Is Oakland about to lose another franchise to Las Vegas? Possibly.
Athletics president says they'll pay for the park at the Waterfront. All Oakland has to do is put tax incentive zones, and develop the surrounding area. The team can leave for places like Vegas, Nashville, or Portland if the city of Oakland does not act right away and votes this project in.
Interview by ABC's Larry Beil.
http://abc7news.com/sports/as-president-explains-what-it-will-take-to-keep-team-in-oakland/10616234/ (http://abc7news.com/sports/as-president-explains-what-it-will-take-to-keep-team-in-oakland/10616234/)
For the A's sake I hope they move to Vegas. The Raiders have already benefitted hugely from moving.
Vegas can't support MLB, much larger crowds over a much longer time than the other sports. Charlotte, to me, makes the most sense, or San Antonio (always overlooked).
I think I'd vote for Nashville for the place that makes the most sense.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on May 12, 2021, 06:00:17 PM
I think I'd vote for Nashville for the place that makes the most sense.
Chris
It seems like it'd be a good fit. I don't think that would encroach too much on the Braves fan base.
I'd get the two florida teams out to sunnier pastures as well
Is there really a market for two MLB teams in the Bay Area?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 09:51:33 PM
Is there really a market for two MLB teams in the Bay Area?
I'm thinking most people who live there don't routinely cross the bridge to do things.
I'm definitely interested in seeing if the A's actually end up moving back east but to Charlotte (how about the Townies) or Nashville (the Stars are an idea). This will be interesting for both MiLB (there was once a team called the Athletic Baseball Club in the old Southern League of Colored Base Ballists, and Connie Mack was here during the early years of MiLB) and World Series (given that they will not be TOO far from the Braves, who once had a MiLB team here also called the Braves, whose legacy lives on at Terry Parker High in the Arlington area–there was also a Negro Major League team called the Red Caps, Red Caps being one of the old names of the team now since known as the Braves) purposes if the move does happen.
If the Athletics move they definitely do not need a change of name. The name literally fits for any city and has been in use since 1901.
Quote from: texaskdog on May 12, 2021, 11:08:05 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 09:51:33 PM
Is there really a market for two MLB teams in the Bay Area?
I'm thinking most people who live there don't routinely cross the bridge to do things.
Despite being close the Oakland and San Francisco are very different places. The fanbases don't have a ton of crossover traditionally. It was actually somewhat controversial when the Warriors moved from Oakland since a lot of people thought that was a betrayal of the fan base.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 09:51:33 PM
Is there really a market for two MLB teams in the Bay Area?
There is if you put one of them in the South Bay, but the Giants do not want the A's going down there. I believe they have the right to block that move.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 09:51:33 PM
Is there really a market for two MLB teams in the Bay Area?
To think there was a time when St. Louis used to have 2 MLB teams. The Cardinals and the Browns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_St._Louis_Browns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvopzY0Qy4o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC_dpKONlhg
Doubtful then the A's would move to Montreal, it'll be a miracle if they move there.
Tampa is likely going to Montreal in the near future.
Chris
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 12:57:15 PM
For the A's sake I hope they move to Vegas. The Raiders have already benefitted hugely from moving.
Vegas wouldn't work with those hot summers. Charlotte makes the most sense.
Anyplace the A's go other than Montreal, there is going to be at least one team that will see it as territorial infringement. Even places like Las Vegas and Charlotte, which aren't really close to another team, the Dodgers (and to a lesser extent the Angels) and the Braves are going to lose TV viewers to the A's.
Does Austin, TX count as a candidate for getting the A's or not. I know Austin, TX has been getting attention here in California because some of the Tech CEO's and VC leaders have been talking about leaving CA for Texas for some time though. But that may not translate necessarily for MLB teams moving though.
I just realized something: This would be the fourth time (IIRC) that one city gained multiple franchises from another, with Oakland getting the A's and Warriors from Philadelphia (although they were via Kansas City and San Francisco, respectively), Atlanta getting the Braves and Hawks from Milwaukee (with the second one via St. Louis), and recently, Los Angeles getting the Clippers and Chargers from San Diego.
Quote from: FightingIrish on May 13, 2021, 09:20:47 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 12:57:15 PM
For the A's sake I hope they move to Vegas. The Raiders have already benefitted hugely from moving.
Vegas wouldn't work with those hot summers. Charlotte makes the most sense.
True, but Arizona has a team.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 13, 2021, 12:35:51 PM
Quote from: FightingIrish on May 13, 2021, 09:20:47 AM
Quote from: thspfc on May 12, 2021, 12:57:15 PM
For the A's sake I hope they move to Vegas. The Raiders have already benefitted hugely from moving.
Vegas wouldn't work with those hot summers. Charlotte makes the most sense.
True, but Arizona has a team.
And if they went to Vegas, I would assume they'd probably have a dome (retractable or not).
Chris
Quote from: Henry on May 13, 2021, 11:26:03 AM
I just realized something: This would be the fourth time (IIRC) that one city gained multiple franchises from another, with Oakland getting the A's and Warriors from Philadelphia (although they were via Kansas City and San Francisco, respectively), Atlanta getting the Braves and Hawks from Milwaukee (with the second one via St. Louis), and recently, Los Angeles getting the Clippers and Chargers from San Diego.
The USFL LA Express we're originally supposed to play in San Diego but it never happened.
I don't like professional sports in Las Vegas simply on principle. Remember how gambling was such a scourge that to associate your sports league with it was to indelibly stain the sport? The Black Sox; Pete Rose; all that shit?
Well never mind that, welcome to opening day of the Las Vegas Athletics brought to you by Draft Kings and the fucking Mirage!
Ha, ha! We're so desperate to increase viewership that we'll embrace degenerate gamblers now!
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 13, 2021, 04:14:09 PM
I don't like professional sports in Las Vegas simply on principle. Remember how gambling was such a scourge that to associate your sports league with it was to indelibly stain the sport? The Black Sox; Pete Rose; all that shit?
Well never mind that, welcome to opening day of the Las Vegas Athletics brought to you by Draft Kings and the fucking Mirage!
Ha, ha! We're so desperate to increase viewership that we'll embrace degenerate gamblers now!
If you like betting on hockey, it's great to bet against the Knights since they get artificially inflated lines from the locals betting on their own team.
Chris
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 13, 2021, 04:14:09 PM
I don't like professional sports in Las Vegas simply on principle. Remember how gambling was such a scourge that to associate your sports league with it was to indelibly stain the sport? The Black Sox; Pete Rose; all that shit?
Well never mind that, welcome to opening day of the Las Vegas Athletics brought to you by Draft Kings and the fucking Mirage!
Ha, ha! We're so desperate to increase viewership that we'll embrace degenerate gamblers now!
Professional athletes make so much now that there is little risk of Vegas players being on the take. Plus sports betting is now legal in many other states where there are teams.
Quote from: bing101 on May 13, 2021, 09:56:11 AM
Does Austin, TX count as a candidate for getting the A's or not. I know Austin, TX has been getting attention here in California because some of the Tech CEO's and VC leaders have been talking about leaving CA for Texas for some time though. But that may not translate necessarily for MLB teams moving though.
I mentioned San Antonio because it's still a much larger metro area than Austin, but a stadium on the north side would draw from both.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 13, 2021, 04:14:09 PM
I don't like professional sports in Las Vegas simply on principle. Remember how gambling was such a scourge that to associate your sports league with it was to indelibly stain the sport? The Black Sox; Pete Rose; all that shit?
Well never mind that, welcome to opening day of the Las Vegas Athletics brought to you by Draft Kings and the fucking Mirage!
Ha, ha! We're so desperate to increase viewership that we'll embrace degenerate gamblers now!
With Vegas not the only place to bet on sports, the stigma should get reduced a bit. In NJ, you can bet on in-state games. They actually are getting larger gross sports betting income than Nevada (helped in part because people couldn't get to Vegas over the past year).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 14, 2021, 03:52:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 13, 2021, 04:14:09 PM
I don't like professional sports in Las Vegas simply on principle. Remember how gambling was such a scourge that to associate your sports league with it was to indelibly stain the sport? The Black Sox; Pete Rose; all that shit?
Well never mind that, welcome to opening day of the Las Vegas Athletics brought to you by Draft Kings and the fucking Mirage!
Ha, ha! We're so desperate to increase viewership that we'll embrace degenerate gamblers now!
With Vegas not the only place to bet on sports, the stigma should get reduced a bit. In NJ, you can bet on in-state games. They actually are getting larger gross sports betting income than Nevada (helped in part because people couldn't get to Vegas over the past year).
Here, the Oregon Lottery has an app you can download just for sports betting. The stigma of sports betting is certainly going by the wayside.
Seems like the A's will be gone.
(From SFGate.com)
A's president John Fisher is "impatient and upset at the city of Oakland for not moving heaven and earth to immediately come to terms on a complicated proposal for a ballark/associated developments at the Howard Terminal."
Immediately? Oakland has been fumbling over a new stadium for years now, and this will be the third pro franchise the city has lost.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on May 25, 2021, 05:19:24 PM
Seems like the A's will be gone.
(From SFGate.com)
A's president John Fisher is "impatient and upset at the city of Oakland for not moving heaven and earth to immediately come to terms on a complicated proposal for a ballark/associated developments at the Howard Terminal."
Immediately? Oakland has been fumbling over a new stadium for years now, and this will be the third pro franchise the city has lost.
Of course, now the question is which major metro area wants the A's more than any other.
And so, with the Braves staying in Atlanta (technically, Cobb County) for the long run, the A's will have the record for most relocations by a single MLB franchise...if Las Vegas or Portland wins the fight to lure them.
And I'd be fine with that, because they really don't need to move east and mess up the whole system. Leave that to the Rays who may leave Tampa/St. Pete because of government officials not giving in to their own demands for a new ballpark either.
Quote from: Henry on May 26, 2021, 07:45:14 PM
And so, with the Braves staying in Atlanta (technically, Cobb County) for the long run, the A's will have the record for most relocations by a single MLB franchise...if Las Vegas or Portland wins the fight to lure them.
And I'd be fine with that, because they really don't need to move east and mess up the whole system. Leave that to the Rays who may leave Tampa/St. Pete because of government officials not giving in to their own demands for a new ballpark either.
May want to start a new thread on the Rays' possible relocation. Portland seems to have been itching for a MLB team for awhile. Las Vegas would have been a no-go due to the whole sports betting thing so who knows, but nowadays it isn't out of the question.
I highly doubt Montreal is going to be the relocated city for a team.
Quote from: Flint1979 on May 26, 2021, 11:55:52 PM
I highly doubt Montreal is going to be the relocated city for a team.
I'm not even sure if they're ready for another MLB team. If anything, they'll (the Rays) be in the Deep South like they are now. Maybe Charlotte.
I don't know what is with this Montreal obsession. The Expos had dismal attendance the last few years they were there. I think Portland would be the best place for the A's. It's on the west coast so they would not have to realign divisions. Although Vegas would be ok. I don't see why California needs 5 baseball teams so if they moved anywhere that would bee ok.
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 13, 2021, 08:23:42 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 09:51:33 PM
Is there really a market for two MLB teams in the Bay Area?
There is if you put one of them in the South Bay, but the Giants do not want the A's going down there. I believe they have the right to block that move.
Right. I was thinking San Jose would be the best location but thanks to the Giants they won't let that happen.
To me, Charlotte and Las Vegas are the best candidates for relocation. I just don't think it will work in Portland.
Quote from: dvferyance on October 07, 2021, 09:09:09 PM
I don't know what is with this Montreal obsession. The Expos had dismal attendance the last few years they were there.
The "obsession" is that, well, Montreal is huge. Well over 4M people in its metro area, well over 8M in the entire province.
As to the attendance problems in Montreal, it was a series of really stupid moves by the government which resulted in a 8 year wait to get into a stadium, which really was not finished for about 2 years after that. A stadium that was to have a retractable roof that never worked and which resulted in a dank basement type atmosphere. A stadium designed by a Euro guy who had never seen either an American football or a baseball game.
That combined with Quebec and Canadian politics that crashed the C$, as Canadian teams in all sports take in C$ and pay out US$; and which drove businesses, and the English speaking minority that worked for them, to relocate out of Quebec.
This was followed by, and yes the plot of Major League is similar, an owner who not only tried to lose, but actually tried to make the team unpopular, so he could get a team in Miami.
With a proper ballpark and an owner who would understand the unique cultural and economic realities, there is no reason Montreal could not be a great major league city.
Reportedly the A's are looking at the Tropicana property on the southeast corner of The Strip and Tropicana Avenue.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/athletics/as-reportedly-eyeing-tropicana-site-for-possible-strip-ballpark-2488711/ (https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/athletics/as-reportedly-eyeing-tropicana-site-for-possible-strip-ballpark-2488711/)
Theoretically most of the hotel could stay while a ballpark would be built on one corner of the property. The Tropicana property is about 35 acres; Target Field in Minneapolis has the smallest footprint of any ballpark in Major League Baseball at about 8.5 acres. I do think a MLB park would have to be on The Strip; the minor league park out in Summerlin along the 215 Beltway is fine for AAA which draws local residents, but MLB and the casino resorts would be looking for visitors to fill the park (and the casinos).
It seems to me the A's ownership is laying some groundwork for MLB to go into Las Vegas eventually, whether it's themselves or a future expansion team.
If there is a prolonged labor outage, especially one that results in cancelled 2022 games, I wonder how this affects the A's staying in or leaving Oakland.
Quote from: SectorZ on December 02, 2021, 08:11:38 AM
If there is a prolonged labor outage, especially one that results in cancelled 2022 games, I wonder how this affects the A's staying in or leaving Oakland.
IMHO, any strike will erode public support for being taxed to build workplaces for these people. In Oakland, Montreal, Las Vegas, St. Petersburg, wherever.
Quote from: SP Cook on December 02, 2021, 08:36:22 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on December 02, 2021, 08:11:38 AM
If there is a prolonged labor outage, especially one that results in cancelled 2022 games, I wonder how this affects the A's staying in or leaving Oakland.
IMHO, any strike will erode public support for being taxed to build workplaces for these people. In Oakland, Montreal, Las Vegas, St. Petersburg, wherever.
Not going to be a strike. The owners locked out the players last night precisely to prevent a strike. The last strike in the four major North American pro leagues was the infamous baseball strike of 1994—95. Every work stoppage since then has been a lockout. The owners wised up when MLB had to cancel the World Series (and, to a lesser degree, in 1992 when the Stanley Cup Playoffs were postponed by two weeks due to a players' strike). The owners make a lot of money on the postseason, especially in the NBA and NHL because their postseasons are so long. They learned the lesson of not giving the players control over when a work stoppage begins.
Quote from: gonealookin on December 01, 2021, 09:55:39 PM
Reportedly the A's are looking at the Tropicana property on the southeast corner of The Strip and Tropicana Avenue.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/athletics/as-reportedly-eyeing-tropicana-site-for-possible-strip-ballpark-2488711/ (https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/athletics/as-reportedly-eyeing-tropicana-site-for-possible-strip-ballpark-2488711/)
Theoretically most of the hotel could stay while a ballpark would be built on one corner of the property. The Tropicana property is about 35 acres; Target Field in Minneapolis has the smallest footprint of any ballpark in Major League Baseball at about 8.5 acres. I do think a MLB park would have to be on The Strip; the minor league park out in Summerlin along the 215 Beltway is fine for AAA which draws local residents, but MLB and the casino resorts would be looking for visitors to fill the park (and the casinos).
It seems to me the A's ownership is laying some groundwork for MLB to go into Las Vegas eventually, whether it's themselves or a future expansion team.
At least they're still negotiating with Oakland about the Howard Terminal site, so don't count on a Raiders reunion yet.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 13, 2021, 08:01:46 AM
Quote from: texaskdog on May 12, 2021, 11:08:05 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 12, 2021, 09:51:33 PM
Is there really a market for two MLB teams in the Bay Area?
I'm thinking most people who live there don't routinely cross the bridge to do things.
Despite being close the Oakland and San Francisco are very different places. The fanbases don't have a ton of crossover traditionally. It was actually somewhat controversial when the Warriors moved from Oakland since a lot of people thought that was a betrayal of the fan base.
True San Francisco is viewed as the Manhattan of California with financial industry types in the area. Oakland is more industrial like a Northern California version of Long Beach. Oakland is more oriented to nonprofits bay area districts.
As far as relocating a team to Austin or San Antonio, the combined markets are certainly large enough. but the Astros and Rangers would both fight a third AL team relocating to Texas. Both see Central Texas as their turf, and one or the other has had a Triple-A affiliate in Round Rock for years (depending on which organization Nolan Ryan was affiliated with).
Since the Raiders now play in a Vegas stadium that looks like a Roomba, that suggests to me an A's move to Vegas will involve building a stadium that looks like an Alexa or something.
https://www.abc10.com/article/news/local/california/agency-clears-way-oakland-athletics-12b-ballpark-plan/103-c7577fc3-684f-4d25-8027-cff8d5479b05
Here is more on the current talks over the A's Stadium plans.
And they're gone.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/eastbay/article/oakland-a-s-reportedly-close-stadium-deal-las-17907710.php
I feel bad for the City of Oakland, having lost all three of their franchises in the last four years.
Quote from: Bruce on April 20, 2023, 03:17:03 AM
And they're gone.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/eastbay/article/oakland-a-s-reportedly-close-stadium-deal-las-17907710.php
Quote from the article:
Quote"I am deeply disappointed that the A's have chosen not to negotiate with the City of Oakland as a true partner, in a way that respects the long relationship between the fans, the City and the team," (Oakland Mayor Sheng) Thao said. "The City has gone above and beyond in our attempts to arrive at mutually beneficial terms to keep the A's in Oakland. In the last three months, we've made significant strides to close the deal. Yet, it is clear to me that the A's have no intention of staying in Oakland and have simply been using this process to try to extract a better deal out of Las Vegas. I am not interested in continuing to play that game – the fans and our residents deserve better."
Let me ponder that for a few minutes.... :confused: :paranoid: :-D
The problems with the Oakland Coliseum was noted for well over a decade, and probably two. While it is the fifth oldest MLB stadium, it is also the worst-maintained stadium which resulted in the ranking of worst stadium for both MLB and NFL (until the Raiders moved away, moving FedEx Field to last place). While I salute the City of Oakland's stand with avoid public funding of a sports stadium, that city's hubris has resulted in the feeling of "all talk, no real action". Yes, the management of the As needs to share the blame as well, but with that level of cooperation from Oakland, I can see the current action.
Quote from: Alps on May 12, 2021, 05:59:07 PM
Vegas can't support MLB, much larger crowds over a much longer time than the other sports. Charlotte, to me, makes the most sense, or San Antonio (always overlooked).
San Antonio never drew well, yet Austin (Round Rock) does.
I wouldn't be surprised if taxes played a role, given California's high income tax rate and Nevada's lack thereof.
Looks like a done deal. The 2027 date is troubling, playing 3 and 7/8ths lame duck seasons in a ball park that is already decrepit and clearly not going to even be cleaned anymore, is poison. The AAA stadium in Las Vegas only holds 10K and looks hemmed in by other buildings and roads, but certainly they could bump it up close to 20K, which is probably more than the A's would draw in Oakland more than a few special events.
This also sets off are, rare under the new rules as teams cannot just move about like they used to, contest to get the relocated AAA Las Vegas team, and then probably cascading down from that.
From what I read, the AAA team is staying in Vegas, and the A's new stadium will only hold 30,000, both of which seem rather odd. Look for more possums than spectators in Oakland...
