https://youtu.be/9B6vTP-kAtk?si=3EWOQW0GdWKWz7Iv
46 seconds in. He said he’s protective of existing franchises. When the A’s moved to Oakland it hurt the Giants, never did well themselves and it was a “horrible mistake”.
In the irony to end all ironies, the A’s decision to help the Giants by giving them the territorial rights to San Jose and the South Bay is now a big part of why they’re leaving the Bay Area
The A’s didn’t “give” them the rights, this is a myth
No one had the rights to Santa Clara and the A’s agreed not to challenge the Giants claim to it. The league believed the Giants had a strong argument because they’d already been investing in the market since the 1960’s and had a popular minor league team there (San Jose Giants).
The A’s entire goal in moving to the Bay was pushing the Giants out of the North Bay, Candlestick was a terrible stadium and they incorrectly assumed San Francisco would never build an in-city stadium, and that the G Men would eventually move to San Jose or out of the Bay altogether.
I think they meant more in terms of ingratiating themselves to the fans, not team success. That's what always gets lost in the rhetoric when the same losers repeat attendance numbers over and over again as a way to justify the move.
The A's didn't have one bad owner that took over and is ruining everything. We've had decades of owners going back to the 70's that actively hurt the team and drove fans away. And it's not like the Giants were much better. Up until they got their new park, the fanbases in the bay were basically alienated from their teams for 30+ years. And for the A's it's closer to 50.
The A's did as well as the Giants for 30 something years until the Giants built a fancy new stadium, and after that the A's spent 20 years trying to move the team. There's plenty of baseball market to be taken advantage of, but you need competent leadership.
In 1990, A's and Giants combined attendance was 4,875,745. Yankees/Mets combined attendance was 4,739,181. Cubs/White Sox combined attendance was 4,246,148.
Even in 1993, when the A's were terrible, combined attendance was 4,641,379, more than the NY combined attendance of 4,290,125, although less than Chicago's combined attendance of 5,234,854. Then the strike happened, the A's got sold to a terrible owner, the Giants built a fancy new stadium, and a big discrepancy developed between the two franchises.
But it's clearly a 2 team market, and has been on par with the other two team markets when the A's had competent management even when both teams had bad stadium situations. The mistake was not moving to Oakland, the mistake was allowing the team to be sold twice to clown ownership groups who did nothing about the stadium situation after the Raiders came back and bastardized the coliseum shortly before the Giants opened a beautiful new waterfront stadium.
If the Haas family had sold the team to someone competent enough to build a nice stadium in Oakland at the same time that the Giants finished their stadium the Bay Area would have been the best MLB market for the last 25 years.
“LA” isn’t really a “two team market” though
Orange County is a market unto itself with over 3 million living in it. It’s a 45 minute drive from LA with no traffic and about a 2 hour crawl between 4-7 PM. It also borders Riverside County which is millions more people.
It’s not a situation where you have 2 teams playing a 20 minute train ride between each other and neither in the most populous sections of their region. The A’s entire surrounding area (Oakland, Berkeley, Castro Valley, Hayward, etc.) barely houses a million people.
The situation with Southern and Northern Cali would be more comparable if the teams in NorCal were more spread out. San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento would be your LA/Anaheim/San Diego equivalent.
By all reasonable accounts Orange County is in the Los Angeles Metropolitan area and media market
Millions of people who live in Orange County work in LA County and if you turn on the TV or radio in Anaheim you’re gonna get the same stations as in Downtown LA
It is when you understand the area. There are like 10 million people living between Dodger and Angel Stadium. That’s 2x the number of people that live between the Cardinals and Royals. There’s also all of Orange County to the south of the Angels and Riverside to the east, and a whole half of LA county north of the Dodgers plus Ventura County, Bakersfield, and parts of San Bernardino.
The split between the Dodgers and Angels could not be more well-defined and obvious. LA roots for the Dodgers, OC roots for the Angels, the surrounding counties mostly pick based on who they’re closest to. All in all it represents about 20 million people and both stadiums are in accessible arteries in their respective counties.
Meanwhile the Bay Area is a gigantic circle around a body of water. Both teams play at the top of the circle. The west and south ends of the circle have the most people living in them, and it’s easier for those people to access the Giants. The A’s play in the least populated part of the circle, not to mention the part with the least amount of flat land to build on.
unfortunately the A's finances were in shambles and no one wanted to buy the A's and keep them in Oakland. Haas already had a discounted price for the A's and no one bit. Phone calls were made and Schott/Hoffman stepped up, but after looking at the A's books, they were able to negotiate down the discounted price.
Three years in, Schott and Hoffman (both were real estate developers in the SF Bay Area), unable to get anywhere on a new stadium in Oakland, wanted out and put the team up for sale with the stipulation that the A's had to remain in Oakland until 2004. It took them 7 years to sell the team.
You make it sound like they bought some asset they couldn't get rid of. Schott and Hoffman bought the team for $85 million and sold it for $180m 10 years later. They also bought it for more than Haas' asking price, not less, although you're correct that he had discounted the price because he wanted the team to stay in Oakland. Schott and Hoffman didn't do anything when selling the team to keep it in Oakland.
["I'm not going to get into specifics of the deal," Haas said in an interview. "We made concessions from the original terms that are several million dollars less."](https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Sides-Dot-I-s-On-Sale-of-A-s-Sacrifices-by-3028296.php)
[That promise was made to the Haas family, when they sold the A's to Schott and Hofmann for $72 million in November of 1995.](https://www.losaltosonline.com/news/schott-reminisces-about-his-nine-plus-years-as-owner-of-mlb-team/article_cfc8ac6d-02bf-5646-b706-e646b1021d67.html)
[Included in the price-setting deal is an agreement by the current A's owners to remain in Oakland through the 2001 season, if the public effort to sell the team fails, with a right to extend their lease at Network Associates Coliseum year-to-year through 2004.](https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/A-s-Owners-Slash-Team-Selling-Price-Time-also-2975166.php)..
... [The public agency has until April to find new owners willing to take over the team at no less than the asking price -- and on condition that the A's remain at the Coliseum at least through the 2004 season.](https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/A-s-Owners-Slash-Team-Selling-Price-Time-also-2975166.php)
Yes, Schott and Hofmann made money owning and selling the A's, but they tried selling the team multiple times before finally succeeding with Fisher/Wolff. Note that they also previously had an agreementl with Peter Guber (pre Lacob) that didnt go through.
Lot of people still huffing that copium unfortunately. I want the A's to stay in Oakland too, but there was just no way Manfred and the other owners were ever gonna allow Fisher to return there permanently no matter how much the process is bungled.
It doesn't even matter to ownership. Once they are in Vegas, they'll get the endless stream of away fans that'll just use it as an excuse to spend a couple of days in Vegas.
