It seems like this is the most popular topic at-hand, so let's get a front page discussion going. Here's the latest on Furcal Watch 2008:
The A's are the only team believed to have offered Furcal a guaranteed 4-year contract - for, it's believed, a guaranteed $40 million. The Dodgers are at 2-years guaranteed, with a 3rd year vesting option. The Royals are mentioned as a 3rd team still in the running and Furcal's ever-ambiguous agent, Paul Kinzer, indicated that a fourth "mystery" remains in the running. God, I kind of hate this Kinzer guy...
Anyways, Yahoo's Tim Brown just published this about an hour ago:
Asked if, as things stand, he [Furcal] would take the A’s offer, Kinzer said, “I can’t say that yet.”
He added, “We’re going to make a decision soon. By (Tuesday).”
There seems to be a lot of yo-yo-ing around occurring in the Furcal camp. Various "informed observers" believe that Oakland is the place that Furcal least wants to play next season, at least among the four teams under consideration, and with the way he's extending this negotiation, you can kind of believe that he's trying to get the Dodgers or Kansas City to guarantee more money or years in order to make the decision to turn down the A's that much easier.
The big question being debated in the ru155's thread seems to be: since it seems like Furcal would rather play somewhere else besides Oakland, but still might HAVE to accept the A's offer, how do you think us fans should react to his (potential) addition to the current team? While the reasons for his reticence toward Oakland seem to be based on his familiarity with other locations (Los Angeles) or with the management of other organizations (Kansas City) - and not on some personal dislike of the Bay Area or the A's franchise - as a fan of the A's you'd probably still like to feel some more positive vibes coming from a potential big-money free agent signee and not get the feeling that he's backing into a deal with our beloved franchise...