Quote from: SP Cook on April 20, 2023, 10:03:08 AM
Looks like a done deal. The 2027 date is troubling, playing 3 and 7/8ths lame duck seasons in a ball park that is already decrepit and clearly not going to even be cleaned anymore, is poison. The AAA stadium in Las Vegas only holds 10K and looks hemmed in by other buildings and roads, but certainly they could bump it up close to 20K, which is probably more than the A's would draw in Oakland more than a few special events.
This also sets off are, rare under the new rules as teams cannot just move about like they used to, contest to get the relocated AAA Las Vegas team, and then probably cascading down from that.
Two reactions to that:
1. I think the AAA team will stay in their current ballpark in Summerlin. I've been there a few times, it's a very nice facility, both for the fans and, according to players, them too. The Aviators can continue to attract locals who want to take the kids to a baseball game without paying major league prices. This arrangement works in some other areas like Minneapolis (the Twins' AAA affiliate plays in St. Paul) and Houston (AAA affiliate in Sugar Land).
2. The A's few remaining fans will stay away the rest of this season, and the Coliseum will be a TV studio for their remaining home games. Their lease in Oakland only extends through 2024, so the remaining year can probably be settled financially. MLB also controls the minor league scheduling now, and I expect the A's and the AAA Aviators will share that ballpark in Summerlin from 2024-2026, alternating weeks at home. The arrangement will require an agreement with the Howard Hughes Corp., which owns the Aviators, but they have said they have been in communciation with A's ownership all along so I think that is workable. The Major League Baseball Players Association will also have to agree to playing in a minor league ballpark for those years and will have to be accommodating as to scheduling issues that conflict with the terms of the current collective bargaining agreement; in many cases the CBA would require the A's to play a day game prior to travel by the visiting team and also themselves, but the Players Association will need to waive the requirement to allow them to play all night games after about the middle of May. Honestly I think the players will be so glad to have the Oakland Coliseum behind them that there won't be a problem there.
Booo, Las Vegas sucks.
Insert my normal rant about how it used to be a big deal for sports to distance themselves from gambling, but now everyone has given up. Too many grifters wanting to make a buck off of addicts.
Just makes me think of something like..
"Gladiators demand Rome build new arena to replace aging Colosseum; threaten to move to Carthage."
Quote from: gonealookin on April 20, 2023, 03:54:18 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on April 20, 2023, 10:03:08 AM
Looks like a done deal. The 2027 date is troubling, playing 3 and 7/8ths lame duck seasons in a ball park that is already decrepit and clearly not going to even be cleaned anymore, is poison. The AAA stadium in Las Vegas only holds 10K and looks hemmed in by other buildings and roads, but certainly they could bump it up close to 20K, which is probably more than the A's would draw in Oakland more than a few special events.
This also sets off are, rare under the new rules as teams cannot just move about like they used to, contest to get the relocated AAA Las Vegas team, and then probably cascading down from that.
Two reactions to that:
1. I think the AAA team will stay in their current ballpark in Summerlin. I've been there a few times, it's a very nice facility, both for the fans and, according to players, them too. The Aviators can continue to attract locals who want to take the kids to a baseball game without paying major league prices. This arrangement works in some other areas like Minneapolis (the Twins' AAA affiliate plays in St. Paul) and Houston (AAA affiliate in Sugar Land).
I wonder if they would be re-branded as the Summerlin Aviators if/when the A's move to Vegas happens.
Quote from: davewiecking on April 20, 2023, 02:42:59 PM
From what I read, the AAA team is staying in Vegas, and the A's new stadium will only hold 30,000, both of which seem rather odd. Look for more possums than spectators in Oakland...
It seems to me that in a market like Las Vegas, a small capacity stadium helps to promote a stable long-term base of local season ticket holders.
A 30,000 seat ballpark is probably going to be packed every night. A lot of those people will be from out of town, following their own team into Vegas for a three-game series. Locals who invest in season ticket plans can go to a few games of their choosing and be fairly confident that they will be able to resell the bulk of their tickets to the visitors at a premium, because of the high prices created by the scarcity.
If a 45,000 seat ballpark is built, maybe the A's draw 35,000 on average, greater than 30,000 but it leaves an average 10,000 empty seats every night. Then it's not so clear that being a season ticket holder is profitable; on some of the lower demand games the reseller is likely to have to dump tickets at a loss or maybe not be able to sell them at all. This problem gets worse as years go by as Royals fans from Kansas City have already seen the Royals in Vegas two or three times and their demand begins to wane.
Visiting fans as a large percentage of the crowd in Vegas has already been very clearly visible at Raiders games. If the Chiefs went to Oakland you would barely see any red in the crowd at all, all silver and black, but watching KC at Vegas there was an enormous amount of Chiefs Red in the stands.
Sad, but not surprised, that the A's will soon be on the move again. Philadelphia to Kansas City to Oakland, and now to Las Vegas...that would be the most relocations by an MLB franchise ever after being tied with the Boston-Milwaukee-Atlanta Braves in that category for well over 50 years. Now Sin City just needs to add an NBA team to make its collection complete. Also, the Giants will be the only ticket in town, and I feel bad for Oakland, which has gone from three major league franchises to none at all (thanks to that impending Raiders reunion down on The Strip).
Hopefully the same thing will not be replayed in the Tampa Bay Area; the Rays deserve a better fate than this.
I just question the long term viability of major league baseball as a whole, especially with some of the regional sports networks collapsing. That's not a insignificant chunk of change that is received in terms of rights fees.
Might not be as done a deal as people think: the public financing portion (https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/potential-deal-for-as-relocation-to-las-vegas-could-rely-on-500-million-in-public-financing) has not yet been finalized. Unlike with the Raiders, where the public financing/incentives were entirely local, the A's want state incentives, which may be a hard sell. Allegiant Stadium is also far easier to use for other events (UNLV uses it, for example) than a baseball stadium would be.
Allegiant Stadium wasn't the easiest sell and this will likely be harder, because the state portion of that deal was solely to allow Clark County to raise taxes.
As Bing chatGPT put it:
"The A's have a written land deal with developers, but the bill that would authorize the funding mechanism for the public portion of the stadium project is still in the works. The bill has not been made public or formally introduced yet, and it will have to go through all the usual steps before it can be voted on. These steps include committee hearings, amendments, and possibly a conference committee. The bill also faces a tight deadline of fewer than six weeks to pass both chambers. Then the full Clark County Commission has to approve the funding and land use. Therefore, nothing is final until the bill is signed into law, but things are looking optimistic for A's about their chances of getting a new home in Las Vegas."
Quote from: on_wisconsin on April 21, 2023, 01:01:37 AM
As Bing chatGPT put it:
"The A's have a written land deal with developers, but the bill that would authorize the funding mechanism for the public portion of the stadium project is still in the works. The bill has not been made public or formally introduced yet, and it will have to go through all the usual steps before it can be voted on. These steps include committee hearings, amendments, and possibly a conference committee. The bill also faces a tight deadline of fewer than six weeks to pass both chambers. Then the full Clark County Commission has to approve the funding and land use. Therefore, nothing is final until the bill is signed into law, but things are looking optimistic for A's about their chances of getting a new home in Las Vegas."
chatGPT isn't quite right there about the "tight deadline", because as noted in the Nevada Independent article linked by cl94 in the prior comment, the Governor can and does call special sessions of the Legislature to settle specific issues, and it was in just such a special session in 2016 that the financing issues regarding Allegiant Stadium were resolved. This could be finalized later in this calendar year.
Stuff could still come up to scare the politicians away, but I don't think any of the parties involved would have said as much as they have in the last couple days unless they thought they had the framework of a financing plan that would get through the Legislature. So I would agree with the overall conclusion about "things looking optimistic".
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 20, 2023, 04:05:57 PM
Booo, Las Vegas sucks.
Insert my normal rant about how it used to be a big deal for sports to distance themselves from gambling, but now everyone has given up. Too many grifters wanting to make a buck off of addicts.
You do realize 641,000 people live in Las Vegas, right? That's twice as many people as Madison has. And over 2.2 million people live in Clark County. Like, other things happen there besides gambling. So there are plenty of people living there that, whether they're involved in gaming or not, might want to have a team in their city.
If you're going to say a team shouldn't be in the same town as gambling, you'd probably have to move half the teams. Oklahoma City has 9 casinos in the metro area, one of which is in city limits about 15 minutes from the NBA arena. Do the Thunder cater only to gamblers?
40K is probably the sweet spot for baseball. That is where the Rangers arrived for their new park. You want to average out the nightly attendance between when the Yankees and Red Sox come to town and when the Devil Rays and Indians do. 40K a night is 3.2M home attendance, which is damn solid.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 21, 2023, 02:44:21 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 20, 2023, 04:05:57 PM
Booo, Las Vegas sucks.
Insert my normal rant about how it used to be a big deal for sports to distance themselves from gambling, but now everyone has given up. Too many grifters wanting to make a buck off of addicts.
You do realize 641,000 people live in Las Vegas, right? That's twice as many people as Madison has. And over 2.2 million people live in Clark County. Like, other things happen there besides gambling. So there are plenty of people living there that, whether they're involved in gaming or not, might want to have a team in their city.
If you're going to say a team shouldn't be in the same town as gambling, you'd probably have to move half the teams. Oklahoma City has 9 casinos in the metro area, one of which is in city limits about 15 minutes from the NBA arena. Do the Thunder cater only to gamblers?
Heck, in DC both Verizon Center (Caesars) and Nationals Park (BetMGM) have sportsbooks located in or adjacent to the venue. (The one at Verizon Center can be accessed from the arena concourse; I'm not sure whether the one at Nats Park can be accessed from inside the ballpark.) When it opened, the one at Verizon Center got a lot of publicity as the first in-arena sportsbook in the country. But the majority of fans attending games at either venue do not appear to visit the sportsbooks–and, given that at least at Verizon Center you have to go through arena security when you enter the arena from the sportsbook, and that security checkpoint is far smaller than the ones at the other entrances, there's a good practical reason not to go there if you're also there for a game.
I have to say I wouldn't know what to do if I went in there–most of the betting jargon you hear on TV doesn't really mean anything to me.
Because when people think about Oklahoma City, the first thing that comes to mind is "casino gambling".
Pro sports leagues used to be so worried about being associated with gambling. The integrity of their sport demanded it. Pete Rose, banned for life; the Black Sox scandal; it's in the roots of baseball especially, the aversion to gambling. Now that integrity has been thrown out in the name of profit.
Sports betting at arenas, gambling sponsorships plastered all over the venues and broadcasts, the gambling leeches have even wormed their way into ownership positions for some teams. I can't look up who is playing when without having the "odds" shoved in my face. Putting sports teams in the most famous gambling city (or its unincorporated suburbs) is just icing on a shit cake that is going to blow up in everyone's face in the coming years.
A long time ago, we let giant tobacco companies worm their way into every aspect of life and we paid dearly for it. Still are. Now another vice industry that exists solely to get people addicted and then profit off that addiction is expanding into every space it can find. The consequences of this rampant gambling are going to bite our collective ass. Biff Tannen's America is arriving and it's going to damage or destroy the sports we love. With all these billions of dollars changing hands (mostly from poor schlubs to the predatory gaming corporations) it is only a matter of time before it becomes too tempting for someone to fuck with a game/match/season in order to 'cover the spread' or whatever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_match-fixing_incidents (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_match-fixing_incidents)
We then reduce professional sports to an elaborate dog track; a skeezy place where degenerates go to get their fix.
I guess the Tigers will have to move out of Detroit if you can't have casinos and a MLB team in the same city. Detroit has 3 casinos, Michigan as a state has 39.
People keep missing the point I am making. It's not the fact that there is also a casino in the goddamn city, it's because of the ASSOCIATION with gambling. I don't know how much more clearly I can say that.
VEGAS = GAMBLING. Any moron on the street will say as much. You used to want to distance your sports league from gambling as much as possible because gambling is a corrupting influence on the integrity of sport. You'd never have an MLB team in Atlantic City, for example, back in the day. It would be outrageous on its face. But now the most gambling city on planet Earth is pulling sports teams left and right.
I have many other beefs with Las Vegas as a metropolitan place in that it encapsulates everything wrong with America, so they do not "deserve" professional sports teams. But that's another topic.
Pro sports playing in Las Vegas is a symbolic surrendering of the integrity these pro sports leagues are ostensibly supposed to have. Or at least pretend to have. Now with MLB coming to Vegas, all pretense is gone.
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 05:15:21 PM
I guess the Tigers will have to move out of Detroit if you can't have casinos and a MLB team in the same city. Detroit has 3 casinos, Michigan as a state has 39.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/36253087/wr-jameson-williams-four-lions-suspended-betting
I don't know, looks like the Lions may need some help.
Quote from: SectorZ on April 21, 2023, 05:46:43 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 05:15:21 PM
I guess the Tigers will have to move out of Detroit if you can't have casinos and a MLB team in the same city. Detroit has 3 casinos, Michigan as a state has 39.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/36253087/wr-jameson-williams-four-lions-suspended-betting
I don't know, looks like the Lions may need some help.
The Lions need more help than anyone can give them.
I think Charlotte, NC deserves a MLB franchise more than Las Vegas does. Besides Vegas would be the only place they'd draw from, it's like a major metro area plopped into the middle of nowhere. At least Charlotte and the Carolinas have some population. The two states combined have about 16 million people. Nevada has just over 3 million, with about 2 million of that living in the Vegas area. Outside of Vegas and Reno there is NOTHING in Nevada.
I suppose they're counting on out-of-town traffic for a lot of the support - both from weekend or day trips from L.A./San Diego/Phoenix/Bay Area and convention and business traffic from other markets. Given the dismal recent on-field performance from the A's I wouldn't be surprised if there were more Angels fans than A's fans for a series in Vegas, and certainly more Dodger fans for an inter-league series.
That said, I don't know if the tourist factor has helped the Raiders, who have been in the bottom third for both absolute attendance and percentage of capacity in their two seasons there. Granted, the Raiders are still pulling 95% of capacity, but I would have thought the new team in the shiny new stadium would have sold out at least year one.
While the Giants are my team, I do put some of the blame on them - when they were in danger of moving to Florida in the early '90s, the A's allowed the Bay Area to be split into two territories in order for the Giants to explore ballpark options in the South Bay. (the other two-team markets all share their territories). Then, when the A's were ready to move to San Jose (land was available, plans drawn up, city was on board), the Giants blocked it as it was "their" territory. Even though it would have moved the A's 40 miles further away from them, the Giants smelled that sweet, sweet Silicon Valley money. If not for that, the A's would be in their second or third season in San Jose right now.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 01:05:05 PM
Because when people think about Oklahoma City, the first thing that comes to mind is "casino gambling".
No, the first thing that people think of is tornadoes, our batshit Legislature, and racism. (Or at least that's all that comes up when I search "Oklahoma" on a national news site.) But there's more to it than that, exactly the same way as there's more to Las Vegas than casino gambling.
The casino gambling more or less happens on two streets in the entire city (one of which isn't even in Las Vegas city limits). Now imagine if we decided whether your city was worthy of a sports team based its most obnoxious two streets.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 01:05:05 PM
Pro sports leagues used to be so worried about being associated with gambling. The integrity of their sport demanded it. Pete Rose, banned for life; the Black Sox scandal; it's in the roots of baseball especially, the aversion to gambling. Now that integrity has been thrown out in the name of profit.
Sports betting at arenas, gambling sponsorships plastered all over the venues and broadcasts, the gambling leeches have even wormed their way into ownership positions for some teams.
The Black Sox scandal was a scandal because it affected game integrity. The players involved stood to benefit from poor performance. Obviously that should be stopped. Someone betting on the game two blocks away who has no personal involvement in any team has no effect on game integrity.
And surprise! Sports teams are businesses! Who would have thought they'd chase profit! It's almost like you live in a capitalist hellhole of a country or something! Just wait until you hear of the NCAA!
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 01:05:05 PM
I can't look up who is playing when without having the "odds" shoved in my face.
That's a you problem, not a Las Vegas problem.
Quote
Putting sports teams in the most famous gambling city (or its unincorporated suburbs) is just icing on a shit cake that is going to blow up in everyone's face in the coming years.
A long time ago, we let giant tobacco companies worm their way into every aspect of life and we paid dearly for it. Still are. Now another vice industry that exists solely to get people addicted and then profit off that addiction is expanding into every space it can find. The consequences of this rampant gambling are going to bite our collective ass. Biff Tannen's America is arriving and it's going to damage or destroy the sports we love. With all these billions of dollars changing hands (mostly from poor schlubs to the predatory gaming corporations) it is only a matter of time before it becomes too tempting for someone to fuck with a game/match/season in order to 'cover the spread' or whatever.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:IDONTLIKEIT
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 01:05:05 PM
We then reduce professional sports to an elaborate dog track; a skeezy place where degenerates go to get their fix.
You mean you haven't realized it always has been?
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 05:39:09 PM
People keep missing the point I am making.
That's probably because the point you're making doesn't make any rational sense.
Quote from: Alps on May 13, 2021, 06:40:44 PM
Quote from: bing101 on May 13, 2021, 09:56:11 AM
Does Austin, TX count as a candidate for getting the A's or not. I know Austin, TX has been getting attention here in California because some of the Tech CEO's and VC leaders have been talking about leaving CA for Texas for some time though. But that may not translate necessarily for MLB teams moving though.
I mentioned San Antonio because it's still a much larger metro area than Austin, but a stadium on the north side would draw from both.
OK I went with the Elon Musk type arguments given how much of a big deal we keep hearing about Austin based on the way the investors surrounding Elon Musk are hyping it up though.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 05:39:09 PM
Pro sports playing in Las Vegas is a symbolic surrendering of the integrity these pro sports leagues are ostensibly supposed to have. Or at least pretend to have. Now with MLB coming to Vegas, all pretense is gone.
Pro sports was about integrity? I thought it was about entertainment and making money this whole time.
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 06:01:27 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 21, 2023, 05:46:43 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 05:15:21 PM
I guess the Tigers will have to move out of Detroit if you can't have casinos and a MLB team in the same city. Detroit has 3 casinos, Michigan as a state has 39.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/36253087/wr-jameson-williams-four-lions-suspended-betting
I don't know, looks like the Lions may need some help.
The Lions need more help than anyone can give them.
The Lions would still find a way to still not win a playoff game even with divine intervention.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 21, 2023, 11:08:41 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 06:01:27 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 21, 2023, 05:46:43 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 05:15:21 PM
I guess the Tigers will have to move out of Detroit if you can't have casinos and a MLB team in the same city. Detroit has 3 casinos, Michigan as a state has 39.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/36253087/wr-jameson-williams-four-lions-suspended-betting
I don't know, looks like the Lions may need some help.
The Lions need more help than anyone can give them.
The Lions would still find a way to still not win a playoff game even with divine intervention.
I can honestly remember the last time they won a playoff game. I also remember Ray Lane doing a special on Tiger Stadium on it's last day and he was talking about Lions games being played there, I can remember him mocking Van Patrick with the call and right after that he says, have we heard from the Lions since? That was in 1999 lol.
Quote from: Henry on April 20, 2023, 09:27:24 PM
after being tied with the Boston-Milwaukee-Atlanta Braves in that category for well over 50 years.
They were also tied with the Orioles franchise for most cities
Milwaukee Brewers (1901) --> St. Louis Browns (1902-1953) --> Baltimore Orioles (1954-present)
Another example of a AAA team being located in the same market as the parent MLB team is Atlanta. The Braves AAA team from Richmond moved to nearby Gwinnett County GA around 2009, and play in a new stadium built for them. The two stadiums are only located about 30-35 miles apart. The arrangement seems to have worked well, as each team serves different markets. And from what I understand the MLB team likes to have the AAA team located close by for cost and logistical reasons. I think Baltimore did this first, even before Atlanta.