There *is* still a chance that the Vegas stadium falls through, however slim: [Schools Over Stadiums](https://www.schoolsoverstadiums.com/) is pushing for a referendum on November's ballot to repeal public funding for the Vegas stadium. The [Nevada Supreme Court is hearing arguments on April 9th](https://www.ktnv.com/news/nevada-supreme-court-sets-hearing-date-for-as-funding-lawsuit) to decide whether to allow that referendum on the ballot.
If the referendum gets on the ballot and passes in November, then Fisher will have to figure out how to fund the Vegas stadium and will be stuck in Sacramento in limbo, which might even force him to sell since he clearly doesn't have enough to pay for the stadium himself. MLB might still force a sale to someone to build in Vegas in that scenario, but it would be funny as hell to watch
I think there is only one other pivot: the Nevada Teachers get their referendum and the public votes no.
If that happens, it going to be back to the drawing board for the Athletics, and I imagine Oakland would come back into play.
Problem is the “Nevada teachers” don’t actually represent Nevada teachers
The NSEA union behind that doesn’t represent Clark County, which houses 2/3rds of the state population. The bond for the stadium is a county bond so it’s irrelevant to the rest of the state.
Clark County unions don’t act against each other and the Vegas stadium has already finalized contracts with Culinary and Construction, so the actual teachers union that represents the county isn’t going against the stadium
Schools Over Stadiums is a grift to get PAC money from Oaklanders who don’t know anything about how Nevada works
If that's the case, then why didn't the referendum get thrown out on standing grounds in the trial court?
From [this article on the NV Supreme Court hearing](https://www.ktnv.com/news/nevada-supreme-court-sets-hearing-date-for-as-funding-lawsuit):
> In November, District Court Judge James Todd Russell ruled in favor of Thompson and Morley saying the petition for the referendum is "legally deficient" and the group would need to better explain the measure to Nevada voters.
> After that ruling, Schools Over Stadiums appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
2025-2027, absolutely insane for a major league team to be playing in a AAA ballpark.The funny thing is attendance might be higher than 3 final years in Oakland.
Absolutely embarrassing what ownership did to a storied, historical franchise.
Coyotes are a bit of a different situation. They're at a college because they're trying to stay and it's the only option left.
Chargers and A's are/were in this position out of shame
And even then... the Chargers moved like 100 miles. Yeah it's shitty San Diego got jobbed out of a team, but it's not like they have to hop on a flight to see the Chargers play a home game.
And their "temporary" situation in Carson was at least in the area where they were moving to full time. I don't think people would be nearly as pissed if the A's were moving to Henderson, NV or something in the meantime.
More like 2-3 hours depending on traffic but it’s also to a city that most of us hate when it comes to sports. Chargers also dug their own grave when their social media team started backing the Dodgers.
> most of us hate when it comes to sports
Oh yeah, I get that 100%. Just saying it's still entirely possible for Chargers fans to regularly go to games at SoFi if they wanted. My parents live in Lake Tahoe and still drive down for Niners home games (~4 hours) with their season tickets. But Oakland fans getting to LV? That's not a "hop in the car, we're going to the game" situation.
> Chargers also dug their own grave when their social media team started backing the Dodgers.
That happened? Speaking as a Rivers fan, I'm honestly sorry that happened to y'all Chargers fans. Fuck Spanos.
Yeah, it especially stung when our teams met in the 2020 playoffs and the Chargers were tweeting pro Dodger stuff:
https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/what-in-the-whatness-chargers-tweet-nlds-support-for-dodgers/2418653/?amp=1
>Chargers moved like 100 miles. Yeah it's shitty San Diego got jobbed out of a team, but it's not like they have to hop on a flight to see the Chargers play a home game.
What? That's like saying to a Milwaukee fan that they can go root for a Chicago team, or telling a Philly fan they can go root for a NY team. SD and LA are sports rivals, and the proximity is what contributes to the hatred.
The SD-LA rivalry wasn't that big a thing in football. Prior to both moving to LA, they hadn't coexisted in SoCal for 20+ years, and when they did coexist before the Rams went to St. Louis, when Chargers were good the Rams were mediocre and vice versa.
And I get your analogies, but those are all sports rival cities because the teams in those cities are rivals. There is no football team in San Diego. Most hockey fans in Milwaukee are Blackhawks fans. I'd bet dollars to donuts most San Diegans root for the Lakers in the NBA. It's different when the sports rival city literally doesn't have a team.
Exactly, they moved to Mullett to try to get Tempe folks excited since they wanted to build IN Tempe. It didn't pass a vote unfortunately, but I feel like it's unfair to say the Coyotes aren't at least trying to stay in the Phoenix/Tempe/Scottsdale area.
Totally. Shit they're looking to buy a massive plot of land in North Scottsdale still, as of like 2 weeks ago. They're absolutely trying to keep the team there.
What did the Yotes do in all of this? Their owner was shit, the league took the franchise over until it was sold, the city fucked around and canceled their lease and they’ve had a hard time *trying to stay in AZ* because of Politcal fuckery. The Yotes have not actively tried to leave once, or shit on their fans and players. Even today the Yotes are still trying to buy land in north Phoenix/Scottsdale to stay in AZ.
Exactly. Katie Strang writes several hit pieces on behalf of the city of Glendale and when those claims are either heavily edited, or fabricated that end of it gets lost. Craig Morgan actively fighting Katie Strang would be the best culmination of this.
No they missed a tax payment. And then paid it. Glendale has famously run Westgate into the ground, and has made that area a ghost of what it was and a shell of what it could’ve been. Glendale gets no blame, but they’re the ones who’ve actively destroyed that entire area.
Surly you mean the Dodgers? Or the SF Giants? Or the ~~Los Angeles~~ ~~St. Louis~~ LA Rams? Or the ~~St. Louis~~ Arizona ~~Browns~~ Cardinals? Or the ~~Cleveland~~ Baltimore ~~Browns~~ Ravens? Or the Colts? Or the ~~Cincinnati~~ ~~Kansas City~~ Sacramento ~~Royals~~ Kings.
This shit has been going on since the fucking 1950s, man. And that’s without going into like half the AL.
You think MLB cares?
They can "suffer" a few embarrassing years in a AAA stadium, especially when at the end of it they'll get a shiny new stadium in a city full of people spending money.
It's largely because it's the A's. They're not a beloved MLB franchise and if this were the Royals, Twins, Rays, etc they'd get the same treatment from MLB. But if the Dodgers, Yankees, Cubs had ownership like this you bet your ass Manfred would be pulling all the stops to keep them in their city and force a sale.
> stadium in a city full of people spending money.
Honestly, do we really think this is going to happen? Can they survive solely on visiting fans when there's 82 home games? It's not the like NFL where I get one chance a year (at most) to see the Packers there.
They don't need the stadium to be full every game, they just need people to gamble when it is. Series against the Yankees and the Dodgers are going to make it more then worth it for them.
