's fan if they played anywhere in the Bay Area; Fremont is a good location, though not as good as downtown San Jose. It would break my heart if they moved away. In fact, the reason I started disliking the Giants after 20 years of kind of liking them was that their intransigence on San Jose  made it clear they wanted the A's to move out of the area.  

Living in San Diego now, I still maintain a "root for where your from" attitude. I would still follow the A's in any norcal city without question, but certainly my loyalty to the club would fade if they moved from the bay area. My family and I have had season tickets since I was born, (in oakland)and I fell in love with not only the A's, but the experience. In order to see a game these days, I have to go to Petco, nice field but not OACS, at least not to me. I would certainly feel betrayed with an out of Bay Area move and would be tempted, out of nostalia, to look across the bay. After all, I am a die hard 9ers fan and hate the Raiders, (they ruined my field!!!!)so the crossover would be easier. All of that being said, I would no longer watch baseball with a passion but rather just for fun.

He's shifted from any mention of "small market" or of revenue at all (Shea actually was the one who pushed it into the discussion -- and only then in context of the A's receiving revenue-sharing dividends) and is no longer pushing the "we need a new stadium to remain competitive" (which directly implies that post-move, the A's will retain expensive players).

Instead, he's now smartly focusing on a shared common enemy: the Raiders and their turf-destroying ways.

(And, yes, of course, I agree that sharing the facility with the Raiders sucks. However, the only reason it sucks for Wolff is not so much that he has to share it with the Raiders, but that the Raiders aren't paying Wolff to use the field.)

(And, yes, of course, Lew The Fan may well rue having the Raiders tear up the field no less genuinely than anyone here. However, John Shea's talking to Lew ain't predicated on Lew's baseball fandom.)

A's forever! I don't root for the players or the place, I root for the TEAM! And with Captain Kirk back, we look UNSTOPPABLE! GO A'S!

and I still root for a team that plays thousands of miles away in a state I've never even visited. As long as the organization continues to be one of the innovators and forerunners in intelligent analysis, they'll be my team. I don't have the ties to the team that many do, so all the ballpark talk never interests me. All I care about is if it'll help the team, and all indications are that a new ballpark will certainly bring the team more revenue.

...but I think the Coliseum is just fine.  I don't care about Mt Davis, or sharing the place with the Raiders, or any of that crap.  New stadiums are nice, but ultimately they're not why I go to games.

I'll be pretty much done with MLB, period.  I feel like a schmuck for caring THIS long, after all the BS it has shoved in the fan's faces, with its ever increasing greed for money.  Fuck 'em, I'll just stick to watching people play who love the game (Little League, Babe Ruth, whatever) and never look back.

Seriously the Rivercats do extremely well here, there is a family atmosphere and I am sure the A's would be welcomed with open arms.  Now there is always the issue that the Sacramento city government is absolutely retarded but I am sure one of the surrounding cities like west Sacramento would build an awesome park along the river in no time... they did it for a minor league team.

The amount of viewers that the kings get even in a struggling season such as the current one is outstanding.  I don't know why other professional teams don't take note.

Obviously there is a bit of support amongst A's fans since everyone on here mentions Sacramento in a positive light.  I also think it would only increase he A's vs Giants rivalry thing which is great for bay area sports.

Anyways... I have been saying this since mount Davis was built and the ice plants were pulled so my hopes are low...