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 22, 2023, 08:26:40 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 21, 2023, 11:08:41 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 06:01:27 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 21, 2023, 05:46:43 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 05:15:21 PM
I guess the Tigers will have to move out of Detroit if you can't have casinos and a MLB team in the same city. Detroit has 3 casinos, Michigan as a state has 39.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/36253087/wr-jameson-williams-four-lions-suspended-betting
I don't know, looks like the Lions may need some help.
The Lions need more help than anyone can give them.
The Lions would still find a way to still not win a playoff game even with divine intervention.
I can honestly remember the last time they won a playoff game. I also remember Ray Lane doing a special on Tiger Stadium on it's last day and he was talking about Lions games being played there, I can remember him mocking Van Patrick with the call and right after that he says, have we heard from the Lions since? That was in 1999 lol.
The 1991 season when they beat the Cowboys 38-6 in a Divisional game.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 22, 2023, 09:27:12 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 22, 2023, 08:26:40 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 21, 2023, 11:08:41 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 06:01:27 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 21, 2023, 05:46:43 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 21, 2023, 05:15:21 PM
I guess the Tigers will have to move out of Detroit if you can't have casinos and a MLB team in the same city. Detroit has 3 casinos, Michigan as a state has 39.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/36253087/wr-jameson-williams-four-lions-suspended-betting
I don't know, looks like the Lions may need some help.
The Lions need more help than anyone can give them.
The Lions would still find a way to still not win a playoff game even with divine intervention.
I can honestly remember the last time they won a playoff game. I also remember Ray Lane doing a special on Tiger Stadium on it's last day and he was talking about Lions games being played there, I can remember him mocking Van Patrick with the call and right after that he says, have we heard from the Lions since? That was in 1999 lol.
The 1991 season when they beat the Cowboys 38-6 in a Divisional game.
I remember that game. Then they went and got murdered by Washington 41-10 who went on to win the Super Bowl that year. The Lions had Erik Kramer at QB lol. I remember Kramer on the Bears too.
Quote from: RoadWarrior56 on April 22, 2023, 09:14:49 AM
Another example of a AAA team being located in the same market as the parent MLB team is Atlanta. The Braves AAA team from Richmond moved to nearby Gwinnett County GA around 2009, and play in a new stadium built for them. The two stadiums are only located about 30-35 miles apart. The arrangement seems to have worked well, as each team serves different markets. And from what I understand the MLB team liles to have the AAA team located close by for cost and logistical reasons. I think Baltimore did this first, even before Atlanta.
Detroit's really isn't far, it's 61 miles from Comerica Park to Fifth Third Field in Toledo. There are a lot of Tigers fans in NW Ohio too.
Quote from: RoadWarrior56 on April 22, 2023, 09:14:49 AM
Another example of a AAA team being located in the same market as the parent MLB team is Atlanta. The Braves AAA team from Richmond moved to nearby Gwinnett County GA around 2009, and play in a new stadium built for them. The two stadiums are only located about 30-35 miles apart. The arrangement seems to have worked well, as each team serves different markets. And from what I understand the MLB team liles to have the AAA team located close by for cost and logistical reasons. I think Baltimore did this first, even before Atlanta.
The Orioles’ AAA team is in Norfolk, which has been the case since 2007. It’s actually the furthest affiliate from Baltimore other than the rookie leagues (which are held at team complexes in Florida/Arizona and the Dominican for all teams), with the other minor league teams all in Maryland. The Braves’ minor league affiliates are all also pretty close, stretching from South Carolina to Mississippi. However, the Gwinnett move was partially because they couldn’t reach a deal with Richmond to replacing the aging Diamond. The AA Flying Squirrels (Giants) that replaced the Braves in Richmond are also starting to talk about moving for the same reason.
The Nationals’ affiliates are also fairly close, with the A-ball team in Fredericksburg the closest.
The Mariners have their AAA and High A affiliates at opposite ends of the Seattle metro area. Works out well, though the latter needs a new stadium due to MiLB standards and they've resorted to stealing money from the fund for youth fields.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdukKx18V8Q
Looks like Oakland is going to be the next Montreal...a one-time major-league city with a very long wait.
(Then again, and rather ironically, Washington had to go 33 years without a team of its own!)
Quote from: Henry on April 25, 2023, 10:20:13 AM
Looks like Oakland is going to be the next Montreal...a one-time major-league city with a very long wait.
(Then again, and rather ironically, Washington had to go 33 years without a team of its own!)
I think it's worse for Oakland. Montreal has the Canadiens, and Washington has the Capitals, Wizards and the Commanders in addition to the Nationals (former Expos). It's hard to think of Oakland getting another major league team (maybe WNBA or soccer)?
Quote from: Henry on April 25, 2023, 10:20:13 AMLooks like Oakland is going to be the next Montreal...a one-time major-league city with a very long wait.
Oink-flap! Oink-flap!
Pigs will be flying before another professional sports team will relocate to the SF bay area. The Giants have their ballpack, the 49ers relocated to Santa Clara in the south, the Warriors are in San Francisco now at the Chase Center, and the Sharks are in San Jose. In addition, the revenue from the Regional Sports Networks for a MLB team is going to be dropping like a rock in the next few years. I don't see how a new major sports franchise is going to locate in California in the future.... or even in the San Francisco area.
Correct. There is no chance that any major sports team (and neither soccer nor WNBA is a major sport) would ever relocate to Oakland, or any place in California, under the present financial situation.
The SF Bay region is a one team per league market, which is what it always should have been. Charlie Findley, who moved the A's from Kansas City, was lured by a sweetheart lease on the, now-rotting, Coliseum, even though the money to build what became Kaufmann Stadium was already approved. Despite the then new and much larger stadium, attendance was only marginally better. Findley was quoted as saying something like "I came out for Opening Day and the place was full, and then the next day there were 5000 people there, and I knew I had made a mistake."
Quote from: SP Cook on April 25, 2023, 03:05:03 PM
(and neither soccer nor WNBA is a major sport)
I agree that neither are major, but throwing the WNBA in there is outright disrespectful to MLS. MLS makes 28 times the revenue of the WNBA (while hockey makes 3x the revenue of MLS, NBA and MLB make 2x the revenue of hockey, and NFL makes 2x the revenue of NBA and MLB).
The MLS vexes me, to me I view it as akin to AA or AAA baseball. Yeah sure, it's a professional league but it isn't exactly the top tier of the sport either. Whereas the WNBA can claim to be the premier women's professional basketball league. If either league had a Detroit based team I probably would be interested in following along (I did with the Shock).
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 21, 2023, 09:34:13 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 01:05:05 PM
Because when people think about Oklahoma City, the first thing that comes to mind is "casino gambling".
No, the first thing that people think of is tornadoes, our batshit Legislature, and racism. (Or at least that's all that comes up when I search "Oklahoma" on a national news site.)
I've lived about two hours from Oklahoma for the last 15 years, and I didn't even know till now that
there were casinos in Oklahoma City. All sorts of other places in the state, yes, but not Oklahoma City.
For what it's worth, I don't think of batshit Legislature or racism either, when I think of Oklahoma City. I do think of tornadoes, though.
(Honestly, I hardly know anything about
my own state's Legislature, let alone a
different state's Legislature. I highly doubt a whole lot of people follow out-of-state legislation closely enough to associate those states' capitals with politics, unless said politics have been routinely making national headlines.)
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 21, 2023, 11:06:55 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 05:39:09 PM
Pro sports playing in Las Vegas is a symbolic surrendering of the integrity these pro sports leagues are ostensibly supposed to have. Or at least pretend to have. Now with MLB coming to Vegas, all pretense is gone.
Pro sports was about integrity? I thought it was about entertainment and making money this whole time.
I thought people
already bet on sports...
Quote from: thspfc on April 25, 2023, 03:40:41 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on April 25, 2023, 03:05:03 PM
(and neither soccer nor WNBA is a major sport)
I agree that neither are major, but throwing the WNBA in there is outright disrespectful to MLS. MLS makes 28 times the revenue of the WNBA (while hockey makes 3x the revenue of MLS, NBA and MLB make 2x the revenue of hockey, and NFL makes 2x the revenue of NBA and MLB).
you just disrespected women's sports. :(
Quote from: kphoger on April 25, 2023, 04:25:42 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 21, 2023, 11:06:55 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 21, 2023, 05:39:09 PM
Pro sports playing in Las Vegas is a symbolic surrendering of the integrity these pro sports leagues are ostensibly supposed to have. Or at least pretend to have. Now with MLB coming to Vegas, all pretense is gone.
Pro sports was about integrity? I thought it was about entertainment and making money this whole time.
I thought people already bet on sports...
And to that end I don't see why it's a big deal or why it would obstruct Las Vegas from having professional teams. There is a lot more to Las Vegas nowadays besides gambling and sports books.
Are two AAA teams allowed in the same city? :-D
(Coming from a long-suffering A's fan.)
Oakland would not be a viable MLS market, since San Jose is already supposed to "cover" the Bay Area and the league is not keen on adding another team to the same market unless it's of the same prestige as NYC or LA. The Oakland Roots play in the second-division USL Championship and seem to be doing fine, and also recently proposed a new stadium complex near the Coliseum lot.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 25, 2023, 03:53:57 PM
The MLS vexes me, to me I view it as akin to AA or AAA baseball. Yeah sure, it's a professional league but it isn't exactly the top tier of the sport either. Whereas the WNBA can claim to be the premier women's professional basketball league. If either league had a Detroit based team I probably would be interested in following along (I did with the Shock).
With soccer, it's difficult to rank the leagues due to how few meaningful, non-exhibition matches are played between teams. Going by continental results, MLS has historically been behind Liga MX (Mexico's top tier) but has improved enough to be close; this summer's Leagues Cup that includes all teams from both leagues will be a good barometer of progress. The first MLS representative in the Club World Cup (my dear Seattle Sounders) were knocked out on an unlucky fluke goal against Egypt's champion, but that doesn't mean that MLS is worse than the Egyptian league as a whole.
Detroit does have a second-division USLC team that had previously been very adamantly anti-MLS, which meant not cooperating with a few proposed bids. If they can finally get over themselves, they could have a shot in the next round of expansion (competitors include San Diego, Las Vegas, Sacramento [again], and Phoenix).
I share the skepticism with Las Vegas being a viable MLB market, but the new site proposed in Oakland sucks because it lacks good transit access and BART refuses to add an infill station to fix that.
Whatever happens, it will be a shame to see the Oakland Mausoleum go. It's the most amazing stadium in MLB and whatever replaces it will be boring cookie cutter bullshit. Definitely recommend going to see a game there while you still can if you haven't already.
I usually catch a couple games at the Colosseum every year because of the relatively low cost and BART access. Shame the As are going away, I'm not likely to return to San Francisco any time soon for a game. My wife and I were talking about trying Anaheim as our new go to for MLB games in California.
But yeah, count me as some who also enjoyed the Brutalist nature of the Colosseum. At least it was authentic Brutalism and not some replica of Camden Yards.
Quote from: SP Cook on April 25, 2023, 03:05:03 PM
The SF Bay region is a one team per league market, which is what it always should have been. Charlie Findley, who moved the A's from Kansas City, was lured by a sweetheart lease on the, now-rotting, Coliseum, even though the money to build what became Kaufmann Stadium was already approved. Despite the then new and much larger stadium, attendance was only marginally better. Findley was quoted as saying something like "I came out for Opening Day and the place was full, and then the next day there were 5000 people there, and I knew I had made a mistake."
By that logic, maybe Chicago needs to be a one-team town as well, because it has only one team in each of the other sports leagues (Bears, Bulls, Blackhawks, Fire, etc.), and yet it still has the Cubs and White Sox. And let's not forget that the White Sox were rumored to move to the Tampa Bay Area, along with the Giants, until the promise of new ballparks kept them in their respective cities. When the Devil Rays arrived in 1998, their home stadium was already feeling antiquated because it was built way too early (opened in 1990 as the Thunderdome).
Back to the subject at hand: Raiders owner Mark Davis is not too thrilled about the thought of the A's following his team (https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/04/20/mark-davis-isnt-a-fan-of-the-as-moving-to-las-vegas/) to Las Vegas. He's still bitter about how the A's screwed the Raiders out of a potential stadium deal, as outlined in the following quote:
Quote"I won't forget what they did to us in Oakland," Davis told Katsilometes on Thursday. "They squatted on a lease for 10 years and made it impossible for us to build on that stadium. . . They were looking for a stadium. We were looking for a stadium. They didn't want to build a stadium, and then went ahead and signed a 10-year lease with the city of Oakland and said, "˜We're the base team.'"
That move, in Davis's mind, killed the Raiders' chances of remaining in Oakland.
"They marketed the team as "˜Rooted in Oakland,' that's been their mantra through the whole thing," Davis said. "The slogans they've been using have been a slap to the face of the Raiders, and they were trying to win over that type of mentality in the Bay Area. Well all they did was fuck the Bay Area."
Mark Davis lives in a fantasy world, as his father did, where he is always the victim. In reality the opposite is true.
Mark Davis is an perfect example of a crybaby. You own the Raiders, you had a chance to build your own stadium and you did by moving the Raiders to Las Vegas. And he won't forget what they did to him in Oakland, what a crybaby and obviously a grudge holder too. Nothing ever got done on a stadium in Oakland, they've been trying for years to get out of that shithole they play in. Before Mount Davis was built the view was actually pretty nice. I have never liked the shape of the stadium or the huge foul territory though.
Luckily we are down to only a few ballparks that need to be replaced. Oakland and Tampa Bay for sure, also Arizona. I had never realized how badly Chase Field was until I started looking at pictures of the upper deck, that is wayyyyyyy too many rows for an upper deck. They could cut that in half and still have an average upper deck. I guess I was spoiled by watching ballgames in two classic ballparks, Comiskey Park and Tiger Stadium. Comiskey was a gem, anywhere you sat in that ballpark you were right there on top of the field basically, you got that same feeling in Tiger Stadium. Ernie Harwell said that you could see them sweat and hear them cuss you were so close to the field at Tiger Stadium. The back row of seating at Tiger Stadium was closer to the field than the front row of seating in the upper deck at Comerica Park is. I'd love to go to a game at Tiger Stadium in 2023.
Quote from: Flint1979 on April 26, 2023, 11:36:53 AMMark Davis is an perfect example of a crybaby. You own the Raiders, you had a chance to build your own stadium and you did by moving the Raiders to Las Vegas.
To be fair, Oakland Coliseum was the last dual-use stadiums in use in the NFL. One of their last games played was a late-Sunday night game due to stadium conversion issues because the A's were in the playoffs. So, that day, we have a morning game, a afternoon game, SNF, and a late Sunday game carried on the NFL network using the television production and announcing crew that was originally for the afternoon game. When the Raiders came back to Oakland, they built the infamous "Mount Davis" for the additional NFL seating.
Of course, we are talking about the same Raiders that, after losing Super Bowl XXXVII, had a playoff drought that ran from 2003 to the 2015 seasons, with only three of those seasons (2010, 2011, 2015) have more than 5 wins. And, they still haven't won a playoff game.
As for Mark Davis.... worst haircut for any NFL team owner.
Mark Davis is just carrying on the family tradition of being a total shitheel.
Bay Bridge Series is the thing of the past as seen with the Raiders and A's leaving Oakland for Las Vegas.
The dividing line in Norcal for in area rivalry was at Yerba Buena Island when that happened. Now the Dividing Line over sports rivalries within Norcal moves to a section of I-80 between Fairfield to Vacaville in the NBA given that this area is a commuter area for both Bay Area and Sacramento.
The only sport going forward with a Northern California rivalry is in the NBA with the Sacramento Kings and the Golden State Warriors and the NBA calls this the I-80 Series due to both teams having new stadiums within the past decade.
Quote from: kphoger on April 25, 2023, 04:24:40 PM(Honestly, I hardly know anything about my own state's Legislature, let alone a different state's Legislature. I highly doubt a whole lot of people follow out-of-state legislation closely enough to associate those states' capitals with politics, unless said politics have been routinely making national headlines.)
Batshit-crazy is in the eye of the beholder anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m_dIhqlxvw
If the A's have to move, I would have much rather seen them land somewhere in SEC country. Dixie is under-served by MLB and the Braves have too much 'territory'. Nashville and Charlotte would be my top picks over Vegas by a country mile.
Hell if they "had" to stay out west somewhere, I'd rather see the A's in Salt Lake or Portland. Portland I'm sure would just love to show the rest of America how to do an urban ballpark, and SLC could pull the same thing off, only more politely.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 29, 2023, 05:35:04 PM
If the A's have to move, I would have much rather seen them land somewhere in SEC country. Dixie is under-served by MLB and the Braves have too much 'territory'. Nashville and Charlotte would be my top picks over Vegas by a country mile.
In fact, the same could be said about the Mid-Atlantic, where the Orioles had quite a lot of territory to cover for 33 years. It's about 700 miles between Baltimore and Atlanta, but the Nationals' presence has somehow cut down on that discrepancy, though not by much.
Portland would make a good rival for Seattle, and Utah/Salt Lake City for Colorado/Denver. Put the new teams in opposing leagues (Portland in the NL and Utah in the AL), and you'd have the perfect natural rivals for each.
https://youtu.be/kcrrgXDQYV8?t=69
Quote from: ZLoth on April 26, 2023, 12:29:34 PM
As for Mark Davis.... worst haircut for any NFL team owner.
I can't wait til he hits his 80s and looks like a melting candle like his dad did.
Quote from: SectorZ on May 10, 2023, 04:05:58 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on April 26, 2023, 12:29:34 PM
As for Mark Davis.... worst haircut for any NFL team owner.
I can't wait til he hits his 80s and looks like a melting candle like his dad did.
Since he is turning 68 on May 18th, we only have 12 years to wait.
Apparently that "binding agreement" for the site on the west side of I-15 wasn't so binding after all. The Nevada Independent is reporting (https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/as-pivot-to-new-site-for-vegas-baseball-stadium-lowering-public-funding-request) that the A's are again in talks to buy the Tropicana and build the stadium there, right on the Strip.
Talk about an about-face. And since there is so little time to get things done in the current NV legislative session, there is no guarantee that the Las Vegas A's will exist, so there needs to be a Plan C in there somewhere. (Plan B is the current Tropicana site, which came about after their original bid fell through.)
I imagine Plan C is getting Clark County to play sugar daddy yet again, same as the Raiders did. That has the benefit of not having to involve Northern Nevada in the discussion, since it wouldn't affect them one way or another. With Allegiant, the state's only involvement was a minor adjustment to tax laws to make it easier for Clark County to raise the necessary funds.
The Strip would be a great spot for a stadium ... as long as walkability is added. The Strip SUCKS for pedestrians. You almost have to call an Uber to go six blocks to eat In N Out.
Quote from: Road Hog on May 12, 2023, 04:40:10 PM
The Strip would be a great spot for a stadium ... as long as walkability is added. The Strip SUCKS for pedestrians. You almost have to call an Uber to go six blocks to eat In N Out.
Casinos only like walkability when it comes to curb appeal. The last thing they want is for people to get up and walk to another casino, taking their money with them.
This would be a great time for Oakland and Alameda County to force MLB and the A's to make decisions. The current per-year lease on RingCentral Coliseum (the A's get no revenue from the naming of the stadium) is $1.75 million, which ends 12/31/24. If I were Oakland/Alameda County, I would offer to waive next year's lease payment PLUS refund them this year's lease payment, on the condition that the A's vacate the stadium by November 30. If they take the deal, and don't vacate the stadium, Oakland/Alameda County gets to file for a court order seeking eviction of the A's.