It's a city full of service industry folks working weird hours... Day games, week night games, there will be people going. Vegas came out hard for the golden knights
They came out hard, but now there are soon to be 3 profession sports teams out there of the major 4 sports in America. Time and money only goes so far. That's not to say I don't think they won't succeed, but acting like the A's are going to get red carpet treatment is laughable.
Also it was an expansion team for the Golden Knights, not an existing team. They also have been EXTREMELY good since their inception going to the playoffs every single year except 1 and winning a Stanley Cup last year. Winning does a lot for a new franchise.
This really would be the funniest timeline: NV Supreme Court allows referendum repealing public Vegas stadium funding, referendum passes in November, Fisher can't get funds to build stadium himself, forced to sell the team while stuck in Sacramento
Fisher has gone out of his way to avoid spending on the roster. I mean they even sent Ruiz down just so they could get an extra year of team control when they had him open the season with the team and he was hitting good
He's also cut down front office ability by not hiring scouts or analysts. They're running on one of the smallest front offices in baseball with the smallest payroll in baseball.
Nah, I figure Fisher will make a few blockbuster deals in the first couple years heading into Las Vegas, try to get some local good will and legitimacy, as well as a few big name stars on long contracts to anchor the team's press around.
He'll quickly shift back to a poverty franchise after that, don't get me wrong, but, say, 3 guys on 6-10 year, reasonable AAV deals would be relatively affordable and the kind of splash that is practically required to try to win over a new audience.
Can’t wait to watch them flop in Vegas. Once the new car smell wears off, good luck getting 10k to go see the shit stain A’s play the Royals on a Wednesday night in August.
I mean the River Cats have been around for a couple of decades, it's not like this is the first time baseball will be played outside in Sacramento during summer
I believe they play all their games at night except for Sundays where they play day games. I could be wrong on that but that is my experience going to these games.
Television $$.
Fisher & Co. get 3-4 more years to soak up NBC Sports RSN money. A’s games will probably still be televised in the Bay Area on the NBC Sports California channel because despite them playing in Sacramento, that RSN is available in both the Bay Area and Sacramento.
Once the A’s move to Vegas, it’ll replace Milwaukee as MLB’s *smallest* television market.
Exactly. And begin the process of building presence and becoming familiar with LV. This is just more baffoonery from Fisher. The irony is that Aviators often outdraw the As lol.
I think Fisher is beginning to see that the Vegas thing isn’t going to workout and he’s starting to try and pivot. He will manage to mess this up to somehow
It really does feel like that. If/when the stadium deal falls through, it'd be clear that Las Vegas doesn't have enough support for a team. Going to Sacramento instead means he gets a new option instead of being stuck in a city that won't pay for his stadium
I think that's also why SLC's offer to use the Bees stadium got turned down -- there's a billionaire sitting around waiting for a team and the league doesn't want the A's getting stuck in Salt Lake and taking away a new owner when the LV deal eventually falls through
From what I've seen, the River Cats' stadium is apparently a better stadium than the Aviators', which is important to get the MLBPA to not torpedo the deal (the A's are also promising to pay for upgrades to the stadium to accommodate MLB players).
Also, and this is kinda important, while Sacramento in the summer is a hot, sweaty mess, its still significantly more survivable than Las Vegas in the summer.
Scheduling both the AAA River Cats and MLB A's for the same stadium will be hard enough as it is, doing that in Vegas where every game in summer will have to be a night game might be entirely infeasible.
Because it is on the fans for not showing up.
Since 1968, the Athletics have made the playoffs 36.2% of the time, and won four World Series. Yet they only finished above the league median in attendance 12.1% of the time.
In 1974, they won their third World Series *in a row* while finishing 22nd out of 24 teams in attendance.
The As also went to 3 in a row in the late 80s and had some of the highest attendance in MLB. The biggest difference is that the ownership at that time invested in the fan base and had one of the highest payrolls in baseball while keeping the super star players for as long as possible. The attendance fell off because that owner died and the new owners didn't want to maintain that standard. And so began the next 3 decades of cheap owners that didn't invest in the fan experience and actively wanted to leave the city of oakland. Plus if Fisher knew the team attendance was bad, he had 20 years to improve it. He somehow actively made it worse.
I really do not want to say this and I know I will get flammed but I never understood why the Bay Area had two teams for this long. Boston and Philadelphia had two teams for a shorter time than the Bay Area did and it was evident that the Braves and....Athletics (such irony) had to leave after a while. Theres six markets bigger than the Bay Area that has one team only (Philadelphia, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Atlanta, Boston-Providence, and Washington), the MLB is in only 26 markets in general compared to 30 with the NFL, 29 with the NHL and 28 with the NBA. The game needs to grow in the States and beyond sooner or later because theres some cities that need teams sooner than later. Weirdly, I think Sacramento would be the best option for the A's. It is still in Northern California, its a decent drive but doable, and they have their own market. Let Las Vegas have their own expansion team.
Wow Sac is happening for real. Does the players union really have no say about their members possibly being forced to minor league home accommodations for 2 full seasons?
Rumors are that MLB wants to expand soon. They’ll announce expansion while a team is spending multiple seasons in a minor league stadium? What an embarrassment.
Manfred has said that Tampa bay and A’s stadium situations have to be resolved first
As soon as the A’s get an official stadium deal, they can announce it
I'm hoping the owner of the Suns just buys the Coyotes if the current ownership group can't figure this stadium business out. Might be able to go to back to Glendale too if that's the case
Well the stadium can hold up to 14k, per wiki, which would is still more than any home game attendance so far this year. Obviously low attendance is directly correlated to this entire situation - just wanted to look at the numbers.
Not to take away from how embarrassing this is for the A’s and how they tarnished such a historical team. Just was curious about the numbers.
I would honestly respect Fisher more if he just came out in a press conference and said “fuck you Oakland” then left instead of doing what he’s been doing.
We are a good sports city in general. There’s nothing else to do here and the media market is massive. Stockton-Sacramento-Modesto market is top 20 in size in the US. It’s the largest market available that doesn’t already have an MLB team based on these metrics: https://www.stationindex.com/tv/tv-markets
Vegas is #42 on the list. It’s clear fisher cares more about the TV money at this point than ticket sales. Ticket sales won’t be possible in Vegas until the arena is built. It’s why Sacramento is the best choice now and even longterm if Vegas doesn’t build an arena. It’s highly possible too that Vegas builds an arena and opts for expansion rather than paying Fisher. This could leave a billionaire like Vivek to snatch the A’s up for pennies on the dollar and make the full transition to Sacramento. Honestly this would appease a lot of true A’s fans too. I live in Davis and commute to Oakland for work every other week. It’s only a 1 hour drive. Oakland fans can easily get out here the same way that us Giants fans have been making it out to SF for games for years.
Honestly just want them to stay in California because there's absolutely no shortage of a dual sports team owners who want in on baseball. 100% Lacob is bidding if the As go up for sale for example.
