At the behest of Leopold and others, this fanpost includes a few shots of the A's cAnine fAnitude.  We got there too late for most of the pup rally festivities.

Continue reading this post »

With apologies to Styne, Merrill and Monkey

(I can't account for the occasional random line breaks.  And yes, I do happen to be a heterosexual)

Don’t tell us not to cheer—

Just mope and compute,
Life’s winning and the goal’s
A chance to crapshoot.
Don’t bring around some stat
To poop on our parade!

Don’t tell us “no sac bunts”
We think they count, too.
If we can steal a base,
We really ought to.
No dreary acronyms

To poop on our parade!

We’ll march our rooks out,              
Bet on the come.
And if we’re hooked-out,
Your turn at bat, Rats.
At least we didn’t flake it,
Drat, Rats, maybe Oh-9 is when we’ll make it …

But if we’re 20 wins,
Of rare perfection.
Or painful losing streaks
Meaned by regression
The Lasik or some blurry sunscreen in the eye,
We gotta play ‘em,
We’re gonna flay ‘em,
Hardly even pay ‘em, this year
Baseball is heaven,
Six months or seven --
We get to cheer the A’s, dear.

Get ready for us, League,
The A’s are comers,
Marching to the beat
Of left-field drummers.
Don’t bore us with some stat 
To poop on our parade!

We’re gonna win, and win Now!
Play off your charts--we know how,
Play-off for the whole jackpot,
Pitch, catch and hit where they’re not,
Eye outside sliders, and take--
Wait for the fastball, and rake-- 
Hey, Mister Selig, kiss our bum!

Repeat: We’ll march our rooks etc.

Repeat: Get ready for us etc.

Original lyrics  here.

Youtube  version here.

Well, the Bay Area's Bestest Newspapers [retch] came out with their regular 50 Biggest Companies reports on Sunday  link , toting revenues and profits for both the 50 largest businesses in the East Bay (generously defined) and the Bay Area at-large.  Of course, they misspelled a word in the headline ("trial" meaning "trail"),  but hey, they don't call themselves the Bay Area's bestest  proofreaders, and I think I know where they made their most recent cuts.  But I digress, hoping I haven't made similar blunders in this here fanpost. 

I was surprised at the results, and thought I'd share 'em on which for folks to chew.  Now, I'm perfectly well aware that this is only one measure of economic activity, but if we concede that the A's are organized and intended to be a profit-making entity, then these kinds of numbers are not insignificant.

For the Bay Area at-large, I would divide the geography as follows:

SF= SF,  SSF and North Bay

Silicon Valley = peninsula, San Jose, Fremont, Hayward, Union City

East Bay = everything else east of most of the bridges

The Top 50 settle into those areas as follows:

SF = 14

SV = 30

EB = 6

So it's really no mystery why the Giaunts are so proud and jealous of "their" territory to the south.

Looking at the East Bay Region specifically, I would resolve the geography as follows:

Oakland = Oakland, Emeryville, Alameda, Berkeley, Hercules

San Ramon/Tri-Valleys = everything east of the Caldecott Tunnel, and Dublin and Sunol grades

Fremont = Fremont, Hayward, Union City

Defined so, the numbers are as follows:

Oak = 12

SRV/TriV = 20

Fremont = 18

By this logic, the new ballyard might better be in Walnut Creek or Pleasanton than Oakland.  And if we just look at companies HQ'd within the city limits of Oakland and Fremont, per se, Oakland loses 3 to 15.

Now, I've heard Fremont disparaged around here as a parking lot with a City Council, but it's pretty clearly more than that.  And one could take away from the  above data that the tech industries centered in the Silicon Valley, of which Fremont is best considered a part, are the economic engine of the Bay Area.  It also seems clear that Oakland in particular, and to a lesser extent SF, just aren't the commercial centers they were when the teams moved here 40 and 50 years ago.  At those times, the peninsula was fruit orchards, and there really were walnut groves in Walnut Creek.  Or so I'm told.

Viewed using this metric, the move south makes a lot of sense.  Yes, companies aren't people, but to an increasing degree they are ticket-buyers, and they do represent sponsorship sources.  Oakland, for all its natural beauty, infrastructure advantages and head start, just hasn't kept pace.

Regular readers of these electron arrangements will recall that there are several of us, 67Marquez and YT among us, who detest the blue-white-and-red dot racer color scheme.  To us, it  characterizes a slapdash approach to the stadium experience.  As such, it's an affront to an outfit that does all those little things on the baseball operations side -- maybe better than anyone.   It's something that troubleth the soul of the team we love.  Please note that this is quite apart from actually cheering for the stupid little orbs -- to me it ranks only inches above The Wave in proving  PTBarnum's theorem.  But I digress.

So.  Last evening I corralled one of the comely, young marketing assistants, who gave me the name of one David D, who, she assured me, could address this matter of deep and lasting ennui.  I emailed him today, as follows:

To: David D
Subject: Please change the Dot colors!

At the pregame event last night, one of the hostesses gave me your name as
someone who might be able to help.

Why, oh WHY, are the dots red white and blue (Red Sox colors, no less -- at
least you arranged for the red dot not to win, but cripes)?

Why, in a day when you can get custom-made M&Ms in A's team colors, can't
you-all customize the dots to be team colors -- then we'd always win!

Plus the crowd, which goes nuts for that silliness anyway, would REALLY go
nuts for this.

Howsabout it?

Thanks,

And, scoring big points for timeliness and politesse, if still blind to the eye-popping brilliance of the solution thus succinctly presented, he responded as follows:

Thank you for your interest in Dot Racing. Dot Racing has had Red White and Blue Dots since it's [sic] inception in 1987. The colors are based on the colors of our nations [sic] flag [Note: also France's ] It is part of the tradition of the unique ballpark experience. There has been some discussion internally about changing the colors but Red White and Blue won out. This feature is sponsored and therefore ultimate approval lies with our client. Thanks again and we thank you for your support of the Oakland Athletics as we celebrate our 40th Anniversary.

He's very welcome.  And, of course, he's very wrong.

He did make the error of indicating that The Client has final authority on this issue.  A little further digging revealed that said client has an executive VP in charge of just  these matters: 

... Vice President of Marketing, has over 10 years of marketing and sales experience[!]. Mr. K is responsible for FusionStorm’s corporate marketing, branding and communications strategies. He joined the company in 1998 and under his direction FusionStorm has grown to be one of the most recognized and respected... [yadayada]

Still with me?  Okay, then it seems to me that a diaristo might be deputized to convey the results of a poll to this Mr. K, on behalf of the citizenry of AN, hopefully to the effect that he could single-handedly rejuvenate the tired marketing, branding and communication strategery , by changing that stoopid-from-the-inception dot color scheme. Not that I'm trying to drum-up support.

Now, it may be that nobody 'cept 67Marquez and YT actually gives an Angels fan's patoot about this issue.  If so, nobody will vote and Marquez and YT will retire to our respective corners, muttering and shaking an occasional angry fist at an indifferent deity.  Or, I might argue passionately that such a show of indifference is prima feces PROOF that the strategery is old-n-busted.  So what if I'd lose.

On the assumption that this screed has now gone on long enough that I can avoid getting Nico's goat, as it were,  'tis time for a thoroughly biased and unscientific poll of the AN cognoscenti (note that indifference is not an option -- express it, if you must, by not letting your voice be heard on this important topic):