This nonsense with the A's has gone on long enough. Time for both the A's and Las Vegas to show the color of their money. Time for Rob Manfred to make some decisions.
Quote from: brad2971 on May 12, 2023, 07:25:38 PM
This would be a great time for Oakland and Alameda County to force MLB and the A's to make decisions. The current per-year lease on RingCentral Coliseum (the A's get no revenue from the naming of the stadium) is $1.75 million, which ends 12/31/24. If I were Oakland/Alameda County, I would offer to waive next year's lease payment PLUS refund them this year's lease payment, on the condition that the A's vacate the stadium by November 30. If they take the deal, and don't vacate the stadium, Oakland/Alameda County gets to file for a court order seeking eviction of the A's.
This nonsense with the A's has gone on long enough. Time for both the A's and Las Vegas to show the color of their money. Time for Rob Manfred to make some decisions.
Not a bad idea, considering how horrible the Coliseum has become ever since the Mt. Davis got built and forever ruined the decent ballpark it once was. I'm sure no one will miss it when it is demolished, even if by some miraculous event the A's abandon Las Vegas and decide to give Oakland one last try. I, for one, had high hopes for Howard Terminal until the Vegas news broke.
Quote from: Road Hog on May 12, 2023, 04:40:10 PM
The Strip would be a great spot for a stadium ... as long as walkability is added. The Strip SUCKS for pedestrians. You almost have to call an Uber to go six blocks to eat In N Out.
The Strip + walkability = Fremont Street
Quote from: Henry on May 12, 2023, 09:57:40 PM
Quote from: brad2971 on May 12, 2023, 07:25:38 PM
This would be a great time for Oakland and Alameda County to force MLB and the A's to make decisions. The current per-year lease on RingCentral Coliseum (the A's get no revenue from the naming of the stadium) is $1.75 million, which ends 12/31/24. If I were Oakland/Alameda County, I would offer to waive next year's lease payment PLUS refund them this year's lease payment, on the condition that the A's vacate the stadium by November 30. If they take the deal, and don't vacate the stadium, Oakland/Alameda County gets to file for a court order seeking eviction of the A's.
This nonsense with the A's has gone on long enough. Time for both the A's and Las Vegas to show the color of their money. Time for Rob Manfred to make some decisions.
Not a bad idea, considering how horrible the Coliseum has become ever since the Mt. Davis got built and forever ruined the decent ballpark it once was. I'm sure no one will miss it when it is demolished, even if by some miraculous event the A's abandon Las Vegas and decide to give Oakland one last try. I, for one, had high hopes for Howard Terminal until the Vegas news broke.
Frankly, the current Coliseum site has much higher and better uses than its current use as a sports complex. Since it's near the Port of Oakland, the site could (and should) be used for warehouses and other port-related industrial uses, which the Bay Area is in great need of right now. While I'm not sure the location is that great for multi-family housing, even with the BART stop, that's also a higher and better use of the Coliseum land. The point is, it's time for Oakland to move on from the A's, since that team has been a drain on the community for at least the last decade.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 10, 2023, 10:58:15 PM
Apparently that "binding agreement" for the site on the west side of I-15 wasn't so binding after all. The Nevada Independent is reporting (https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/as-pivot-to-new-site-for-vegas-baseball-stadium-lowering-public-funding-request) that the A's are again in talks to buy the Tropicana and build the stadium there, right on the Strip.
There are some details about this latest Tropicana site plan in the R-J today (https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/athletics/rj-exclusive-ballys-corp-chairman-hopes-free-land-helps-push-as-deal-to-completion-2777470/). I did a quick second-grade level sketch, putting the ballpark (crudely at scale) on the southeast 9 acres with the remainder of the property extended north to Tropicana Ave. and west to the Strip having the new casino resort hotel built on it.
(https://i.imgur.com/8tRG20i.jpg)
One thing about this alignment is that it turns most of the stadium lights away from the airport, which might mitigate any FAA concerns. It's an odd angle for a baseball field because it puts late-afternoon sun in the hitters' eyes on open-roof games, although with some presumably huge new hotel being built between left field and the Strip the field is probably in shadow in the late afternoon anyway.
Does the angle necessarily matter? I thought I read the proposal was for a retractable roof, which would seem to mitigate the sun glare issue.
It would have to be a domed stadium considering that it is in the middle of the desert.
Quote from: 1995hoo on May 15, 2023, 02:25:00 PM
Does the angle necessarily matter? I thought I read the proposal was for a retractable roof, which would seem to mitigate the sun glare issue.
"Retractable" means open some of the time. The weather in Vegas can be very nice in the evening in April and May. Also part of the selling point is having the nearby hotels on the Strip as a backdrop so presumably even when the roof is closed there are windows permitting a view out that way (and allowing sunlight to come in). Allegiant Stadium has a little bit of that window and Strip view at that end of the field.
But, if the "New Tropicana Resort" is built behind left field and has a 40-story hotel to the west of the stadium, that shadow should take care of most of the late-afternoon sun issues.
Yes, I know what a retractable roof is and I know what the intention behind having one is. I can't help but wonder whether it would be closed for day games and open only for night games.
The Nevada Legislature only seems to be willing to contribute $195 million of the $395 million the A's are seeking. (Part of the reluctance seems to be because of the A's indecision on where, exactly, they're wanting to put the stadium.) So guess who they're asking to fork over the other $200 million? Did you guess Clark County? Yeah, we all saw that coming.
Nevada lawmakers balk at A's $395M price tag; deal dependent on county funding (https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/nevada-lawmakers-balk-at-as-395m-price-tag-deal-dependent-on-county-funding)
The clock is ticking...
QuoteThe news comes less than 20 days before the end of the state's 120-day legislative session. Any public money for the project will need to be approved by both houses of the Legislature by June 5, or the Legislature would need to deal with the matter in a special session, which can be called by the governor or a two-thirds majority of lawmakers.
Calling a special session for something like this seems like it would be pretty silly. I don't know Governor Lombardo well enough to know whether he'd do it or not. I'm guessing if the Legislature is already ambivalent about the bill, you're probably not going to get 2/3 of them to vote to come back to work some more.
Howard Terminal may not be completely dead, as Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao is going to keep it alive if the A's decide to give it another try (https://sports.yahoo.com/oakland-very-close-athletics-howard-191227385.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall). And given that NV is unwilling to foot the bill for the proposed ballpark in Las Vegas, they probably will have no other choice.
There seems to be more resistance to public funding of athletic stadiums now than in years past. I'm not that familiar with the political culture of Arizona and Nevada, but if they're resistant to financing new stadia, that sends a message.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on May 20, 2023, 07:13:15 AM
There seems to be more resistance to public funding of athletic stadiums now than in years past. I'm not that familiar with the political culture of Arizona and Nevada, but if they're resistant to change, that sends a message.
Not to get political here, but this is an incredibly good step if people are revolting on this. This is something that has always disgusted me.
Quote from: SectorZ on May 20, 2023, 07:37:08 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on May 20, 2023, 07:13:15 AM
There seems to be more resistance to public funding of athletic stadiums now than in years past. I'm not that familiar with the political culture of Arizona and Nevada, but if they're resistant to change, that sends a message.
Not to get political here, but this is an incredibly good step if people are revolting on this. This is something that has always disgusted me.
Are you saying that a sports stadium is essentially a Field of Schemes (https://www.fieldofschemes.com/2023/05/19/19972/friday-roundup-nevada-wants-county-to-share-as-stadium-cost-commanders-execs-think-virginia-will-give-them-1-5b-to-move-there/)? Or is it the "bread and circuses" aspect?
Quote from: ZLoth on May 20, 2023, 09:30:06 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on May 20, 2023, 07:37:08 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on May 20, 2023, 07:13:15 AM
There seems to be more resistance to public funding of athletic stadiums now than in years past. I'm not that familiar with the political culture of Arizona and Nevada, but if they're resistant to change, that sends a message.
Not to get political here, but this is an incredibly good step if people are revolting on this. This is something that has always disgusted me.
Are you saying that a sports stadium is essentially a Field of Schemes (https://www.fieldofschemes.com/2023/05/19/19972/friday-roundup-nevada-wants-county-to-share-as-stadium-cost-commanders-execs-think-virginia-will-give-them-1-5b-to-move-there/)? Or is it the "bread and circuses" aspect?
A little of each.
If Manfred has his way, the owners will approve the A's relocation next month (https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/37729844/rob-manfred-says-owners-vote-las-vegas-move-june). Of course, it all hinges on what happens in Las Vegas; that town needs to get its act together and pool all the funds before the ballpark can be built, but it's probably going to happen eventually.
Quote from: Henry on May 25, 2023, 11:38:21 PM
If Manfred has his way, the owners will approve the A's relocation next month (https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/37729844/rob-manfred-says-owners-vote-las-vegas-move-june). Of course, it all hinges on what happens in Las Vegas; that town needs to get its act together and pool all the funds before the ballpark can be built, but it's probably going to happen eventually.
A bit of a nitpick on that: Everything south of the Stratosphere on the Strip is in unincorporated Clark County, not the City of Las Vegas. The City has nothing to do with this. The public portion of the financing would be tax breaks from the State of Nevada and bond financing from Clark County.
It seems like they have a deal. Comments as a Nevada resident, and a lifelong A's fan who would prefer they stay in Oakland but has accepted the reality of the situation: politically, the GOP governor is supporting it, and a lot of the Democratic legislators from Clark County are beholden to the unions in Las Vegas who support it as well. I think this will get enough support from both parties to get through the (heavily Democratic) legislature and then the governor will sign. It should be completed in the next week or two.
I feel bad for fans in Oakland. However, now that it seems likely a deal is likely to bring the A's to Las Vegas, I hope that the new stadium will have a retractable roof so that its extremely hot summers don't scare off the would-be fans.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on May 26, 2023, 06:49:31 AM
I feel bad for fans in Oakland. However, now that it seems likely a deal is likely to bring the A's to Las Vegas, I hope that the new stadium will have a retractable roof so that its extremely hot summers don't scare off the would-be fans.
That's exactly what they have in mind. Phoenix has extremely hot summers too, and Chase Field is a perfect building for it. Same goes for Arlington (Globe Life Park), Houston (Minute Maid Park), Miami (LoanDepot Park) and, for now, St. Petersburg (Tropicana Field, but it's a fixed-roof building like the now-demolished Metrodome and Kingdome were).
On the flip side of the coin, retractable-roof ballparks also work well in cities with very cold springs and falls, such as Milwaukee (American Family Field), Seattle (T-Mobile Park) and Toronto (Rogers Centre).
Renderings feature a "partially retractable" roof. What good does that do in that climate?
Quote from: Big John on May 26, 2023, 10:51:28 PM
Renderings feature a "partially retractable" roof. What good does that do in that climate?
I believe what those drawings are showing is the fixed roof over about half of the ballpark. The retractable portion of the roof would slide around to enclose the remaining open portion for most of the season...but the drawing looks better when showing the roof open.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOZmnHtsjAY
Quote from: gonealookin on May 26, 2023, 12:10:32 AM
It seems like they have a deal. Comments as a Nevada resident, and a lifelong A's fan who would prefer they stay in Oakland but has accepted the reality of the situation: politically, the GOP governor is supporting it, and a lot of the Democratic legislators from Clark County are beholden to the unions in Las Vegas who support it as well. I think this will get enough support from both parties to get through the (heavily Democratic) legislature and then the governor will sign. It should be completed in the next week or two.
Well, that was wrong. The regular session of the Nevada Legislature ended last night without a vote on the ballpark financing. There's going to be at least one special session to deal with some unresolved issues regarding the state budget and that
could include the ballpark issue, but it looks like the real problem is that the legislature stood up to the demands of the billionaire team owner and the votes just aren't there for any portion of the project to be publicly financed. Where it goes from here, who knows, but the odds of the A's ever playing in Vegas took a huge plunge last night.
Now's your chance, Nashville!
:-D
Good hopefully it doesn't happen. I was indifferent until I found out they proposed demolishing The Tropicana for this. Fuck that. There's so much vacant land south of the airport why not build it there and spur more development down that way?
Whatever public funding this would get I'd rather see go into a heavy rail subway underneath the boulevard.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 06, 2023, 07:26:42 PM
Good hopefully it doesn't happen. I was indifferent until I found out they proposed demolishing The Tropicana for this. Fuck that. There's so much vacant land south of the airport why not build it there and spur more development down that way?
Whatever public funding this would get I'd rather see go into a heavy rail subway underneath the boulevard.
The elderly by Las Vegas standards Tropicana is going down anyway. A company called Gaming and Leisure Properties owns the land and Bally's owns the improvements with development rights. Bally's wants to do a 21st-century development that's more in tune with the other ostentatious places on the Strip. A MLB ballpark connected to the casino resort would have been a way to distinguish Bally's development from those other places so that's why they have an interest in doing it. If the ballpark does fall through they will still tear down the Tropicana, build their new resort and find some other spectacular attraction to put on that corner of the property.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 06, 2023, 03:49:11 PM
Now's your chance, Nashville!
:-D
Not if Sacramento has something to say about it.
If the A's still want to leave Oakland, and Las Vegas is no longer an option, then the next big town up I-80 (https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/oakland-as-las-vegas-deal-falls-through-sacramento-consideration/) will probably be the new frontrunner for their next home. With the NV State Legislature adjourned, there may not even be a Las Vegas A's to cheer for, and this quote may prove it:
QuoteLas Vegas is currently the No. 1 option but has seen some pushback, specifically from Nevada State Assemblywoman Daniele Monroe-Moreno -- the chair on that chamber's Ways and Means committee.
"She said, 'I am currently a hell no and you need to get me to a yes.' And if she is saying that, other folks are probably thinking along the same lines," said Tabitha Mueller, a reporter with the Nevada Independent.
As for the current home city of the Kings:
QuoteSo if not Sin City, why not Sacramento?
"Sacramento is a better financial deal than Las Vegas, a better team environment, a better fan environment, and a better merchandise and TV environment — and the A's are going to lose money in Las Vegas," said Barry Broome, the CEO of the Greater Sacramento Economic Council.
Broome, who has written Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred himself, believes the A's and the league should consider the capital city — with the Railyards in Sacramento and The Bridge District in West Sacramento as two viable options.
"West Sacramento can put together a more aggressive deal together than what Nevada has right now, and the deal in the Railyards is better than the deal in Las Vegas," Broome said.
"The A's have told us if the deal falls through in Vegas, they will hear us out. But we need the MLB commissioner to acknowledge Sacramento as a site," Broome said. "So we are waiting to see if this deal goes through on Monday. If it doesn't, we will have two communities that can present a fantastic case to the A's."
And as for local support?
"I do believe we will get support for Vivek Ranadive. I do believe we can get support from Gov. Newsom," Broome said.
Best of all...
QuoteBroome says if the A's do decide to come to Sacramento, construction can begin almost immediately.
"We will sell that stadium out before there is a shovel in the ground if they just make a commitment to our community," Broome said.
I'd be all-in for this alternative proposal, especially since the Raiders have already said that they don't want their former neighbors in their new city. FWIW, the Kings enjoy a considerable amount of support from their small but very passionate fanbase, which bodes well for the A's staying within the Golden State. We'll see what happens.
The ballpark at the Tropicana is still breathing.
https://twitter.com/tabitha_mueller/status/1666254484207718400
The Capital Improvement Program special session of the Legislature is tonight. The legislative leaders have said the budget has to be fully completed before there are any policy discussions such as ballpark financing. So if they get that last piece of the budget done tonight, it sounds like Governor Lombardo wants to call a second special session in the next day or two for the ballpark. That doesn't mean the legislature would approve it. The governor does have the right to demand the second special session and put the ballpark financing on the agenda, but the Assembly and/or Senate could put the proposal up for a vote, vote No and that would be the end of it, at least as far as the possibility of public financial participation goes.
Quote from: Henry on June 06, 2023, 09:55:01 PMI'd be all-in for this alternative proposal, especially since the Raiders have already said that they don't want their former neighbors in their new city. FWIW, the Kings enjoy a considerable amount of support from their small but very passionate fanbase, which bodes well for the A's staying within the Golden State.
FWIW... the Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto is considered the #20 media market, and a strong secondary market for the bay area sports teams. (It was also subject to the NFL blackout rules when those were in effect.) I know of fans who traveled on a regular basis to attend home team games, including season ticket holders for both NFL teams. The question becomes.... has the management of the Oakland As alienated the fan base enough to sabotage a local team move? It's doubtful that owner would sell to appease those fans.
I'd be more in favor of Sacramento than Vegas.
From SBNation:
A's attempted move to Las Vegas is fast becoming the biggest mess in sports
This is blowing up in their faces SPECTACULARLY.QuoteOakland Athletics owner John Fisher thought this would be easy. He'd twiddle his fingers for a while in the Bay Area trying to get a new stadium, and if that didn't materialize he'd bolt for Las Vegas with MLB's blessing – getting richer in the process. Fisher's assumption was that with the Raiders' move, and the Golden Knights selling out their arena, it was going to be simple to get a boatload of taxpayer money to build a ballpark, with private investors falling over themselves to get a piece of the action.
One month later, Fisher's dream is collapsing around him. Everything is on fire and he's left trying to work out what the hell to do next.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://markholtz.info/2r4)
Meanwhile, in Nevada:
https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/as-swing-and-miss-again-with-ballpark-presentation-but-this-games-not-over
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 07, 2023, 10:59:56 AM
I'd be more in favor of Sacramento than Vegas.
I thought the same thing but then went deeper and realized that the Giants AAA team is there.
https://www.theonion.com/every-professional-sports-team-moves-to-las-vegas-1850520728 (https://www.theonion.com/every-professional-sports-team-moves-to-las-vegas-1850520728)
They might have to stay in Oakland now that they've forgotten how to tank.
Quote from: epzik8 on June 12, 2023, 09:23:51 PM
They might have to stay in Oakland now that they've forgotten how to tank.
if you extrapolate the last 6 games they will win the world series
Jonah Hill better shave and gain some weight back for Moneyball 2 . . .
Nevada Senate passed the funding bill.
The A's have their largest home crowd of the season tonight (27,759) for a Tuesday night game against Tampa Bay that would normally draw 4,000. It's a preplanned "reverse boycott" by the Oakland fans to show that they still support the team, just not the ownership. Lots of "SELL THE TEAM" an "F**K JOHN FISHER" chants every inning.
The Nevada Assembly passed the bill with the Senate's amendments and some amendments of its own this afternoon, and the Senate concurred with the Assembly's amendments shortly thereafter. The bill now goes to Governor Lombardo's desk for signature. One of the Senate Democrats' additions was to insert some modifications to Family and Medical Leave law that the Governor vetoed during the regular session. However, the Governor is expected to sign the final bill as amended, which passed with majorities of both Democrats and Republicans in both the Senate and the Assembly. A's owner Fisher got the money he asked for; the modifications to his terms were primarily regarding the subject of the A's commitments to the Las Vegas community under the "Community Benefits Agreement" portion of the bill.
MLB must now approve the relocation (with the "relocation fee" waived as Commissioner Manfred has promised, though that requires a vote of the owners), and Fisher must secure financing of his $1.1 billion private portion and must reach the required development agreements. After all that, shovels go in the ground (sometime in 2024?) and the A's would tentatively play their first game in that ballpark on Opening Day 2028. Their lease expires at the Oakland Coliseum after the 2024 season; it's not clear that the lease won't be terminated after this season because they would be playing before empty seats there as a lame duck, and in any case they need a home for 2025-2027, most likely the 10,000-seat Las Vegas Ballpark in Summerlin, which would be shared with the AAA Las Vegas Aviators.