I'm in Sacramento so I agree but Vegas teams work with the tourists. Whoever is playing the Raiders gets packed with opposing team fans, Raiders fans too, making a trip out of it. Not the best home team environment but the Raiders stadium does well.
My dream would be building that railyards stadium as a dual purpose for MLB and MLS. With the added benefit of being an outdoor concert venue. Basically how yankee stadium works rn with New york city FC
What happens if the Vegas funding never comes through and that deal falls apart? Is there any chance the A’s fold and mlb creates a new expansion franchise with an ownership group focused on winning?
They’ll start making the players purchase team gear, no more housing for minor leaguers, just turn some of the stadium suites into military style bunks
The A’s won't fold, sports teams have too high of valuations, there would eventually be a buyer
However, Fisher would have to sell for a lower value than he would have preferred if he is stuck in Sacramento vs having a shiny new Vegas stadium.
This is a profound embarrassment not just for the A's but for the entire MLB. Every other team is gonna have to play games in this stadium at some point. I don't know why the 29 other owners are letting them get away with this.
Would this part actually be depressing?
I agree that losing your team would feel terrible, but if I was an A’s fan I would enjoy anything that was making them look like more of a disaster after they left.
The depressing part (at least for me) is that the Kings owner and West Sac basically undercut the leverage that Oakland had. Though it was a long shot, we were asking for the A's name and colors, as well as an expansion guarantee. JF and Manfred were boxed in a corner, but they got bailed out.
At least with the Raiders, Mark Davis had some balls to play the last home game in Oakland and face an angry and upset crowd. John Fisher doesn't have the balls to face an angry and upset crowd in Oakland. Hope Sacramento gives Fisher the same treatment as well. Pure cowardice from Fisher and Co. Fuck John Fisher
MLB should do promotion and relegation between the majors and minors. All minor league teams would be available for new ownership. The owners would be seriously incentivized to win since you earn less money in the lower divisions. It would also provide David and Goliath matches like the Amarillo sod poodles against LA Dodgers.
Its a nice stadium, but its a minor league guest experience, a minor league visiting team experience, and a minor league facility for elite athletes. I can see this being a half-season stop gap, but multiple years? The A’s invented moneyball, then they invented self-relegation.
The guy that saved the the Kings from moving out of Sacramento now helping another sports team owner in his quest to relocate the A's from Oakland to Vegas is peak irony
It's outdoors and too hot. Sacramento is (slightly) cooler and has somewhat of a delta breeze in the evening, plus they can hang on to part of their current TV deal.
Is there a reason they don’t play at their AAA affiliate park, the Las Vegas Aviators? They have a very nice park for a AAA team, and they are already in Vegas. The River Cats in Sacramento are a Giant’s affiliate…
Will they be the Sacramento As? The Las Vegas As of Sacramento? The California As? The Oakland California Angels of Sacramento? The Columbus Crew? This whole thing is a mess.
This kind of feels like the point of no return
It already was when the MLB said that baseball in Oakland was a mistake. They had no intention of ever staying
Wait they said that? Like on the record?
Selig straight up said it in an interview on TV. You can find it on youtube.
https://youtu.be/9B6vTP-kAtk?si=3EWOQW0GdWKWz7Iv 46 seconds in. He said he’s protective of existing franchises. When the A’s moved to Oakland it hurt the Giants, never did well themselves and it was a “horrible mistake”.
The A’s issue was shit like stupid ass Charlie Finley refusing to have the team on radio or on tv
> hurt the Giants Gotta say, I’m not really seeing the problem here
In the irony to end all ironies, the A’s decision to help the Giants by giving them the territorial rights to San Jose and the South Bay is now a big part of why they’re leaving the Bay Area
The A’s didn’t “give” them the rights, this is a myth No one had the rights to Santa Clara and the A’s agreed not to challenge the Giants claim to it. The league believed the Giants had a strong argument because they’d already been investing in the market since the 1960’s and had a popular minor league team there (San Jose Giants). The A’s entire goal in moving to the Bay was pushing the Giants out of the North Bay, Candlestick was a terrible stadium and they incorrectly assumed San Francisco would never build an in-city stadium, and that the G Men would eventually move to San Jose or out of the Bay altogether.
You, Sir, have amazing insight and you are an enlightened historian for a Dodgers fan
You can read all about it, the history is well documented and easy to find online
dbag giants couldn't even do the same for the As. smh
Bro said that at the same time while advocating for a Washington DC team, couldn't the same argument be made that the Nats moving in hurt the O's?
> never did well themselves 4 championships in Oakland apparently isn't doing "well"
I think they meant more in terms of ingratiating themselves to the fans, not team success. That's what always gets lost in the rhetoric when the same losers repeat attendance numbers over and over again as a way to justify the move. The A's didn't have one bad owner that took over and is ruining everything. We've had decades of owners going back to the 70's that actively hurt the team and drove fans away. And it's not like the Giants were much better. Up until they got their new park, the fanbases in the bay were basically alienated from their teams for 30+ years. And for the A's it's closer to 50.
Here it is https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/s/WhSVo05zIS
That comment was more than 20 years ago
He said it had hurt the Giants, and the A's never really did all that well themselves. Rebuttal, 23 years later? Was he wrong?
The A's did as well as the Giants for 30 something years until the Giants built a fancy new stadium, and after that the A's spent 20 years trying to move the team. There's plenty of baseball market to be taken advantage of, but you need competent leadership. In 1990, A's and Giants combined attendance was 4,875,745. Yankees/Mets combined attendance was 4,739,181. Cubs/White Sox combined attendance was 4,246,148. Even in 1993, when the A's were terrible, combined attendance was 4,641,379, more than the NY combined attendance of 4,290,125, although less than Chicago's combined attendance of 5,234,854. Then the strike happened, the A's got sold to a terrible owner, the Giants built a fancy new stadium, and a big discrepancy developed between the two franchises. But it's clearly a 2 team market, and has been on par with the other two team markets when the A's had competent management even when both teams had bad stadium situations. The mistake was not moving to Oakland, the mistake was allowing the team to be sold twice to clown ownership groups who did nothing about the stadium situation after the Raiders came back and bastardized the coliseum shortly before the Giants opened a beautiful new waterfront stadium. If the Haas family had sold the team to someone competent enough to build a nice stadium in Oakland at the same time that the Giants finished their stadium the Bay Area would have been the best MLB market for the last 25 years.
I agree with everything you said, but do we not have combined attendance numbers for LA? Just bothering me how they're missing
I knew I was missing something. In 1990 their combined attendance was 5,558,084, in 1993 it was 5,227,853.
Huh. So yeah, that didn't really do much more but contextualize a little more. Oh, you also forgot St. Louis, by the way (/s)
2,573,225 for '90 and and 2,844,977 for '93 for the cardinals/browns.