I imagine that AAA club will probably move since you really don't see AAA teams in MLB cities. I hear there's a soon-to-be empty stadium in Oakland....
I should add to the list of things that have to happen before shovels for the ballpark go in the ground: The existing Tropicana has to be demolished, or at least that part that's on the ballpark construction site, and the site cleared. Bally's, which owns the development rights to the property, hasn't firmly established a shutdown date for the existing resort, though assuming all the other steps (MLB approval, development agreements, financing) are settled by the end of this calendar year I'd think the shutdown timeline might be accelerated. It's also not clear when the new resort that Bally's will build on the remainder of the Tropicana parcel would open; construction of that could be concurrent with the ballpark (seems logical) or later (seems a bit awkward).
As to triplemultiplex's comment about the Aviators, it has been pretty clearly established that the intent is to keep them where they are. It's a nice new ballpark that just opened a few years ago, immediately adjacent to the Summerlin shopping and restaurant district. To the extent the A's and Aviators both play there for a few seasons, that can be arranged scheduling-wise; there's ample precedent in baseball for two teams to play in the same home ballpark (e.g. Yankees and Mets at Shea Stadium while Yankee Stadium was being rebuilt, and the Dodgers and Angels at Dodger Stadium before Anaheim Stadium opened).
Then the Braves AAA team plays in suburban Gwinett County.
Quote from: Big John on June 15, 2023, 11:20:54 AM
Then the Braves AAA team plays in suburban Gwinett County.
That was part of a deliberate move to consolidate their farm system within the state of Georgia, though.
There are six AAA teams that play in the same media market as the MLB parent.
As mentioned, the Gwinnett Stripers (Braves) play in suburban Atlanta.
The Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs (Phillies) play in Allentown, PA, which is in the Philadelphia DMA.
The Worchester Red Sox play in Worchester, MA, which is in the Boston DMA.
The Saint Paul Saints (Twins) play in St. Paul, the other Twin City.
The Sugar Land Space Cowboys (Astros) play in Sugar Land, TX, which is suburban Houston.
The Tacoma Rainiers (Mariners) play in Tacoma, which is the other major city in the Seattle/Tacoma market.
Many of the rest play in an adjacent market to the big league team. Buffalo (Toronto), Scranton/Wilkes-Barre (New York), Columbus (Cleveland), Louisville (Cincinnati), Omaha (Kansas City), Toledo (Detroit), Albuquerque (Denver, and yes the two media markets border), Round Rock (Texas (Dallas-Fort Worth) ), and Sacramento (San Francisco)
Baseball made a cost driven effort to have its farm teams in a geographically logical cluster when it resorted MiLB back in 21.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 15, 2023, 01:01:53 PM
There are six AAA teams that play in the same media market as the MLB parent.
As mentioned, the Gwinnett Stripers (Braves) play in suburban Atlanta.
The Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs (Phillies) play in Allentown, PA, which is in the Philadelphia DMA.
The Worchester Red Sox play in Worchester, MA, which is in the Boston DMA.
The Saint Paul Saints (Twins) play in St. Paul, the other Twin City.
The Sugar Land Space Cowboys (Astros) play in Sugar Land, TX, which is suburban Houston.
The Tacoma Rainiers (Mariners) play in Tacoma, which is the other major city in the Seattle/Tacoma market.
It should be noted that those are all top 15 media markets:
Philadelphia (4), Atlanta (6), Houston (7), Boston (9), Seattle (12), and Minneapolis (15)
and top 16 metro areas:
Houston (5), Philadelphia (7), Atlanta (8), Boston (11), Seattle (15), and Minneapolis (16)
Las Vegas is the #29 metro area and #40 media market, so it could be argued that the region isn't large enough to support both MLB and AAA teams. I suppose the A's ownership claiming such a huge potential draw from tourists is supposed to offset that argument.
Quote from: DTComposer on June 16, 2023, 06:03:16 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on June 15, 2023, 01:01:53 PM
There are six AAA teams that play in the same media market as the MLB parent.
As mentioned, the Gwinnett Stripers (Braves) play in suburban Atlanta.
The Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs (Phillies) play in Allentown, PA, which is in the Philadelphia DMA.
The Worchester Red Sox play in Worchester, MA, which is in the Boston DMA.
The Saint Paul Saints (Twins) play in St. Paul, the other Twin City.
The Sugar Land Space Cowboys (Astros) play in Sugar Land, TX, which is suburban Houston.
The Tacoma Rainiers (Mariners) play in Tacoma, which is the other major city in the Seattle/Tacoma market.
It should be noted that those are all top 15 media markets:
Philadelphia (4), Atlanta (6), Houston (7), Boston (9), Seattle (12), and Minneapolis (15)
and top 16 metro areas:
Houston (5), Philadelphia (7), Atlanta (8), Boston (11), Seattle (15), and Minneapolis (16)
Las Vegas is the #29 metro area and #40 media market, so it could be argued that the region isn't large enough to support both MLB and AAA teams. I suppose the A's ownership claiming such a huge potential draw from tourists is supposed to offset that argument.
And their landing in Vegas is being greased by the Nevada Legislature.
Quote from: DTComposer on June 16, 2023, 06:03:16 PM
Las Vegas is the #29 metro area and #40 media market, so it could be argued that the region isn't large enough to support both MLB and AAA teams. I suppose the A's ownership claiming such a huge potential draw from tourists is supposed to offset that argument.
As a long time A's fan, former Oakland resident and current Nevada resident, I watched quite a bit of the Nevada Legislature's hearings on the ballpark legislation. A big part of the pitch was that their projections have out-of-town visitors making up an average 30% of the crowd at A's home games (and filling hotel rooms during the slow summer season in Vegas, eating at restaurants, losing money in the casinos and so forth). With the ballpark planned to be 30,000 seats, the smallest in the major leagues, that means 9,000 out-of-towners in the stands per game, which requires only 21,000 per game from the local market to sell the place out every night.
AAA teams do pretty well to average around 7,000-8,000 attendance per game, all of which is local. I see AAA baseball as more family-friendly, especially in Vegas with the AAA ballpark being in the western suburbs rather than on the Strip. A family can go see an Aviators game for much, much less than the high ticket prices the A's will charge in that relatively small ballpark, and never mind the $60 you'll have to pay to park your car in the MGM Grand's or New York New York's garage. A lot of kids don't really care that they are seeing anonymous minor league players and not Shohei Ohtani and Aaron Judge.
I think the attendance targets from the local Vegas market are achievable for both the A's and the Aviators. I do wonder, long-term, about that 9,000 per game from out-of-town. Once a Mariners fan has made the trip from Seattle two or three times, are they going to keep doing that same trip regularly? It seems like once the novelty wears off that market might start to decline.
With the Las Vegas A's on their way (and Oakland losing its longest-tenured team as a result), will the AAA team be renamed to the Summerlin Aviators? There has been precedent of a smaller unknown city being named instead of the large city nearby: take the Round Rock Express, who play in a suburb of Austin. Before they were founded, nobody outside of Austin (and maybe San Antonio, plus several other places along the I-35 corridor) would've known where Round Rock was, and now the fans have a reason to go there. After all, Nolan Ryan's family owns the team!
Quote from: DTComposer on June 16, 2023, 06:03:16 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on June 15, 2023, 01:01:53 PM
There are six AAA teams that play in the same media market as the MLB parent.
As mentioned, the Gwinnett Stripers (Braves) play in suburban Atlanta.
The Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs (Phillies) play in Allentown, PA, which is in the Philadelphia DMA.
The Worchester Red Sox play in Worchester, MA, which is in the Boston DMA.
The Saint Paul Saints (Twins) play in St. Paul, the other Twin City.
The Sugar Land Space Cowboys (Astros) play in Sugar Land, TX, which is suburban Houston.
The Tacoma Rainiers (Mariners) play in Tacoma, which is the other major city in the Seattle/Tacoma market.
It should be noted that those are all top 15 media markets:
Philadelphia (4), Atlanta (6), Houston (7), Boston (9), Seattle (12), and Minneapolis (15)
and top 16 metro areas:
Houston (5), Philadelphia (7), Atlanta (8), Boston (11), Seattle (15), and Minneapolis (16)
Las Vegas is the #29 metro area and #40 media market, so it could be argued that the region isn't large enough to support both MLB and AAA teams. I suppose the A's ownership claiming such a huge potential draw from tourists is supposed to offset that argument.
And they don't necessarily have to have both the MLB and AAA teams in the same TV DMA. The A's (possibly renamed to Aviators?) can switch AAA teams with the Arizona Diamondbacks; the A's could have the Reno Aces as an AAA team, and the D-Backs could move the current Las Vegas Aviators to either Tucson or Talking Stick Fields near Scottsdale.
Quote from: brad2971 on June 20, 2023, 11:38:29 PM
And they don't necessarily have to have both the MLB and AAA teams in the same TV DMA. The A's (possibly renamed to Aviators?) can switch AAA teams with the Arizona Diamondbacks; the A's could have the Reno Aces as an AAA team, and the D-Backs could move the current Las Vegas Aviators to either Tucson or Talking Stick Fields near Scottsdale.
I suspect that Las Vegas will affiliate with Reno AAA, and that the ex-Las Vegas AAA team will be the subject of a pretty solid bidding war between medium sized cities, perhaps cascading down the chain is a AA moves up and so on. There are plenty of baseball-less markets that could support a AAA team.
Meanwhile, from Oakland A's fans:
https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2023/6/21/23767113/oakland-as-leaving-for-vegas-john-fisher-reverse-boycott
From NBC Sports Bay Area:
Oakland mayor has stipulations in mind if A's extend Coliseum leaseQuoteAs the Athletics ponder their impending relocation, extending the team's Oakland Coliseum lease until its new Las Vegas ballpark is constructed won't come without cost.
Oakland mayor Sheng Thao has informed MLB commissioner Rob Manfred a Coliseum lease extension has a price, her chief of staff, Leigh Hanson, told the San Francisco Chronicle. Hanson also revealed those demands could include a clause in the agreement requiring the A's name to stay in Oakland, or the city could make sure it's awarded an MLB expansion team.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.nbcsportsbayarea.com/mlb/oakland-athletics/oakland-coliseum-lease-extension/1650985/)
I have a few things to say to the Oakland mayor and government leaders... all of them NSFW.
Of course, the "Athletics" name didn't originate in Oakland, either.
Might as well try and bilk the A's out of more money since they were trying to bilk Oakland out of hundreds of millions of dollars for a new stadium.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 29, 2023, 10:53:21 AMMight as well try and bilk the A's out of more money since they were trying to bilk Oakland out of hundreds of millions of dollars for a new stadium.
Although I am opposed to taxpayer funding of stadiums and arenas, there are steps that a city can take to address the business needs of a team. From what I can see, Oakland did none of that, maybe because the current team owner is a cheapskate. When MLB is even willing to waive the relocation fee to allow the team to move, that is not a sign of a good working relationship. Now, Oakland wants to pull a Cleveland Browns maneuver. Remember, the Baltimore Colts bolted to Indianapolis when the state threatened to take the team using eminent domain.
In fairness, I think the Mayor of Oakland has more pressing immediate things to worry about than the A's:
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/oakland-mayor-sheng-thao-crime-concerns/3301465/
Quote from: ZLoth on August 29, 2023, 09:30:10 AM
From NBC Sports Bay Area:
Oakland mayor has stipulations in mind if A's extend Coliseum leaseQuoteAs the Athletics ponder their impending relocation, extending the team's Oakland Coliseum lease until its new Las Vegas ballpark is constructed won't come without cost.
Oakland mayor Sheng Thao has informed MLB commissioner Rob Manfred a Coliseum lease extension has a price, her chief of staff, Leigh Hanson, told the San Francisco Chronicle. Hanson also revealed those demands could include a clause in the agreement requiring the A's name to stay in Oakland, or the city could make sure it's awarded an MLB expansion team.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.nbcsportsbayarea.com/mlb/oakland-athletics/oakland-coliseum-lease-extension/1650985/)
I have a few things to say to the Oakland mayor and government leaders... all of them NSFW.
Awarded an expansion team? How will that be different than keeping the A's?
I'm calling it now: Time to welcome the Las Vegas Gamblers!
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 29, 2023, 09:33:15 AM
Of course, the "Athletics" name didn't originate in Oakland, either.
But the "Raiders" did, and look where they went.
I also find it funny that Oakland thinks that the Athletics name should remain in Oakland when that isn't even where the name originated, that'd be Philadelphia. Kansas City never said that the Royals should be the Athletics and keep that name there. Why should Oakland get to keep the name? They did very little to get a stadium deal done there.
There is this small group, including NBC commentator Brodie Brazil, who have this theory that the A's can move to Las Vegas, but that puts Oakland into contention for an expansion team, which baseball expansion is coming in the last part of this decade. This is why they want to keep the A's name.
Newsflash: Oakland is losing its team because its city/county/state cannot/will not build an acceptable stadium. Every other city in the same position, got it done. How anyone can think that, somehow, that will change in the next few years, is beyond me. If Oakland wants baseball, it needs to/needed to get this done. No one is going to put himself in a position of moving into that dump of a stadium and then go through years of being turned down on deal after deal, again.
Quote from: SP Cook on August 30, 2023, 03:11:16 PM
There is this small group, including NBC commentator Brodie Brazil, who have this theory that the A's can move to Las Vegas, but that puts Oakland into contention for an expansion team, which baseball expansion is coming in the last part of this decade. This is why they want to keep the A's name.
Newsflash: Oakland is losing its team because its city/county/state cannot/will not build an acceptable stadium. Every other city in the same position, got it done. How anyone can think that, somehow, that will change in the next few years, is beyond me. If Oakland wants baseball, it needs to/needed to get this done. No one is going to put himself in a position of moving into that dump of a stadium and then go through years of being turned down on deal after deal, again.
I agree. It's crazy to think that with the situation there now that something is suddenly going to change in the next few years if MLB does expand and I guarantee Oakland will not be getting a team since they already have one and can't get a stadium now. No Oakland it's either build the A's a new stadium or when they leave you can forget about ever hosting a MLB game in your city again.
The problem is that since the A's moved to Oakland in 1968, much of the wealth in the Bay area has moved down to the San Jose/Santa Clara area.
The equitable solution would be to let the A's follow the money down there, but the Giants see that as an infringement on their territory. Oakland/Alameda County just don't have the wealth to support a new team or stadium.
Quote from: Alps on August 29, 2023, 08:02:58 PMAwarded an expansion team? How will that be different than keeping the A's?
And how will Oakland attract a expansion team? By building a good stadium. Anyone looking at the Oakland Hole will say a few choice words, and it's past the renovation point now. And, like it was stated earlier in this thread...
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on August 29, 2023, 01:50:23 PMIn fairness, I think the Mayor of Oakland has more pressing immediate things to worry about than the A's
Plus, any expansion team will get a hard NO! from the San Francisco Giants. Beyond New York (#1 media market), Los Angeles (#2 media market), and Chicago (#3 media market), I don't see any area being able to support two MLB teams, including DFW.
No city should have to use public funds to build a stadium for an entitled professional team with wealthy owners. If they want city money, they should be forced to accept public ownership that would forever bind the team to the city itself.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on August 30, 2023, 03:37:48 PM
The problem is that since the A's moved to Oakland in 1968, much of the wealth in the Bay area has moved down to the San Jose/Santa Clara area.
The equitable solution would be to let the A's follow the money down there, but the Giants see that as an infringement on their territory. Oakland/Alameda County just don't have the wealth to support a new team or stadium.
San Jose would be a perfect location for the A's to move to but I guess the Giants own the territory or something I don't know why it'd matter since they'd be playing further away than they are now.
Quote from: Flint1979 on August 30, 2023, 06:40:41 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on August 30, 2023, 03:37:48 PM
The problem is that since the A's moved to Oakland in 1968, much of the wealth in the Bay area has moved down to the San Jose/Santa Clara area.
The equitable solution would be to let the A's follow the money down there, but the Giants see that as an infringement on their territory. Oakland/Alameda County just don't have the wealth to support a new team or stadium.
San Jose would be a perfect location for the A's to move to but I guess the Giants own the territory or something I don't know why it'd matter since they'd be playing further away than they are now.
The Giants were granted the exclusive rights to Santa Clara County as part of some legal maneuvering around the late 1980s or early 1990s. They were stuck in Candlestick Park, which was an even more miserable dump than the Oakland Coliseum is now, and made a couple attempts at getting a ballpark approved in Santa Clara, in the general area where the 49ers' Levi's Stadium is situated, but the voters rejected the financing plans. The A's ownership at the time, Walter Haas and family, were satisfied with Oakland, had no contemplation of ever moving to Santa Clara County and agreed to the Giants' request.
Ownership of both teams has changed, and even though the Giants eventually found a site in San Francisco and built one of baseball's best ballparks there, they have never been willing to reciprocate Haas' cooperation and relinquish their exclusive rights in Santa Clara County. It has been part of a strategy to either ensure that the A's are the secondary team in the Bay Area or force them to leave and give the Giants a monopoly in one of the country's largest and wealthiest markets, and that strategy finally appears to have worked out for them.
The Giants don't have any right to prevent baseball from putting an expansion team in Alameda or Contra Costa Counties (or Sacramento, for that matter). Under the Major League Constitution their exclusive territory is "The City of San Francisco; and San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Monterey and Marin Counties in California; provided, however, that with respect to all Major League Clubs, Santa Clara County in California shall also be included." However, it seems unlikely that Major League Baseball would put the East Bay above several other cities which would be competing for an expansion franchise, as the A's have usually been toward the back end of the pack in attendance for most of their Oakland tenure.
Having an MLB team in the Central Valley might be interesting given there is only one big four professional franchise teams out here. Trouble is where to put a stadium and how would it get paid for?
Quote from: gonealookin on August 30, 2023, 07:57:24 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on August 30, 2023, 06:40:41 PM
San Jose would be a perfect location for the A's to move to but I guess the Giants own the territory or something I don't know why it'd matter since they'd be playing further away than they are now.
The Giants were granted the exclusive rights to Santa Clara County as part of some legal maneuvering around the late 1980s or early 1990s.
This was around 1992-1993 time frame where there was the threat of the Giants moving to Tampa Bay.
Quote from: ZLoth on August 30, 2023, 03:58:56 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 29, 2023, 08:02:58 PMAwarded an expansion team? How will that be different than keeping the A's?
And how will Oakland attract a expansion team? By building a good stadium. Anyone looking at the Oakland Hole will say a few choice words, and it's past the renovation point now. And, like it was stated earlier in this thread...
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on August 29, 2023, 01:50:23 PMIn fairness, I think the Mayor of Oakland has more pressing immediate things to worry about than the A's
Plus, any expansion team will get a hard NO! from the San Francisco Giants. Beyond New York (#1 media market), Los Angeles (#2 media market), and Chicago (#3 media market), I don't see any area being able to support two MLB teams, including DFW.
Are we forgetting Baltimore and Washington? Some people say they're two separate areas, but they're close enough to be considered one large area. As I recall, the Nationals were opposed by the Orioles' owner when they arrived (and they were owned by MLB back then, not yet sold to a single individual or group), but it took them 15 years to reach the pinnacle of success, a World Series championship. While the Nationals don't have the large fan base that the Orioles do, at least those fans are dedicated, and it felt good to see them get rewarded.
Certainly helps that the residents of the two cities largely hate each other, especially when it comes to sports.
Quote from: Henry on August 30, 2023, 09:40:04 PM
Are we forgetting Baltimore and Washington? Some people say they're two separate areas, but they're close enough to be considered one large area. As I recall, the Nationals were opposed by the Orioles' owner when they arrived...
The Orioles owner, who is one of the most immoral and truly evil people currently alive, worked out a complex deal with MLB, relative to the TV rights to the Nationals. How much the TV network, which the Orioles own, should pay has been in litigation ever since. Angelos, the Orioles owner, has lost at every level, but simply files new lawsuits and avoids paying. Eventually, with the regional sports network model in decline, he will simply bankrupt the TV channel and pay the Nationals nothing.
Sadly, the other owners knew exactly what sort of person Angelos was when they let him buy the team.
Quote from: Henry on August 30, 2023, 09:40:04 PM
Quote from: ZLoth on August 30, 2023, 03:58:56 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 29, 2023, 08:02:58 PMAwarded an expansion team? How will that be different than keeping the A's?
And how will Oakland attract a expansion team? By building a good stadium. Anyone looking at the Oakland Hole will say a few choice words, and it's past the renovation point now. And, like it was stated earlier in this thread...
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on August 29, 2023, 01:50:23 PMIn fairness, I think the Mayor of Oakland has more pressing immediate things to worry about than the A's
Plus, any expansion team will get a hard NO! from the San Francisco Giants. Beyond New York (#1 media market), Los Angeles (#2 media market), and Chicago (#3 media market), I don't see any area being able to support two MLB teams, including DFW.
Are we forgetting Baltimore and Washington? Some people say they're two separate areas, but they're close enough to be considered one large area. As I recall, the Nationals were opposed by the Orioles' owner when they arrived (and they were owned by MLB back then, not yet sold to a single individual or group), but it took them 15 years to reach the pinnacle of success, a World Series championship. While the Nationals don't have the large fan base that the Orioles do, at least those fans are dedicated, and it felt good to see them get rewarded.
The A's and Giants play 16 miles apart so they're a lot closer than the Nats and Orioles. The attendance figures in Oakland (going back 20 years, before Fisher bought the team) support the assertion that the Bay Area can't support two teams. The team has had really good seasons, even recently, and no one is showing up.
A's fans are loud online and spin a hell of a sob story but sometimes reality smacks you in the face.
It isn't as though Oakland doesn't have a track record for losing professional teams to other cities. The city in fact likely has the worst record given it stands to lose all four major sports and somehow the same NFL team twice.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 31, 2023, 09:45:04 AM
It isn't as though Oakland doesn't have a track record for losing professional teams to other cities. The city in fact likely has the worst record given it stands to lose all four major sports and somehow the same NFL team twice.
I've honestly been surprised by the social media reaction to the A's leaving. It's not as though Oakland is a prime sports market that is losing a baseball team that regularly sells out and has wide fan support. There are emerging markets for MLB to enter and if you're looking to relocate a team, Oakland's metrics make them a prime candidate.
John Fisher is an asshole and their stadium is a dump so on the surface, it's a sympathetic cause but the team has had minimal live attendance over the last two decades, which includes multiple runs of decent success (including a 97 win season). I've seen hot takes ranging from people claiming that the A's are a big part of Oakland's culture so the name should remain (they were in Philly and KC first, get in line Oakland) and this is worse than when the Dodgers left Brooklyn (lol!).
The A's relocation saga is a good example of how social media can be used to rile people up, even when the facts aren't on their side.
Quote from: SP Cook on August 30, 2023, 03:11:16 PM
....
Newsflash: Oakland is losing its team because its city/county/state cannot/will not build an acceptable stadium. Every other city in the same position, got it done. ....
There is one that didn't get it done. That city–Montreal–lost its team. There were several other issues at play there as well, of course, including bad attendance, which also affects Oakland, as well as mismanagement of media rights where one owner didn't even bother to arrange for English-language local TV and radio deals. The media rights fiasco almost certainly affected attendance because I think most people who watch baseball would agree that it's a more enjoyable sport when you watch the same team regularly.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 31, 2023, 10:54:33 AM
Quote from: SP Cook on August 30, 2023, 03:11:16 PM
....
Newsflash: Oakland is losing its team because its city/county/state cannot/will not build an acceptable stadium. Every other city in the same position, got it done. ....
There is one that didn't get it done. That city–Montreal–lost its team. There were several other issues at play there as well, of course, including bad attendance, which also affects Oakland, as well as mismanagement of media rights where one owner didn't even bother to arrange for English-language local TV and radio deals. The media rights fiasco almost certainly affected attendance because I think most people who watch baseball would agree that it's a more enjoyable sport when you watch the same team regularly.
Soldier Field in Chicago, although a better stadium than the Oakland Hole, has major issues as well to the point where the team is purchasing a former racetrack and is planning to convert it to the stadium. The poor field maintanence has been a major issue for decades. Yet, the politicos keep thinking they own that team.
Ref:
The Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority (City of Oakland and Alameda County) owns and "maintains" the Oakland Coliseum.
Quote from: Bruce on August 30, 2023, 05:37:06 PM
No city should have to use public funds to build a stadium for an entitled professional team with wealthy owners. If they want city money, they should be forced to accept public ownership that would forever bind the team to the city itself.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 31, 2023, 11:30:04 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 30, 2023, 05:37:06 PMNo city should have to use public funds to build a stadium for an entitled professional team with wealthy owners. If they want city money, they should be forced to accept public ownership that would forever bind the team to the city itself.
I agree wholeheartedly.
As far as I'm concerned, whether it be a sports stadium, sports arena, sports pavilion, or what have you... we should not be utilizing taxpayer funds or tax-free muni bonds to fund a stadium. It's a entertainment complex after all, much like a movie theater or music venue. https://www.fieldofschemes.com/
I guess it doesn't bother me. Usually the leading theory is that the economic benefits of a professional sports venue and franchise will recoup the investment.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 31, 2023, 03:23:38 PM
Usually the leading theory is that the economic benefits of a professional sports venue and franchise will recoup the investment.
True, but rare is the case where this theory withstands empirical scrutiny.
I think it depends on a couple of things, with the two biggest considerations being the type of venue and the location. Paying for an indoor arena (hockey/basketball size) likely has the most benefit because it gets used the most of any sports venue and it's not limited to just those events. Some arenas are in use almost every day of the year and bring in business to the surrounding area as a result. Verizon Center in DC–though not publicly funded except for infrastructure improvements–is an outstanding example of a sports venue that led to an economic boom in the surrounding area. I'd suggest that a pro football stadium is the least sensible for public funding because it has the lowest return due to being used for far fewer dates per year than an arena or a ballpark (or, I suppose, an MLS-sized soccer stadium).
Any venue you plop down in the middle of a sea of parking is likely to have limited economic benefit to the local area compared to an in-city arena or ballpark surrounded by restaurants, bars, etc.
Public financing of infrastructure improvements around new stadiums is also a tricky one. For conventional real estate development, the developer is usually fronting this cost, but for even privately-financed stadiums it's assumed to be the government's responsibility. Doesn't sit well with me at all.
The recent wave of MLS stadiums with very little to no public subsidies proves that it can be done in this country. These ownership groups are nowhere near as wealthy as the traditional leagues of the Big 5 and yet can build stadiums that are close to $1 billion.
It also matters to me how much direct benefit is available to the average citizen. While an NFL stadium will likely provide an economic boost to the neighborhood via increased use of hotels, bars, restaurants, etc., the average cost of NFL and/or concert tours tickets prices out a huge segment of the city's population, and is in use maybe 20 times a year. Your average city-funded performing arts center can have events 150 days or more per year and include events at all price ranges and accessibilities. Libraries are available to all for free.
To the best of my knowledge, the Howard Terminal stadium plan had passed its EIR and received a green light from the Port of Oakland, and was less than $100 million short on funding. A's ownership let a deadline pass last fall without explanation, which prompted MLB to go on red alert that Oakland wasn't viable anymore.
As far as market size and wealth, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties top 2.8 million people - larger than at least half a dozen of the other MLB markets, and both counties are in the top 15 large counties (over 500K) for income.
One can argue on whether the Bay Area should be a two-team market (and IMO, no one besides New York and L.A. should be), but Oakland did a great deal to get a deal done. A's ownership was never truly committed to Oakland in this process.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 31, 2023, 04:03:50 PM
I think it depends on a couple of things, with the two biggest considerations being the type of venue and the location. Paying for an indoor arena (hockey/basketball size) likely has the most benefit because it gets used the most of any sports venue and it's not limited to just those events. Some arenas are in use almost every day of the year and bring in business to the surrounding area as a result. Verizon Center in DC–though not publicly funded except for infrastructure improvements–is an outstanding example of a sports venue that led to an economic boom in the surrounding area. I'd suggest that a pro football stadium is the least sensible for public funding because it has the lowest return due to being used for far fewer dates per year than an arena or a ballpark (or, I suppose, an MLS-sized soccer stadium).
Any venue you plop down in the middle of a sea of parking is likely to have limited economic benefit to the local area compared to an in-city arena or ballpark surrounded by restaurants, bars, etc.
I feel like DC has done a great job with using sporting venues as catalysts for economic growth. Nationals Park in Navy Yard is another great example.
I thought about mentioning Nationals Park because that one was in fact paid for by the city as part of the deal to get MLB to move the Expos here. There was great skepticism about the location because, prior to the ballpark opening, it was a rather rough and forgotten area that most people saw only as they passed by on South Capitol Street. That area has seriously transformed. I'm wondering when the area between the "Wharf" development at the Southwest Waterfront and the Nats Park area will be redeveloped. It's bound to happen because the land will just plain become too valuable for the current low-density residential uses, but it's bound to cause some bitter opposition and political fallout because it will displace people who don't have a whole lot of options as to where to move.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 01, 2023, 09:28:09 AM
I thought about mentioning Nationals Park because that one was in fact paid for by the city as part of the deal to get MLB to move the Expos here. There was great skepticism about the location because, prior to the ballpark opening, it was a rather rough and forgotten area that most people saw only as they passed by on South Capitol Street. That area has seriously transformed. I'm wondering when the area between the "Wharf" development at the Southwest Waterfront and the Nats Park area will be redeveloped. It's bound to happen because the land will just plain become too valuable for the current low-density residential uses, but it's bound to cause some bitter opposition and political fallout because it will displace people who don't have a whole lot of options as to where to move.
I've parked near the SW Waterfront Metro stop and walked to Nats Park many times. It's a gap in development that I suspect will be filled in in the next couple of decades. I agree that it'll be a political fight but developers usually win out in the end in DC. Lower income people will just keep getting pushed into PG County.
I also suspect we'll also see development between Nats Park and Audi Field and towards Ft. McNair. You're already starting to see that with things like the Cambria Hotel opening up. There are still some housing developments left over from before Nats Park opened that will likely be gone within the next 10 years. I do believe that Buzzard Point will likely be the next boom neighborhood in DC.
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 01, 2023, 09:28:09 AM
I thought about mentioning Nationals Park because that one was in fact paid for by the city as part of the deal to get MLB to move the Expos here. There was great skepticism about the location because, prior to the ballpark opening, it was a rather rough and forgotten area that most people saw only as they passed by on South Capitol Street. That area has seriously transformed. I'm wondering when the area between the "Wharf" development at the Southwest Waterfront and the Nats Park area will be redeveloped. It's bound to happen because the land will just plain become too valuable for the current low-density residential uses, but it's bound to cause some bitter opposition and political fallout because it will displace people who don't have a whole lot of options as to where to move.
can tell you from my drives that it has not seriously transformed. maybe north to downtown, but definitely not west across the street.
I meant the area right around the ballpark on the east side of South Capitol Street has seriously transformed, which is undeniable. It used to be almost completely industrial aside from a few homosexual bars (and indeed the presence of those bars were one reason some people opposed the ballpark being constructed there). Notice the way I structured my prior comment–I said "that area has a seriously transformed" and then, after that, I referred to the area west of the ballpark and east of the Wharf. That way of commenting was intentional to separate the two areas. In particular, we used to walk through that residential area directly west of the ballpark (Syphax Gardens, I think) to go back to the car. There was a definite "safety in numbers" feeling after a ballgame, but at least once some woman who lives there was yelling at the people passing on the sidewalk–definitely gave a feeling of the residents resenting ballpark patrons walking through the area.
Quote from: Alps on September 01, 2023, 01:49:55 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 01, 2023, 09:28:09 AM
I thought about mentioning Nationals Park because that one was in fact paid for by the city as part of the deal to get MLB to move the Expos here. There was great skepticism about the location because, prior to the ballpark opening, it was a rather rough and forgotten area that most people saw only as they passed by on South Capitol Street. That area has seriously transformed. I'm wondering when the area between the "Wharf" development at the Southwest Waterfront and the Nats Park area will be redeveloped. It's bound to happen because the land will just plain become too valuable for the current low-density residential uses, but it's bound to cause some bitter opposition and political fallout because it will displace people who don't have a whole lot of options as to where to move.
can tell you from my drives that it has not seriously transformed. maybe north to downtown, but definitely not west across the street.
It's happening slowly. As I said in my post above, that's the next growth area. The area between 2nd St. SW and S. Capitol St. will see some heavy gentrification over the next decade.
From Yahoo Sports via AOL:
MLB owners unanimously vote to approve Athletics' move to Las VegasQuoteThe Oakland Athletics are officially relocating. The team's move to Las Vegas was voted on, and unanimously approved, by all 30 MLB owners Thursday.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.aol.com/mlb-owners-unanimously-vote-approve-143233566.html)
But grass doesn't grow there...
While I'm sad that this is happening, I'm not surprised by this at all. Even expansion is a long shot, given how horrible the state of Oakland truly is. The Raiders and Warriors are already gone, and I figured it would be a matter of time before the A's left too. I sense an Expos/Supersonics situation ahead where a long wait will follow.
I feel terrible for Oakland, but it seems this was a long time coming.
Goodbye to the Bay Bridge Series in both the MLB and NFL.
Quote from: Henry on November 16, 2023, 10:09:40 PM
While I'm sad that this is happening, I'm not surprised by this at all. Even expansion is a long shot, given how horrible the state of Oakland truly is. The Raiders and Warriors are already gone, and I figured it would be a matter of time before the A's left too. I sense an Expos/Supersonics situation ahead where a long wait will follow.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on November 17, 2023, 05:40:43 AM
I feel terrible for Oakland, but it seems this was a long time coming.
1960 populations: Alameda County 908,209 - Santa Clara County 642,315
2020 populations: Alameda County 1,682,353 - Santa Clara County 1,936,259
The demographics of the area have changed dramatically since the Raiders and A's arrived in Oakland. Oakland is not going to be a viable spot for a team that has San Francisco and San Jose leaving it behind in both population growth and popularity.
MLB needed to work out a deal where the Giants got some concessions in order to drop their opposition to the A's moving to the South Bay. Would have been best for everybody.
Quote from: bing101 on November 17, 2023, 07:56:28 AM
Goodbye to the Bay Bridge Series in both the MLB and NFL.
I thought the NFL version was gone when the 49ers moved to Santa Clara.
Quote from: Rothman on November 16, 2023, 03:20:03 PM
But grass doesn't grow there...
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81I6iErcxdL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 17, 2023, 08:05:46 AM
MLB needed to work out a deal where the Giants got some concessions in order to drop their opposition to the A's moving to the South Bay. Would have been best for everybody.
IIRC, the A's originally had territorial rights to that particular area when the Giants were threatening to move to Tampa Bay, and they gave it to their neighbors in a deal that would include what is now called Oracle Park. Looking back, they wish they never did it, but what's done is done. Also, it wouldn't be right to have the Dodgers travel to the Gulf Coast just to play their longstanding rivals (dating back to their times in NYC, or to be more specific, Manhattan and Brooklyn), because then it would lose all of its appeal and everything that made it a special occasion on the MLB calendar, along with Red Sox-Yankees and Cubs-Cardinals.
Quote from: Henry on November 23, 2023, 11:10:57 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on November 17, 2023, 08:05:46 AM
MLB needed to work out a deal where the Giants got some concessions in order to drop their opposition to the A's moving to the South Bay. Would have been best for everybody.
IIRC, the A's originally had territorial rights to that particular area when the Giants were threatening to move to Tampa Bay, and they gave it to their neighbors in a deal that would include what is now called Oracle Park. Looking back, they wish they never did it, but what's done is done. Also, it wouldn't be right to have the Dodgers travel to the Gulf Coast just to play their longstanding rivals (dating back to their times in NYC, or to be more specific, Manhattan and Brooklyn), because then it would lose all of its appeal and everything that made it a special occasion on the MLB calendar, along with Red Sox-Yankees and Cubs-Cardinals.
Santa Clara County was shared territory between the Giants and A's, and the A's gave the Giants exclusive rights so a stadium proposal there could go forward (interestingly, not far from where Levi's Stadium is now). That proposal went away once the PacBell/AT&T/Oracle Park plan gained traction.
San Jose had everything lined up for a downtown ballpark for the A's, but the Giants were not willing to reverse the agreement.
Quote from: Alps on May 13, 2021, 06:40:44 PM
Quote from: bing101 on May 13, 2021, 09:56:11 AM
Does Austin, TX count as a candidate for getting the A's or not. I know Austin, TX has been getting attention here in California because some of the Tech CEO's and VC leaders have been talking about leaving CA for Texas for some time though. But that may not translate necessarily for MLB teams moving though.
I mentioned San Antonio because it's still a much larger metro area than Austin, but a stadium on the north side would draw from both.
Put it on the South Side of San Marcos. It would be centrally located.
Blanco might be a good fit too. It is a little bit farther, but is closer to the affluent zip codes in both Austin and San Antonio.
Quote from: Rothman on November 16, 2023, 03:20:03 PM
But grass doesn't grow there...
Domes and artificial turf.
Quote from: bwana39 on November 27, 2023, 02:15:30 PM
Quote from: Alps on May 13, 2021, 06:40:44 PM
Quote from: bing101 on May 13, 2021, 09:56:11 AM
Does Austin, TX count as a candidate for getting the A's or not. I know Austin, TX has been getting attention here in California because some of the Tech CEO's and VC leaders have been talking about leaving CA for Texas for some time though. But that may not translate necessarily for MLB teams moving though.
I mentioned San Antonio because it's still a much larger metro area than Austin, but a stadium on the north side would draw from both.
Put it on the South Side of San Marcos. It would be centrally located.
Blanco might be a good fit too. It is a little bit farther, but is closer to the affluent zip codes in both Austin and San Antonio.
It might make a perfect opportunity to have the NL return to the Lone Star State (which it abandoned after 2012, when the Astros joined the Rangers in the AL), and give locals rooting interest beyond the Spurs. And with expansion on the horizon, now is the time to pull the trigger.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10098984-oakland-ballers-independent-baseball-team-started-by-fans-ahead-of-as-vegas-move
Note there is hype to make a new Oakland Baseball team but for now its not bound to reality.
Quote from: bing101 on November 28, 2023, 02:39:33 PM
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10098984-oakland-ballers-independent-baseball-team-started-by-fans-ahead-of-as-vegas-move
Note there is hype to make a new Oakland Baseball team but for now its not bound to reality.
Now it's official:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/columnist/bob-nightengale/2023/11/28/oakland-announces-expansion-pioneer-league-oakland-ballers/71726850007/
The A's may soon be gone, but the B's are stealing back Oakland's baseball legacy!
Sutter Health Park, formerly Raley Field, in West Sacramento is reportedly the frontrunner to host the A's during the Oakland to Las Vegas transition period.
https://www.sacbee.com/sports/article285588157.html (https://www.sacbee.com/sports/article285588157.html)
The Sacramento River Cats are the Giants' AAA affiliate, so there would be some irony there. The River Cats' attendance has been in a long-term decline to the point where they have been in the bottom third of all AAA teams in attendance since Covid. Vivek Ranadivé, the River Cats' owner who also owns the NBA Sacramento Kings, might not mind some sort of subsidy or indemnification payment from the A's to help his own team's financials. The A's would likely keep their RSN television contract, although it provides for modification and likely reduction in payments if the A's play outside the immediate Bay Area (and Sacramento apparently is "outside" under that contract). A possible obstacle to Sacramento or any other AAA park would be any objection from the MLB Players Association.