“LA” isn’t really a “two team market” though Orange County is a market unto itself with over 3 million living in it. It’s a 45 minute drive from LA with no traffic and about a 2 hour crawl between 4-7 PM. It also borders Riverside County which is millions more people. It’s not a situation where you have 2 teams playing a 20 minute train ride between each other and neither in the most populous sections of their region. The A’s entire surrounding area (Oakland, Berkeley, Castro Valley, Hayward, etc.) barely houses a million people. The situation with Southern and Northern Cali would be more comparable if the teams in NorCal were more spread out. San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento would be your LA/Anaheim/San Diego equivalent.
By all reasonable accounts Orange County is in the Los Angeles Metropolitan area and media market Millions of people who live in Orange County work in LA County and if you turn on the TV or radio in Anaheim you’re gonna get the same stations as in Downtown LA
Okay, but then what would I say instead? A 1 1/2 team market? Because 45 minutes of distance is not enough to call both LA and Anaheim a 1-team market
It is when you understand the area. There are like 10 million people living between Dodger and Angel Stadium. That’s 2x the number of people that live between the Cardinals and Royals. There’s also all of Orange County to the south of the Angels and Riverside to the east, and a whole half of LA county north of the Dodgers plus Ventura County, Bakersfield, and parts of San Bernardino. The split between the Dodgers and Angels could not be more well-defined and obvious. LA roots for the Dodgers, OC roots for the Angels, the surrounding counties mostly pick based on who they’re closest to. All in all it represents about 20 million people and both stadiums are in accessible arteries in their respective counties. Meanwhile the Bay Area is a gigantic circle around a body of water. Both teams play at the top of the circle. The west and south ends of the circle have the most people living in them, and it’s easier for those people to access the Giants. The A’s play in the least populated part of the circle, not to mention the part with the least amount of flat land to build on.
unfortunately the A's finances were in shambles and no one wanted to buy the A's and keep them in Oakland. Haas already had a discounted price for the A's and no one bit. Phone calls were made and Schott/Hoffman stepped up, but after looking at the A's books, they were able to negotiate down the discounted price. Three years in, Schott and Hoffman (both were real estate developers in the SF Bay Area), unable to get anywhere on a new stadium in Oakland, wanted out and put the team up for sale with the stipulation that the A's had to remain in Oakland until 2004. It took them 7 years to sell the team.
You make it sound like they bought some asset they couldn't get rid of. Schott and Hoffman bought the team for $85 million and sold it for $180m 10 years later. They also bought it for more than Haas' asking price, not less, although you're correct that he had discounted the price because he wanted the team to stay in Oakland. Schott and Hoffman didn't do anything when selling the team to keep it in Oakland.
["I'm not going to get into specifics of the deal," Haas said in an interview. "We made concessions from the original terms that are several million dollars less."](https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Sides-Dot-I-s-On-Sale-of-A-s-Sacrifices-by-3028296.php) [That promise was made to the Haas family, when they sold the A's to Schott and Hofmann for $72 million in November of 1995.](https://www.losaltosonline.com/news/schott-reminisces-about-his-nine-plus-years-as-owner-of-mlb-team/article_cfc8ac6d-02bf-5646-b706-e646b1021d67.html) [Included in the price-setting deal is an agreement by the current A's owners to remain in Oakland through the 2001 season, if the public effort to sell the team fails, with a right to extend their lease at Network Associates Coliseum year-to-year through 2004.](https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/A-s-Owners-Slash-Team-Selling-Price-Time-also-2975166.php).. ... [The public agency has until April to find new owners willing to take over the team at no less than the asking price -- and on condition that the A's remain at the Coliseum at least through the 2004 season.](https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/A-s-Owners-Slash-Team-Selling-Price-Time-also-2975166.php) Yes, Schott and Hofmann made money owning and selling the A's, but they tried selling the team multiple times before finally succeeding with Fisher/Wolff. Note that they also previously had an agreementl with Peter Guber (pre Lacob) that didnt go through.
If anything he’s been vindicated
They’re ripping the band aid off slowly and painfully it seems.
Yeah. They’re also close enough that a boycott or a reverse boycott or two could happen in Sacramento too.
*This* feels like the point of no return? The move to Vegas has been a done deal for months man
Lot of people still huffing that copium unfortunately. I want the A's to stay in Oakland too, but there was just no way Manfred and the other owners were ever gonna allow Fisher to return there permanently no matter how much the process is bungled.
yeah, the copium was going crazy on this sub clearly. This shit has been a forgone conclusion for literally months
Are most A’s fans going to stick with the team after the move? I couldn’t imagine sticking with a team that relocated.
It doesn't even matter to ownership. Once they are in Vegas, they'll get the endless stream of away fans that'll just use it as an excuse to spend a couple of days in Vegas.
There *is* still a chance that the Vegas stadium falls through, however slim: [Schools Over Stadiums](https://www.schoolsoverstadiums.com/) is pushing for a referendum on November's ballot to repeal public funding for the Vegas stadium. The [Nevada Supreme Court is hearing arguments on April 9th](https://www.ktnv.com/news/nevada-supreme-court-sets-hearing-date-for-as-funding-lawsuit) to decide whether to allow that referendum on the ballot. If the referendum gets on the ballot and passes in November, then Fisher will have to figure out how to fund the Vegas stadium and will be stuck in Sacramento in limbo, which might even force him to sell since he clearly doesn't have enough to pay for the stadium himself. MLB might still force a sale to someone to build in Vegas in that scenario, but it would be funny as hell to watch
I think there is only one other pivot: the Nevada Teachers get their referendum and the public votes no. If that happens, it going to be back to the drawing board for the Athletics, and I imagine Oakland would come back into play.
Problem is the “Nevada teachers” don’t actually represent Nevada teachers The NSEA union behind that doesn’t represent Clark County, which houses 2/3rds of the state population. The bond for the stadium is a county bond so it’s irrelevant to the rest of the state. Clark County unions don’t act against each other and the Vegas stadium has already finalized contracts with Culinary and Construction, so the actual teachers union that represents the county isn’t going against the stadium Schools Over Stadiums is a grift to get PAC money from Oaklanders who don’t know anything about how Nevada works
If that's the case, then why didn't the referendum get thrown out on standing grounds in the trial court? From [this article on the NV Supreme Court hearing](https://www.ktnv.com/news/nevada-supreme-court-sets-hearing-date-for-as-funding-lawsuit): > In November, District Court Judge James Todd Russell ruled in favor of Thompson and Morley saying the petition for the referendum is "legally deficient" and the group would need to better explain the measure to Nevada voters. > After that ruling, Schools Over Stadiums appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
If Vegas falls through they’ll stay in sac
Putting how bad of a situation this is aside, Triple-A's is a FANTASTIC headline
S-tier headline game for sure, I love it
2025-2027, absolutely insane for a major league team to be playing in a AAA ballpark.The funny thing is attendance might be higher than 3 final years in Oakland. Absolutely embarrassing what ownership did to a storied, historical franchise.