It's possible the Sacramento report was planted to pressure the City of Oakland to give the A's a better deal on a temporary lease extension at the Oakland Coliseum. However, Oakland might respond by telling A's ownership "don't let the door hit you on the way out" as relations between ownership and the City are pretty hostile. In any case, the A's do need to determine a home field for 2025 shortly as MLB wants to have a 2025 schedule out by July or so.
With apologies to any A's fans here, this circus is getting really fun to watch right now.
Quote from: SectorZ on February 17, 2024, 05:44:14 PM
With apologies to any A's fans here, this circus is getting really fun to watch right now.
With the elephant in their logo
Quote from: SectorZ on February 17, 2024, 05:44:14 PM
With apologies to any A's fans here, this circus is getting really fun to watch right now.
Oh, I've been an A's fan since I was in grade school in the East Bay and Reggie Jackson, Catfish Hunter and Rollie Fingers were winning World Championships. There's no need to apologize, the current ownership has certainly turned it into a "circus", which will get even more absurd if they somehow fail to complete their stadium deal in Las Vegas (they have a promise of $380 million courtesy of the Nevada legislature, but the rest of the financing is still up in the air).
In recent years the A's ownership has simply decided not to compete in Major League Baseball. They had some good players in the 2018-2021 period, but as they gained enough service time and came due for salaries well above the MLB minimum, the A's traded all of them off for other teams' mediocre prospects who would work for cheap (and also be lousy enough to lose 112 games as the team did last season). It stupefies me that someone would own a major league sports team and be satisfied to cash the checks from TV deals and not try their best to field a winning team; if that's your mentality you need to invest your assets in some other line of business.
If the Vegas ballpark deal were to fall apart I expect the other MLB owners would finally get fed up and force John Fisher to sell the team. That wouldn't necessarily be any better for Oakland as someone from one of the other cities mentioned as future expansion candidates might step up to be the buyer, or a buyer might just take over the Vegas project.
From SportsNet:
Oakland A's relocating to Sacramento for next three seasonsQuoteThe A's announced the decision to play at the home of the Sacramento River Cats from 2025-27 with an option for 2028 on Thursday after being unable to reach an agreement to extend their lease in Oakland during that time.
(text deleted)
The A's will now play the next three seasons at Sutter Health Park in West Sacramento, near the state capitol and the NBA arena where the Sacramento Kings play. The minor league stadium has 10,624 fixed seats and can currently hold 14,014 fans with lawn seating and standing room.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.sportsnet.ca/mlb/article/oakland-as-relocating-to-sacramento-for-next-three-seasons/)
Probably not too worried about that low seating capacity in Sacramento when they can only get 6,000 to go to a game in Oakland right now.
I actively cringed just watching that three game series the Red Sox played against them, especially that game with five errors in three innings. I swear Margaret Whitton was reincarnated and watching the game from a luxury box applauding the effort.
If the short term move to Sacramento goes down I'll probably incorporate a game into a city meet. To my knowledge nobody has done Sacramento and the stadium is right near a lot of noteworthy road items.
Congrats to Sacramento on finally getting their MLB team.
When the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
Quote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
It should be
BAL
A'S
One of the things they said in the announcement is that they will simply be known as the "Athletics" or the "A's" with no city affiliation in the name. I imagine they might put some Sacramento patch on the uniforms but they won't have "Sacramento" in script across the front.
Quote from: gonealookin on April 04, 2024, 10:39:24 PMQuote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
It should be
BAL
A'S
One of the things they said in the announcement is that they will simply be known as the "Athletics" or the "A's" with no city affiliation in the name. I imagine they might put some Sacramento patch on the uniforms but they won't have "Sacramento" in script across the front.
It's their last season in Oakland, so it's still going to be "BAL-OAK" like it's been for the last 57 years. I sort of expected them not getting an extension in Oakland, and it's just as well because the relationship between the two sides has deteriorated to the point of no return. Just like that, the Giants will have the Bay Area all to themselves for all eternity.
Quote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
The AARoads Forum experience in two posts:
Quote from: Henry on April 04, 2024, 10:47:23 PMIt's their last season in Oakland, so it's still going to be "BAL-OAK" like it's been for the last 57 years.
Quote from: LilianaUwU on April 04, 2024, 10:56:00 PMhehe ball sack
Quote from: Henry on April 04, 2024, 10:47:23 PMQuote from: gonealookin on April 04, 2024, 10:39:24 PMQuote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
It should be
BAL
A'S
One of the things they said in the announcement is that they will simply be known as the "Athletics" or the "A's" with no city affiliation in the name. I imagine they might put some Sacramento patch on the uniforms but they won't have "Sacramento" in script across the front.
It's their last season in Oakland, so it's still going to be "BAL-OAK" like it's been for the last 57 years. I sort of expected them not getting an extension in Oakland, and it's just as well because the relationship between the two sides has deteriorated to the point of no return. Just like that, the Giants will have the Bay Area all to themselves for all eternity.
As it is, the A's wanted to move to the South Bay and the Giants said no. It is like the Airport thing going on right now. Nobody wants to be associated with Oakland.
Maybe FCK-ARS if there is the possibility that FC Kaiserslautern return to the Bundesliga and make a Champions League appearance against Arsenal.
Not sure the As move to Vegas is going to go like the Raiders. The Raiders have a huge fanbase in southern California that will think nothing of driving up to Vegas for a weekend considering there are only eight or nine home games. NFL games are more a destination event.
The As don't have that following and baseball isn't quite like that.
Quote from: gonealookin on April 04, 2024, 10:39:24 PMQuote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
It should be
BAL
A'S
One of the things they said in the announcement is that they will simply be known as the "Athletics" or the "A's" with no city affiliation in the name. I imagine they might put some Sacramento patch on the uniforms but they won't have "Sacramento" in script across the front.
So, it's "Thanks for hosting us; we won't give you any recognition"? Sacramento should then say, sorry, the ballpark is no longer available for your use.
And yes, while not every team uses the host city in their name, a nice sign of appreciation for this limited-timed engagement would be to use the city name. It also helps with jersey sales, along with other apparel and souvenir sales.
Seems like the owners have no idea how marketing works.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 05, 2024, 10:07:59 AMQuote from: gonealookin on April 04, 2024, 10:39:24 PMQuote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
It should be
BAL
A'S
One of the things they said in the announcement is that they will simply be known as the "Athletics" or the "A's" with no city affiliation in the name. I imagine they might put some Sacramento patch on the uniforms but they won't have "Sacramento" in script across the front.
So, it's "Thanks for hosting us; we won't give you any recognition"? Sacramento should then say, sorry, the ballpark is no longer available for your use.
And yes, while not every team uses the host city in their name, a nice sign of appreciation for this limited-timed engagement would be to use the city name. It also helps with jersey sales, along with other apparel and souvenir sales.
Seems like the owners have no idea how marketing works.
I agree about the marketing, but I think Sacramento turning this deal down because they won't refer to themselves as the Sacramento As is a little short-sighted.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKVg3zfXoAABJ4o?format=jpg&name=medium)
In case the image doesn't display properly, here is a link to the source, and if THAT doesn't work, search Twitter for @ToddRadom.
https://twitter.com/ToddRadom/status/1775932164749644157
Too bad Fresno didn't put in a pitch to have the As here. Chukchansi Park is a similar size to Sutter Health Park. I'd probably go to an As game every week if they were here.
Quote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
Whereas if the Nats were to play there, it would just be good advice:
WSH
SAC
The Mariners, on the other hand....
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 05, 2024, 02:53:33 PMQuote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
Whereas if the Nats were to play there, it would just be good advice:
WSH
SAC
The Mariners, on the other hand....
When the White Sox come to town it becomes a dog toy. TB can also be an imaginative one as well.
Quote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
The TV score bugs show team logo/score/score/team logo, so every time the Phillies and Pirates play, we start with
P 0 0 P
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on April 05, 2024, 04:40:24 PMQuote from: Buck87 on April 04, 2024, 10:11:48 PMWhen the Orioles play there will the scoreboards and TV score bugs show:
BAL
SAC
The TV score bugs show team logo/score/score/team logo, so every time the Phillies and Pirates play, we start with
P 0 0 P
Best idea yet.
From Sportico (posted May 7th):
NO A'S IN ATTENDANCE: OAKLAND TRAILS A WHOPPING 553 U.S. TEAMSQuoteWhat do the Calgary Roughnecks of the National Lacrosse League and the Houston Roughnecks of the United Football League have in common besides the name?
They both outdraw the Oakland Athletics.
The A's are averaging 6,410 fans per game in what is expected to be their final season in Oakland. It would be the lowest home attendance figure for an MLB team in 45 years, and a total that would look more at home in leagues that you've likely never heard of.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.sportico.com/leagues/baseball/2024/oakland-athletics-attendance-mlb-sports-teams-1234777988/)
From KGO (posted May 9th):
Here's how empty the Coliseum is for A's last season in OaklandQuoteAttendance for Oakland A's games at the Coliseum are much lower so far compared to last season, according to MLB data.
The peak attendance for the first 21 games this season was Opening Day at around 13,500 fans. The lowest attendance was Monday, when it was less than 2,900. Last season, opening day had over 25,000 fans.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://abc7news.com/post/low-attendance-at-coliseum-for-as-last-season-in-oakland/14789670/)
Quote from: ZLoth on May 10, 2024, 05:51:43 PMFrom Sportico (posted May 7th):
NO A'S IN ATTENDANCE: OAKLAND TRAILS A WHOPPING 553 U.S. TEAMS
QuoteWhat do the Calgary Roughnecks of the National Lacrosse League and the Houston Roughnecks of the United Football League have in common besides the name?
They both outdraw the Oakland Athletics.
The A's are averaging 6,410 fans per game in what is expected to be their final season in Oakland. It would be the lowest home attendance figure for an MLB team in 45 years, and a total that would look more at home in leagues that you've likely never heard of.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.sportico.com/leagues/baseball/2024/oakland-athletics-attendance-mlb-sports-teams-1234777988/)
From KGO (posted May 9th):
Here's how empty the Coliseum is for A's last season in Oakland
QuoteAttendance for Oakland A's games at the Coliseum are much lower so far compared to last season, according to MLB data.
The peak attendance for the first 21 games this season was Opening Day at around 13,500 fans. The lowest attendance was Monday, when it was less than 2,900. Last season, opening day had over 25,000 fans.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://abc7news.com/post/low-attendance-at-coliseum-for-as-last-season-in-oakland/14789670/)
I feel like the city of Oakland had multiple chances to improve their stadium situation, and blew them all.
Quote from: epzik8 on May 11, 2024, 08:18:19 PMQuote from: ZLoth on May 10, 2024, 05:51:43 PMFrom Sportico (posted May 7th):
NO A'S IN ATTENDANCE: OAKLAND TRAILS A WHOPPING 553 U.S. TEAMS
QuoteWhat do the Calgary Roughnecks of the National Lacrosse League and the Houston Roughnecks of the United Football League have in common besides the name?
They both outdraw the Oakland Athletics.
The A's are averaging 6,410 fans per game in what is expected to be their final season in Oakland. It would be the lowest home attendance figure for an MLB team in 45 years, and a total that would look more at home in leagues that you've likely never heard of.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.sportico.com/leagues/baseball/2024/oakland-athletics-attendance-mlb-sports-teams-1234777988/)
From KGO (posted May 9th):
Here's how empty the Coliseum is for A's last season in Oakland
QuoteAttendance for Oakland A's games at the Coliseum are much lower so far compared to last season, according to MLB data.
The peak attendance for the first 21 games this season was Opening Day at around 13,500 fans. The lowest attendance was Monday, when it was less than 2,900. Last season, opening day had over 25,000 fans.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://abc7news.com/post/low-attendance-at-coliseum-for-as-last-season-in-oakland/14789670/)
I feel like the city of Oakland had multiple chances to improve their stadium situation, and blew them all.
Oakland had some missteps, absolutely, but this is squarely on John Fisher. It's obvious that staying in Oakland was never his goal - otherwise the Howard Terminal project would be a reality by now (it had something like 90% of the funding already in place). He saw the potential dollars in Vegas and never seriously considered anything after that.
In spite of the A's not using the city name, I hope Sacramento makes every effort to make the A's feel welcome. I think there's a non-zero chance the Vegas deal falls apart, and if San Jose or Oakland are no longer options, Sacramento is a solid landing spot.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on May 13, 2021, 04:54:07 PMQuote from: triplemultiplex on May 13, 2021, 04:14:09 PMI don't like professional sports in Las Vegas simply on principle. Remember how gambling was such a scourge that to associate your sports league with it was to indelibly stain the sport? The Black Sox; Pete Rose; all that shit?
Well never mind that, welcome to opening day of the Las Vegas Athletics brought to you by Draft Kings and the fucking Mirage!
Ha, ha! We're so desperate to increase viewership that we'll embrace degenerate gamblers now!
Professional athletes make so much now that there is little risk of Vegas players being on the take. Plus sports betting is now legal in many other states where there are teams.
And legal gambling is everywhere.
Quote from: ZLoth on May 10, 2024, 05:51:43 PMFrom Sportico (posted May 7th):
NO A'S IN ATTENDANCE: OAKLAND TRAILS A WHOPPING 553 U.S. TEAMS
QuoteWhat do the Calgary Roughnecks of the National Lacrosse League and the Houston Roughnecks of the United Football League have in common besides the name?
They both outdraw the Oakland Athletics.
Love the dearth of creativity in team names. "Is there oil nearby? Okay, we're the 'Roughnecks!' Yeah, that's good enough."
I'm sure the author went out of their way to pick two teams with the same name, but still.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 12, 2024, 07:58:14 PMQuote from: NWI_Irish96 on May 13, 2021, 04:54:07 PMQuote from: triplemultiplex on May 13, 2021, 04:14:09 PMI don't like professional sports in Las Vegas simply on principle. Remember how gambling was such a scourge that to associate your sports league with it was to indelibly stain the sport? The Black Sox; Pete Rose; all that shit?
Well never mind that, welcome to opening day of the Las Vegas Athletics brought to you by Draft Kings and the fucking Mirage!
Ha, ha! We're so desperate to increase viewership that we'll embrace degenerate gamblers now!
Professional athletes make so much now that there is little risk of Vegas players being on the take. Plus sports betting is now legal in many other states where there are teams.
And legal gambling is everywhere.
And also "the fucking Mirage" isn't sponsoring anything, as it's closing in June.
Besides, anyone playing for the Vegas team would become a local, one characteristic of which is a debilitating allergy to the Strip outside of work hours. (Seriously, I've been here for 4 months at this point, and stepped foot on the Strip all of once, and that was only because the Trop was closing and I wanted to see it off. Otherwise, the Strip is "that kind of annoyingly long light on Flamingo" to me.)
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 17, 2024, 10:48:13 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on May 12, 2024, 07:58:14 PMQuote from: NWI_Irish96 on May 13, 2021, 04:54:07 PMQuote from: triplemultiplex on May 13, 2021, 04:14:09 PMI don't like professional sports in Las Vegas simply on principle. Remember how gambling was such a scourge that to associate your sports league with it was to indelibly stain the sport? The Black Sox; Pete Rose; all that shit?
Well never mind that, welcome to opening day of the Las Vegas Athletics brought to you by Draft Kings and the fucking Mirage!
Ha, ha! We're so desperate to increase viewership that we'll embrace degenerate gamblers now!
Professional athletes make so much now that there is little risk of Vegas players being on the take. Plus sports betting is now legal in many other states where there are teams.
And legal gambling is everywhere.
And also "the fucking Mirage" isn't sponsoring anything, as it's closing in June.
Besides, anyone playing for the Vegas team would become a local, one characteristic of which is a debilitating allergy to the Strip outside of work hours. (Seriously, I've been here for 4 months at this point, and stepped foot on the Strip all of once, and that was only because the Trop was closing and I wanted to see it off. Otherwise, the Strip is "that kind of annoyingly long light on Flamingo" to me.)
Did you go walk around it? It felt like the backrooms to me it is so huge and it's empty. I paid extra for a strip view and they had this extremely annoying shit on the windows that made it hard to see out of which is my favorite part of staying on the strip.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on May 17, 2024, 11:18:39 PMDid you go walk around it? It felt like the backrooms to me it is so huge and it's empty. I paid extra for a strip view and they had this extremely annoying shit on the windows that made it hard to see out of which is my favorite part of staying on the strip.
Oh, good, so it wasn't just me that got the backrooms vibe from it. I wandered around a bunch of empty hallways trying to find the bathroom, and there was a guy in a bunny suit in there. I just ascribed that to Vegas being Vegas, until I realized like 20 minutes later it was Easter Sunday. Even though I'm used to being around out-of-service slot machines, having as much of the floor down as they did was kind of spooky. It was probably the most bizarre casino experience I've ever had, which is saying something since I worked at Newcastle for six years.
I had a similar room experience as you did when I stayed at the Excalibur across the street last year—paid extra for a Strip view and we got put on the floor that had the decorative crenellations on it, which totally blocked the view for my wife (I'm tall enough I could at least see
part of the Tropicana over the wall). If I were in the position of coming in from out of town again, I think my game plan might be to stay at one of the cheap off-Strip resorts like the Rio and then just Uber over to the Strip or Fremont.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 17, 2024, 10:48:13 PMBesides, anyone playing for the Vegas team would become a local, one characteristic of which is a debilitating allergy to the Strip outside of work hours. (Seriously, I've been here for 4 months at this point, and stepped foot on the Strip all of once, and that was only because the Trop was closing and I wanted to see it off. Otherwise, the Strip is "that kind of annoyingly long light on Flamingo" to me.)
In 2015, I attended the Toastmasters Conference which was held at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas (located at 3570 S Las Vegas Blvd, Paradise, NV 89109). I arrived before the convention and saw David Copperfield, Blue Man Group, and Cirque du Solei as part of longer vacation. During that time, I spoke with some of the LV Toastmasters, and they told me that, unless they have business on the strip/LV, they actively avoid the area because of the congestion.
If the Athletics want to start playing in 2027 in LV, they have to start construction by next spring. If the current reports are correct, they are nowhere near that point in construction plans or funding.
Anybody who is concerned about gambling and Las Vegas has not been paying attention for the last 10 years. Since the Supreme Court's ruling that every state is equal, and thus Congress could not prohibit gambling in other states, it has exploded. Not only can you gamble on your phone, there are casinos within walking distance, or at least a short drive, from more than 2/3rd of Big Four sports arenas.
Quote from: SP Cook on May 18, 2024, 02:20:12 PMAnybody who is concerned about gambling and Las Vegas has not been paying attention for the last 10 years. Since the Supreme Court's ruling that every state is equal, and thus Congress could not prohibit gambling in other states, it has exploded. Not only can you gamble on your phone, there are casinos within walking distance, or at least a short drive, from more than 2/3rd of Big Four sports arenas.
Yup. Even if you just stick to casino-style gaming, if you just want to gamble, chances are there's a place to do it within easy driving distance, no matter where in the US you are. If you're coming to Las Vegas in 2024, you're not coming just to gamble, you're coming for all of the other ridiculousness that we do best, like the shows, or the fancy hotel rooms, or the booze, or the clubs, or the people-watching, or whatever. Vegas figured out long ago that there's way more money to be made from all of that stuff than there was in just pure gambling. Sports are just the power brokers' latest fixation. Ten years from now we'll have something else we're chasing.