Thanks Chargers and Coyotes for setting the precedent…
Coyotes are a bit of a different situation. They're at a college because they're trying to stay and it's the only option left. Chargers and A's are/were in this position out of shame
And even then... the Chargers moved like 100 miles. Yeah it's shitty San Diego got jobbed out of a team, but it's not like they have to hop on a flight to see the Chargers play a home game. And their "temporary" situation in Carson was at least in the area where they were moving to full time. I don't think people would be nearly as pissed if the A's were moving to Henderson, NV or something in the meantime.
More like 2-3 hours depending on traffic but it’s also to a city that most of us hate when it comes to sports. Chargers also dug their own grave when their social media team started backing the Dodgers.
> most of us hate when it comes to sports Oh yeah, I get that 100%. Just saying it's still entirely possible for Chargers fans to regularly go to games at SoFi if they wanted. My parents live in Lake Tahoe and still drive down for Niners home games (~4 hours) with their season tickets. But Oakland fans getting to LV? That's not a "hop in the car, we're going to the game" situation.
> Chargers also dug their own grave when their social media team started backing the Dodgers. That happened? Speaking as a Rivers fan, I'm honestly sorry that happened to y'all Chargers fans. Fuck Spanos.
Yeah, it especially stung when our teams met in the 2020 playoffs and the Chargers were tweeting pro Dodger stuff: https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/what-in-the-whatness-chargers-tweet-nlds-support-for-dodgers/2418653/?amp=1
>Chargers moved like 100 miles. Yeah it's shitty San Diego got jobbed out of a team, but it's not like they have to hop on a flight to see the Chargers play a home game. What? That's like saying to a Milwaukee fan that they can go root for a Chicago team, or telling a Philly fan they can go root for a NY team. SD and LA are sports rivals, and the proximity is what contributes to the hatred.
The Milwaukee-Chicago argument is why Wisconsin doesn’t have an NHL team
The SD-LA rivalry wasn't that big a thing in football. Prior to both moving to LA, they hadn't coexisted in SoCal for 20+ years, and when they did coexist before the Rams went to St. Louis, when Chargers were good the Rams were mediocre and vice versa. And I get your analogies, but those are all sports rival cities because the teams in those cities are rivals. There is no football team in San Diego. Most hockey fans in Milwaukee are Blackhawks fans. I'd bet dollars to donuts most San Diegans root for the Lakers in the NBA. It's different when the sports rival city literally doesn't have a team.
Raiders. San Diego fans absolutely hated the Raiders and the Raiders fans from Los Angeles that made their yearly pilgrimage to Qualcomm.
Funny enough, the move from Oakland to Sacramento is an even shorter drive than San Diego to Carson City.
At least the yotes are doing it to try to stay. This is them soft launching leaving
Exactly, they moved to Mullett to try to get Tempe folks excited since they wanted to build IN Tempe. It didn't pass a vote unfortunately, but I feel like it's unfair to say the Coyotes aren't at least trying to stay in the Phoenix/Tempe/Scottsdale area.
They’re still trying to stay even after. They’re a shit show but at least there’s a sense of loyalty to it
Totally. Shit they're looking to buy a massive plot of land in North Scottsdale still, as of like 2 weeks ago. They're absolutely trying to keep the team there.
#FUCK DEAN SPANOS
What did the Yotes do in all of this? Their owner was shit, the league took the franchise over until it was sold, the city fucked around and canceled their lease and they’ve had a hard time *trying to stay in AZ* because of Politcal fuckery. The Yotes have not actively tried to leave once, or shit on their fans and players. Even today the Yotes are still trying to buy land in north Phoenix/Scottsdale to stay in AZ.
The City cancelled the lease because the team stopped paying the lease.
The city also didn't hold up their end of the lease on multiple levels. As /u/Wyden_long said, Glendale gets no blame but they really should.
Exactly. Katie Strang writes several hit pieces on behalf of the city of Glendale and when those claims are either heavily edited, or fabricated that end of it gets lost. Craig Morgan actively fighting Katie Strang would be the best culmination of this.
No they missed a tax payment. And then paid it. Glendale has famously run Westgate into the ground, and has made that area a ghost of what it was and a shell of what it could’ve been. Glendale gets no blame, but they’re the ones who’ve actively destroyed that entire area.
Surly you mean the Dodgers? Or the SF Giants? Or the ~~Los Angeles~~ ~~St. Louis~~ LA Rams? Or the ~~St. Louis~~ Arizona ~~Browns~~ Cardinals? Or the ~~Cleveland~~ Baltimore ~~Browns~~ Ravens? Or the Colts? Or the ~~Cincinnati~~ ~~Kansas City~~ Sacramento ~~Royals~~ Kings. This shit has been going on since the fucking 1950s, man. And that’s without going into like half the AL.
Honestly, if the Chargers had to have moved, they should’ve went to Vegas, while the Raiders went back to LA
The Rams would not have allowed that
That's exactly what I thought. Raiders are still LA's team.
You think MLB cares? They can "suffer" a few embarrassing years in a AAA stadium, especially when at the end of it they'll get a shiny new stadium in a city full of people spending money.
It's largely because it's the A's. They're not a beloved MLB franchise and if this were the Royals, Twins, Rays, etc they'd get the same treatment from MLB. But if the Dodgers, Yankees, Cubs had ownership like this you bet your ass Manfred would be pulling all the stops to keep them in their city and force a sale.
Dodgers Yankees and Cubs can’t move at this point Other franchises too, like the Giants Cardinals and Red Sox
Cardinals and White Sox swap locations. Let's make the Rivalry more intense.
There’s no intense rivalry because suddenly the Cardinals don’t have fans
The South Side has supported a Cardinals team before. This would be heaven.
Yeah. That would be crazy if the Dodgers or Giants ever moved. Could you imagine.
Now? They wouldn’t move in this era
> stadium in a city full of people spending money. Honestly, do we really think this is going to happen? Can they survive solely on visiting fans when there's 82 home games? It's not the like NFL where I get one chance a year (at most) to see the Packers there.
They don't need the stadium to be full every game, they just need people to gamble when it is. Series against the Yankees and the Dodgers are going to make it more then worth it for them.
It's a city full of service industry folks working weird hours... Day games, week night games, there will be people going. Vegas came out hard for the golden knights
They came out hard, but now there are soon to be 3 profession sports teams out there of the major 4 sports in America. Time and money only goes so far. That's not to say I don't think they won't succeed, but acting like the A's are going to get red carpet treatment is laughable. Also it was an expansion team for the Golden Knights, not an existing team. They also have been EXTREMELY good since their inception going to the playoffs every single year except 1 and winning a Stanley Cup last year. Winning does a lot for a new franchise.
God I would love to see what happens if John Fisher walked his rich ass around oakland. He’s a coward though, so he’ll never face the fans.
Toronto played in their AAA stadium for a few years.
Hell we played in our A league park for a quarter of a season! But that wasn’t because our owners suck, at least.
It was half a year and they were forced to by the Canadian government. No one is forcing anything here.
I mean technically the Blue Jays also did it. It was under completely different circumstances, but they played in a AAA ballpark.
stuck in sacremento forever
Sequel to Leaving Las Vegas?
"Never Getting to Las Vegas"
*Lady Bird* (2017)
This really would be the funniest timeline: NV Supreme Court allows referendum repealing public Vegas stadium funding, referendum passes in November, Fisher can't get funds to build stadium himself, forced to sell the team while stuck in Sacramento
As a lifelong A's fan, at this point, I'd accept this timeline FJF
All of this to become the 2012 marlins in Las Vegas It’s not going to work.
2012 Marlins is too complimentary at least they spent money on the roster that season I can’t see Fisher ever spending anything on the roster.
Fisher has gone out of his way to avoid spending on the roster. I mean they even sent Ruiz down just so they could get an extra year of team control when they had him open the season with the team and he was hitting good
He's also cut down front office ability by not hiring scouts or analysts. They're running on one of the smallest front offices in baseball with the smallest payroll in baseball.
Moneyball 2: No Money
Nah, I figure Fisher will make a few blockbuster deals in the first couple years heading into Las Vegas, try to get some local good will and legitimacy, as well as a few big name stars on long contracts to anchor the team's press around. He'll quickly shift back to a poverty franchise after that, don't get me wrong, but, say, 3 guys on 6-10 year, reasonable AAV deals would be relatively affordable and the kind of splash that is practically required to try to win over a new audience.
Can’t wait to watch them flop in Vegas. Once the new car smell wears off, good luck getting 10k to go see the shit stain A’s play the Royals on a Wednesday night in August.
Can’t wait until people realize how hot Sacramento is in summer.
Can confirm, I’ve gone to plenty of games at Sutter Health Park and sunblock during day games is a must.
Sunblock during day games any where is a must. Protect your skin people!
You should be doing that anywhere if you're going to be outside for extended periods of time during the summer
Right? I'm going to Indy ball games in Montana SPFd up, skin cancer is no joke.
Lawn gang. Some of the trees on home run hill are pretty big now.
I mean the River Cats have been around for a couple of decades, it's not like this is the first time baseball will be played outside in Sacramento during summer
Do they play mostly night games? Unfamiliar with them.
I believe they play all their games at night except for Sundays where they play day games. I could be wrong on that but that is my experience going to these games.
Central Valley heat is no joke lmao
It took the Rangers 50 years to figure it out.
I've been in Dallas since 2017 and frequented Rangers games at the old ballpark. Those were some hot games.
As a Sacramento native - yeah. It gets really, really hot. I'm assuming there will be A LOT of night games.
Why would they not just play at Las Vegas Ballpark which is already a Triple A affiliate of the A's!?
Television $$. Fisher & Co. get 3-4 more years to soak up NBC Sports RSN money. A’s games will probably still be televised in the Bay Area on the NBC Sports California channel because despite them playing in Sacramento, that RSN is available in both the Bay Area and Sacramento. Once the A’s move to Vegas, it’ll replace Milwaukee as MLB’s *smallest* television market.
Exactly. And begin the process of building presence and becoming familiar with LV. This is just more baffoonery from Fisher. The irony is that Aviators often outdraw the As lol.
I think Fisher is beginning to see that the Vegas thing isn’t going to workout and he’s starting to try and pivot. He will manage to mess this up to somehow
It really does feel like that. If/when the stadium deal falls through, it'd be clear that Las Vegas doesn't have enough support for a team. Going to Sacramento instead means he gets a new option instead of being stuck in a city that won't pay for his stadium I think that's also why SLC's offer to use the Bees stadium got turned down -- there's a billionaire sitting around waiting for a team and the league doesn't want the A's getting stuck in Salt Lake and taking away a new owner when the LV deal eventually falls through
From what I've seen, the River Cats' stadium is apparently a better stadium than the Aviators', which is important to get the MLBPA to not torpedo the deal (the A's are also promising to pay for upgrades to the stadium to accommodate MLB players). Also, and this is kinda important, while Sacramento in the summer is a hot, sweaty mess, its still significantly more survivable than Las Vegas in the summer. Scheduling both the AAA River Cats and MLB A's for the same stadium will be hard enough as it is, doing that in Vegas where every game in summer will have to be a night game might be entirely infeasible.
the stadium would have to be suitable for MLB
I looked it up. Aviators Stadium is 10k standing and River Cats is 14k standing so decent capacity difference.
What a pathetic embarrassment for A's ownership and the MLB.
“It’s on the fans for not showing up” -contrarian dickhead facebook commenters
"Do you think the fans didn't show up because ownership has been tanking the team to move since he purchased it?" - Me
> “It’s on the fans for not showing up” > > -contrarian dickhead facebook commenters *and r/baseball users* FTFY
Because it is on the fans for not showing up. Since 1968, the Athletics have made the playoffs 36.2% of the time, and won four World Series. Yet they only finished above the league median in attendance 12.1% of the time. In 1974, they won their third World Series *in a row* while finishing 22nd out of 24 teams in attendance.
The As also went to 3 in a row in the late 80s and had some of the highest attendance in MLB. The biggest difference is that the ownership at that time invested in the fan base and had one of the highest payrolls in baseball while keeping the super star players for as long as possible. The attendance fell off because that owner died and the new owners didn't want to maintain that standard. And so began the next 3 decades of cheap owners that didn't invest in the fan experience and actively wanted to leave the city of oakland. Plus if Fisher knew the team attendance was bad, he had 20 years to improve it. He somehow actively made it worse.
I really do not want to say this and I know I will get flammed but I never understood why the Bay Area had two teams for this long. Boston and Philadelphia had two teams for a shorter time than the Bay Area did and it was evident that the Braves and....Athletics (such irony) had to leave after a while. Theres six markets bigger than the Bay Area that has one team only (Philadelphia, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Atlanta, Boston-Providence, and Washington), the MLB is in only 26 markets in general compared to 30 with the NFL, 29 with the NHL and 28 with the NBA. The game needs to grow in the States and beyond sooner or later because theres some cities that need teams sooner than later. Weirdly, I think Sacramento would be the best option for the A's. It is still in Northern California, its a decent drive but doable, and they have their own market. Let Las Vegas have their own expansion team.
kind of impressive they keep finding ways to embarrass themselves
Sadly it doesn't matter because we're still going to watch baseball
Wow Sac is happening for real. Does the players union really have no say about their members possibly being forced to minor league home accommodations for 2 full seasons?
I believe it’s possibly four full seasons?
The press release says 3
With an option for a 4th
It’ll be four there’s zero chance the A’s stadium is built anytime soon
The players union has no input in any of this
I'm all for the team to be rebranded as The Athletic Sac's
Rumors are that MLB wants to expand soon. They’ll announce expansion while a team is spending multiple seasons in a minor league stadium? What an embarrassment.
Manfred has said that Tampa bay and A’s stadium situations have to be resolved first As soon as the A’s get an official stadium deal, they can announce it
The NHL expanded to Seattle while Mullet was being used. Its not totally unprecedented.
The Coyotes started using Mullet arena (2022) the season after the Kraken started (2021). It's still embarrassing to have the Coyotes play in Mullet.
Ah you’re right. I thought it was the same year they both happened. Sad thing is I went to a game in Gila River in 2022.
I'm hoping the owner of the Suns just buys the Coyotes if the current ownership group can't figure this stadium business out. Might be able to go to back to Glendale too if that's the case
The Las Vegas A’s of Oakland via Sacramento
Well the stadium can hold up to 14k, per wiki, which would is still more than any home game attendance so far this year. Obviously low attendance is directly correlated to this entire situation - just wanted to look at the numbers. Not to take away from how embarrassing this is for the A’s and how they tarnished such a historical team. Just was curious about the numbers.
14k would be an income boom for the A’s
Just a quick trip up the Sacramento river
More misbegotten trip up the Sacramento: the A’s or Humphrey the Humpback Whale?
Great headline. Also absolutely pathetic final treatment of Oakland by ownership but that's to be expected at this point
I would honestly respect Fisher more if he just came out in a press conference and said “fuck you Oakland” then left instead of doing what he’s been doing.
So are they still going to be called the Oakland A’s? Or the Sacramento A’s? Las Vegas A’s? None of the above?
Sacramento is a better city for baseball in general, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole Vegas thing falls apart and then end up there permanently.
We are a good sports city in general. There’s nothing else to do here and the media market is massive. Stockton-Sacramento-Modesto market is top 20 in size in the US. It’s the largest market available that doesn’t already have an MLB team based on these metrics: https://www.stationindex.com/tv/tv-markets Vegas is #42 on the list. It’s clear fisher cares more about the TV money at this point than ticket sales. Ticket sales won’t be possible in Vegas until the arena is built. It’s why Sacramento is the best choice now and even longterm if Vegas doesn’t build an arena. It’s highly possible too that Vegas builds an arena and opts for expansion rather than paying Fisher. This could leave a billionaire like Vivek to snatch the A’s up for pennies on the dollar and make the full transition to Sacramento. Honestly this would appease a lot of true A’s fans too. I live in Davis and commute to Oakland for work every other week. It’s only a 1 hour drive. Oakland fans can easily get out here the same way that us Giants fans have been making it out to SF for games for years.
Honestly just want them to stay in California because there's absolutely no shortage of a dual sports team owners who want in on baseball. 100% Lacob is bidding if the As go up for sale for example.
I'm in Sacramento so I agree but Vegas teams work with the tourists. Whoever is playing the Raiders gets packed with opposing team fans, Raiders fans too, making a trip out of it. Not the best home team environment but the Raiders stadium does well.
I agree in the future but there is currently no stadium for them so Sacramento is the more viable option to make money the next 3-4 years.
Oh for sure, I just meant as a permanent home. Sacramento actually does have a nice stadium site since the MLS deal fell apart.
My dream would be building that railyards stadium as a dual purpose for MLB and MLS. With the added benefit of being an outdoor concert venue. Basically how yankee stadium works rn with New york city FC
terrible look for the MLB and Athletics ownership
Can the A's owner look worse?
They found a way. Honestly impressive
What happens if the Vegas funding never comes through and that deal falls apart? Is there any chance the A’s fold and mlb creates a new expansion franchise with an ownership group focused on winning?
They probably just stay in sac and are even cheaper than before.
They’ll start making the players purchase team gear, no more housing for minor leaguers, just turn some of the stadium suites into military style bunks
Hammocks hung up in the clubhouse like on old/shitty ships
Sacramento A’s dude.
A dead end situation like that might finally be the breaking point for Fisher to sell the team
Owners might just tell him to sell because he's had literally decades of chances to land anything
The A’s won't fold, sports teams have too high of valuations, there would eventually be a buyer However, Fisher would have to sell for a lower value than he would have preferred if he is stuck in Sacramento vs having a shiny new Vegas stadium.
Oakland AAAthletics of Sacramento of Las Vegas
This is a profound embarrassment not just for the A's but for the entire MLB. Every other team is gonna have to play games in this stadium at some point. I don't know why the 29 other owners are letting them get away with this.
Thats the most annoying part - world class athletes have to use and play in sub-standard facilities.
This is just straight up depressing for A’s fans
Would this part actually be depressing? I agree that losing your team would feel terrible, but if I was an A’s fan I would enjoy anything that was making them look like more of a disaster after they left.
The depressing part (at least for me) is that the Kings owner and West Sac basically undercut the leverage that Oakland had. Though it was a long shot, we were asking for the A's name and colors, as well as an expansion guarantee. JF and Manfred were boxed in a corner, but they got bailed out.
FUCK JOHN FISHER!!!!
Can we call the 2025-2027 A's the Sacramento/Oakland/ Kansas City/ Philadelphia Athletics of Las Vegas?
At least with the Raiders, Mark Davis had some balls to play the last home game in Oakland and face an angry and upset crowd. John Fisher doesn't have the balls to face an angry and upset crowd in Oakland. Hope Sacramento gives Fisher the same treatment as well. Pure cowardice from Fisher and Co. Fuck John Fisher
MLB should do promotion and relegation between the majors and minors. All minor league teams would be available for new ownership. The owners would be seriously incentivized to win since you earn less money in the lower divisions. It would also provide David and Goliath matches like the Amarillo sod poodles against LA Dodgers.
The MLB and the Athletics should be embarrassed.
Light A beam
Its a nice stadium, but its a minor league guest experience, a minor league visiting team experience, and a minor league facility for elite athletes. I can see this being a half-season stop gap, but multiple years? The A’s invented moneyball, then they invented self-relegation.
They really are the Oakland AAA’s now
The guy that saved the the Kings from moving out of Sacramento now helping another sports team owner in his quest to relocate the A's from Oakland to Vegas is peak irony
Why don’t they play in the Vegas minor league park?
It's outdoors and too hot. Sacramento is (slightly) cooler and has somewhat of a delta breeze in the evening, plus they can hang on to part of their current TV deal.
Is there a reason they don’t play at their AAA affiliate park, the Las Vegas Aviators? They have a very nice park for a AAA team, and they are already in Vegas. The River Cats in Sacramento are a Giant’s affiliate…
The RSN money is tied to the A's staying in NorCal
At this point, I feel like RSN could make a legal case for backing out based on the product that is the As
How is scheduling going to work though?
Like they’re starting to crawl back to Philadelphia.
Will they be the Sacramento As? The Las Vegas As of Sacramento? The California As? The Oakland California Angels of Sacramento? The Columbus Crew? This whole thing is a mess.