I think the last time I even gambled in Las Vegas was before 2010? Gambling has never been my bag and probably never been the reason I've visited Clark County.
The only gaming I do nowadays is the occasional drive up to the Oklahoma casinos with my mother. While I end up losing $100, it's not much for me since it's multiple months between casino visits. I still get that guilty feeling that the money can be used elsewhere. However, I have used the resort in the past for a quick getaway that isn't that expensive. Also, I don't drink.
Plus, the entertainment that they have at the two casinos aren't getting my interest. "Rocky and the Bullwinkles"? I believe Chocktaw in Durant, OK is the casino partner for the Texas Rangers while Winstar is the casino partner for the Dallas Cowboys,
Quote from: ZLoth on May 10, 2024, 05:51:43 PMFrom Sportico (posted May 7th):
NO A'S IN ATTENDANCE: OAKLAND TRAILS A WHOPPING 553 U.S. TEAMS
QuoteWhat do the Calgary Roughnecks of the National Lacrosse League and the Houston Roughnecks of the United Football League have in common besides the name?
They both outdraw the Oakland Athletics.
The A's are averaging 6,410 fans per game in what is expected to be their final season in Oakland. It would be the lowest home attendance figure for an MLB team in 45 years, and a total that would look more at home in leagues that you've likely never heard of.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.sportico.com/leagues/baseball/2024/oakland-athletics-attendance-mlb-sports-teams-1234777988/)
OK, but we're talking
average attendance. It looks like the Calgary Roughnecks played 9 home games in their just-completed season and the Houston Roughnecks are playing 5 home games in their current season. The A's play 81 home games. Even in their current derelict lame-duck state that their ownership has put them in, I'd argue that a lot of the Coliseum's seats would have butts in them if they were playing single-digit home games this season.
Quote from: DTComposer on May 11, 2024, 09:23:48 PMOakland had some missteps, absolutely, but this is squarely on John Fisher. It's obvious that staying in Oakland was never his goal - otherwise the Howard Terminal project would be a reality by now (it had something like 90% of the funding already in place). He saw the potential dollars in Vegas and never seriously considered anything after that.
It seemed like Fisher was making a sincere effort towards doing a big ballpark/housing/commercial development at Howard Terminal around 2017-2019. Then Covid hit in 2020 and that evidently changed the financial calculus as to that project. After that, you're right, Vegas was easier, cheaper and probably not nearly as risky financially so Oakland got the cold shoulder.
Quote from: ZLoth on May 18, 2024, 01:15:50 PMIf the Athletics want to start playing in 2027 in LV, they have to start construction by next spring. If the current reports are correct, they are nowhere near that point in construction plans or funding.
Initially the target date for opening the new ballpark at the Tropicana site was the start of the 2027 season, but it was almost immediately pushed back to the currently-stated start of the 2028 season. The agreement to use the River Cats' AAA park in West Sacramento is for 2025 through 2027, but there are provisions for extending it through the 2029 season in the event of delays in Las Vegas.
Here is the site of the future A's stadium.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 17, 2024, 10:48:13 PMSeriously, I've been here for 4 months at this point, and stepped foot on the Strip all of once, and that was only because the Trop was closing and I wanted to see it off. Otherwise, the Strip is "that kind of annoyingly long light on Flamingo" to me.
After I finished college, I got short-term apartment there on a lark for most of February 1997. At the time, they were really trying to push the "Boulder Strip". Is that still a thing?
Quote from: bing101 on June 30, 2024, 06:22:53 PMHere is the site of the future A's stadium.
The Tropicana, we'll miss that building...I saw a article published last Spring about it.
https://www.remindmagazine.com/article/12729/tropicana-resort-closing-las-vegas-baseball-stadium-as/
Parts of James Bond movie "Diamonds are Forever" was filmed at the Tropicana hotel.
https://jamesbondlocations.blogspot.com/2014/05/hotel-tropicana.html
Quote from: elsmere241 on August 15, 2024, 01:45:25 PMQuote from: Scott5114 on May 17, 2024, 10:48:13 PMSeriously, I've been here for 4 months at this point, and stepped foot on the Strip all of once, and that was only because the Trop was closing and I wanted to see it off. Otherwise, the Strip is "that kind of annoyingly long light on Flamingo" to me.
After I finished college, I got short-term apartment there on a lark for most of February 1997. At the time, they were really trying to push the "Boulder Strip". Is that still a thing?
I mean, Boulder Highway still has casinos on it, but it has a reputation as being a pretty sleazy part of town. Not unsafe if you're staying at the casino, but it's not advised to walk to the next one at night like you might do on Las Vegas Blvd.
The Giants will have to cross the Bay Bridge to get to Sacramento right?
Depends on the traffic. Sometimes it is faster to take the Golden Gate across to Marin County and jog back to Vallejo.
So today the A's will play their final game at the Oakland Coliseum.
I lived in the East Bay almost all of my life until 2009. When I was playing "Peanut League" ball I went to my first major league game at the Coliseum, in 1970. I got hooked pretty quickly, and one of the first things that happened was that the A's team that had Reggie Jackson, Catfish Hunter, Rollie Fingers, Sal Bando and all those guys won three straight World Series from 1972-1974. I've been an A's fan the whole time since.
I left Oakland in 2009 but still kept in touch with A's fan friends and with the team on a daily basis each season. Obviously they needed a new ballpark to replace that miserable relic from the 1960s, and there were a lot of failed attempts to get one (several of them never realistically attainable in the first place). I thought the ownership and one of the cities would eventually get a deal done to keep the A's in the Bay Area, but after Covid and then particularly starting in 2022 it seemed like ownership just abandoned that idea, feeling that greener grass was elsewhere, and Las Vegas eventually became the places where riches could be made.
So the last three seasons have been a steep decline, with the team owner ordering the team stripped of all major league talent so he didn't have to pay more than the bare minimum salary, while raising ticket prices and doing nothing to make the ballpark experience more enjoyable. Flipping the middle finger to all the people who supported the team for the previous 50 years at every turn. My interest plunged correspondingly.
The next three seasons they will spend a strange interlude in a minor league ballpark in West Sacramento, which is much closer to my current home than Oakland, but I just don't care any more. My sentiment this morning can be summed up in a couple words: Good Riddance. I'll watch the home finale today, but without any sadness, because this process has been so drawn out that I personally resolved my feelings a long time ago (though I know many of those A's fan friends I talk to will shed quite a few tears today). To John Fisher, the owner, Rob Manfred, who never cared about Oakland, and Major League Baseball in general, I say, F*** You, you're out of my life and you ain't ever being welcomed back.
I'm a little shocked by how low the seating capacity will be at the A's new stadium in Las Vegas: just 33,000 seats. That's fewer seats than any other MLB stadium. Most of those existing venues have over 40,000 seats. Dodger Stadium has a capacity of 56,000. Oakland Coliseum has the most with 56,782.
I think the lower seating capacity at the proposed Las Vegas ballpark is all about creating forced scarcity and thus higher ticket prices. The exterior of the stadium appears more than a little similar to the Sydney Opera House. Some have joked that it looks like an armadillo.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 26, 2024, 11:24:46 AMI'm a little shocked by how low the seating capacity will be at the A's new stadium in Las Vegas: just 33,000 seats. That's fewer seats than any other MLB stadium. Most of those existing venues have over 40,000 seats. Dodger Stadium has a capacity of 56,000. Oakland Coliseum has the most with 56,782.
I think the lower seating capacity at the proposed Las Vegas ballpark is all about creating forced scarcity and thus higher ticket prices. The exterior of the stadium more than a little similar to the Sydney Opera House. Some have joked that it looks like an armadillo.
There's also knowing the market. Teams don't like playing in ballparks that are only half-filled. It doesn't look good on TV. It doesn't look good sitting in the stands. 29 other teams may have bigger ballparks, but only 10 of the 30 teams have had average attendance figures about 33k this season.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 26, 2024, 11:30:38 AMQuote from: Bobby5280 on September 26, 2024, 11:24:46 AMI'm a little shocked by how low the seating capacity will be at the A's new stadium in Las Vegas: just 33,000 seats. That's fewer seats than any other MLB stadium. Most of those existing venues have over 40,000 seats. Dodger Stadium has a capacity of 56,000. Oakland Coliseum has the most with 56,782.
I think the lower seating capacity at the proposed Las Vegas ballpark is all about creating forced scarcity and thus higher ticket prices. The exterior of the stadium more than a little similar to the Sydney Opera House. Some have joked that it looks like an armadillo.
There's also knowing the market. Teams don't like playing in ballparks that are only half-filled. It doesn't look good on TV. It doesn't look good sitting in the stands. 29 other teams may have bigger ballparks, but only 10 of the 30 teams have had average attendance figures about 33k this season.
Other than Opening Day and visits by the Dodgers and Yankees, I don't see a 33k capacity having any scarcity that would drive up ticket prices.
It's small because it's a casino with a baseball field out back.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 26, 2024, 11:30:38 AMQuote from: Bobby5280 on September 26, 2024, 11:24:46 AMI'm a little shocked by how low the seating capacity will be at the A's new stadium in Las Vegas: just 33,000 seats. That's fewer seats than any other MLB stadium. Most of those existing venues have over 40,000 seats. Dodger Stadium has a capacity of 56,000. Oakland Coliseum has the most with 56,782.
I think the lower seating capacity at the proposed Las Vegas ballpark is all about creating forced scarcity and thus higher ticket prices. The exterior of the stadium more than a little similar to the Sydney Opera House. Some have joked that it looks like an armadillo.
There's also knowing the market. Teams don't like playing in ballparks that are only half-filled. It doesn't look good on TV. It doesn't look good sitting in the stands. 29 other teams may have bigger ballparks, but only 10 of the 30 teams have had average attendance figures about 33k this season.
Exactly. Baseball is a
relatively dying sport. Long gone are the days of the Rockies selling out Mile High for almost every game. A good sized baseball stadium should have 25-30k at most.
FWIW I always liked the Coliseum. It wasn't a looker but had great access to a BART station and tickets cost way less than attending a Giants game.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 26, 2024, 12:14:10 PMFWIW I always liked the Coliseum. It wasn't a looker but had great access to a BART station and tickets cost way less than attending a Giants game.
It's one of those awful round places with terrible sight lines, because it was built to house both baseball and football and didn't do a good job with either one. St. Louis, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Philly, Atlanta...these buildings were all the rage in the late 1960s. And, with good reason, they were all blown up and replaced long ago with better stadiums whose seats weren't a mile from the playing field.
However, for many years it was the better baseball park in the Bay Area, because the competition was the ghastly Candlestick Park, possibly the worst stadium ever built in the United States. The Coliseum was open above the outfield bleachers with a level of iceplant that bloomed in the spring and views of the Oakland Hills beyond. Then Oakland made a horrendous deal with Al Davis to bring the Raiders back from L.A. that resulted in the construction of that godawful monstrosity in the outfield (that was so tall the Raiders couldn't even sell the seats in the upper level, and tarped those over in their last ten years or so in Oakland), ruining the aesthetics of the place for baseball. And when the Giants, after their own new-stadium failures and threats to move out of the area (they had one foot in the place now called "Tropicana Field" in St. Petersburg at one point) got their basically-perfect new ballpark just south of the Bay Bridge, the Coliseum starting looking more pathetic than ever, and has since been allowed to deteriorate to its dismal state of recent years.
Quote from: gonealookin on September 26, 2024, 12:45:07 PMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on September 26, 2024, 12:14:10 PMFWIW I always liked the Coliseum. It wasn't a looker but had great access to a BART station and tickets cost way less than attending a Giants game.
It's one of those awful round places with terrible sight lines, because it was built to house both baseball and football and didn't do a good job with either one. St. Louis, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Philly, Atlanta...these buildings were all the rage in the late 1960s. And, with good reason, they were all blown up and replaced long ago with better stadiums whose seats weren't a mile from the playing field.
However, for many years it was the better baseball park in the Bay Area, because the competition was the ghastly Candlestick Park, possibly the worst stadium ever built in the United States. The Coliseum was open above the outfield bleachers with a level of iceplant that bloomed in the spring and views of the Oakland Hills beyond. Then Oakland made a horrendous deal with Al Davis to bring the Raiders back from L.A. that resulted in the construction of that godawful monstrosity in the outfield (that was so tall the Raiders couldn't even sell the seats in the upper level, and tarped those over in their last ten years or so in Oakland), ruining the aesthetics of the place for baseball. And when the Giants, after their own new-stadium failures and threats to move out of the area (they had one foot in the place now called "Tropicana Field" in St. Petersburg at one point) got their basically-perfect new ballpark just south of the Bay Bridge, the Coliseum starting looking more pathetic than ever, and has since been allowed to deteriorate to its dismal state of recent years.
There is nothing at the Coliseum that is going to out dystopian watching games Tiger's Stadium. No MLB park I've been to ever came close to matching the sight line obstructions, biker gang chaos and oddities like the ancient urine troths.
Watching a game in SF is hardly perfect. Getting to the place is a huge pain in the ass unless you are a local or are willing to stay overnight somewhere nearby. With the Coliseum I could at least jump on the BART back to Dublin and drive home in a reasonable amount of time. I'll take ease of access any day over the niceties of modern aesthetics.
Speaking of the Trop, that is another cheap MLB haunt that I frequent when I'm inclined to see a game while visiting family. Maybe I just don't mind ugly sports venues?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 26, 2024, 01:09:12 PMThere is nothing at the Coliseum that is going to out dystopian watching games Tiger's Stadium. No MLB park I've been to ever came close to matching the sight line obstructions, biker gang chaos and oddities like the ancient urine troths.
...
Speaking of the Trop, that is another cheap MLB haunt that I frequent when I'm inclined to see a game while visiting family. Maybe I just don't mind ugly sports venues?
I went to quite a few A's road games over the years. I visited old Tiger Stadium in its declining years. Sure it was worn out and obsolete, though not quite literally crumbling the way the old Comiskey Park on the south side of Chicago was when I saw games in that one a couple years before its demolition. One day we sat in the first few rows of the upper deck at Tiger Stadium, directly behind home plate and above the press box. Those were the greatest seats I've ever been in for a ballgame; it felt like we were looking right over the plate umpire's shoulder. The radio announcers always talked about how foul balls coming into the booth could be lethal, and with that proximity to home plate it was easy to see why.
Tropicana Field feels too claustrophobic with that low-hanging roof, and there's the ensuing stupidity of all the ground rules required for fly balls hitting off the support rings. It seems dark and gloomy. I've thought it wouldn't be all that bad if they would take a can opener and remove the roof, but being Florida the roof is kind of essential. The Rays have been trying to get out of that place for a long time and various plans were floated in both St. Pete and Tampa with the concurrent threats to move entirely, pretty much the same as the A's story, and just recently they have made the agreements with the City of St. Petersburg and Pinellas County for financing and construction of a new ballpark and related surrounding development. Re the above comments about the capacity of new baseball stadiums, the Rays' press release (https://www.mlb.com/rays/press-release/press-release-tampa-bay-rays-hines-celebrate-approval-of-new-ballpark-historic-gas-plant-district-development?t=rays-press-releases) states that "The neighborhood ballpark will have a capacity of 30,000 for baseball, with at least 25,000 fixed seats in a variety of options over three levels."
I'm trying to think back. Was Tiger's Stadium the only MLB ballpark where the upper deck clearly was the superior place to sit? I want to say that some of the older parks had a similar element, but it wasn't universal like Tiger's Stadium.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 26, 2024, 01:09:12 PMWatching a game in SF is hardly perfect. Getting to the place is a huge pain in the ass unless you are a local or are willing to stay overnight somewhere nearby. With the Coliseum I could at least jump on the BART back to Dublin and drive home in a reasonable amount of time. I'll take ease of access any day over the niceties of modern aesthetics.
We've been going to 3-4 Giants games and 1-2 A's games per year the last several years. For both ballparks we've both driven and taken the train (BART to Oakland, Caltrain to SF).
Driving is certainly easier for the Coliseum - once you're off of 880. That said, I know the area around Oracle well enough that parking has never been a huge hassle (never more than 3 blocks away, never in the ballpark parking lots, and only had to pay "full price" about half the time) - although the kid likes to get there early for batting practice, so parking's not as crowded.
I prefer Caltrain to BART, only because (partly because of the teams' fortunes) the atmosphere with the fans is more fun on the way up. Sometimes we take it all the way from Diridon, sometimes we drive up to Redwood City or San Mateo for a meal, then take the train from there.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 26, 2024, 03:34:30 PMI'm trying to think back. Was Tiger's Stadium the only MLB ballpark where the upper deck clearly was the superior place to sit? I want to say that some of the older parks had a similar element, but it wasn't universal like Tiger's Stadium.
Old photos make it look like certain ballparks like Ebbets Field in Brooklyn were built so that the front of the upper deck was very close to the foul lines, because it overhung most of the lower deck. Ebbets Field and a number of similar ballparks were demolished in the 1950s and 1960s so the fathers and grandfathers of posters on this forum would have to answer that.
Some of the newer ballparks have tried to emulate that effect to some degree, and while they are much better than the round multipurpose places in that regard, they also have to allocate premium space for hugely profitable luxury box seating, which relegates the riffraff like me to seats more distant from the field.
Quote from: gonealookin on September 26, 2024, 04:16:01 PMOld photos make it look like certain ballparks like Ebbets Field in Brooklyn were built so that the front of the upper deck was very close to the foul lines, because it overhung most of the lower deck. Ebbets Field and a number of similar ballparks were demolished in the 1950s and 1960s so the fathers and grandfathers of posters on this forum would have to answer that.
....
My father grew up about two miles from Ebbets Field and attended games there, but unfortunately I can no longer ask him what he remembers about the aspect you describe. In general, though, I've read that the "Jewel Box" era ballparks (including Ebbets Field) did indeed have the upper levels much closer to the field because they used pillars to support the stands, which in turn meant more obstructed seating in the lower level.
I'll take a nice, modern ballpark over Fenway or Wrigley any day. They're nice for nostalgia sake, but the overall experience is nowhere near as nice in my opinion.
I'm pleased that the late-game disruptions (running onto the field, throwing crap onto the field, etc.) were pretty minimal and that my fellow A's fans saw this to the end with class.
A's radio announcer (for the last 29 seasons) Ken Korach capped it off with "It is over, after 57 years of thrills, of heartbreak...but always a sense of community."
I'm happy to see that they ended their last-ever Oakland game with a win. After losing the Raiders and Warriors, the A's will be the hardest loss for the city to take since they had the longest continuous tenure of the three. So sorry that the Howard Terminal ballpark could not get built, since we saw it as the last great chance for them to stick around longer.
https://apnews.com/article/las-vegas-casinos-tropicana-mirage-artifacts-955677275c676a629bd303dc17c0e61f
Here's one as the Tropicana is being cleared out for the new A's stadium.
With the Raiders and A's now gone, is it safe to say the Coliseum is going to be demolished soon? Or will it spend an extended period unused, like RFK Stadium in DC?
Quote from: Henry on December 09, 2024, 03:13:36 PMWith the Raiders and A's now gone, is it safe to say the Coliseum is going to be demolished soon? Or will it spend an extended period unused, like RFK Stadium in DC?
A soon to be great place for monster truck rallies...
Quote from: Rothman on December 09, 2024, 06:37:26 PMQuote from: Henry on December 09, 2024, 03:13:36 PMWith the Raiders and A's now gone, is it safe to say the Coliseum is going to be demolished soon? Or will it spend an extended period unused, like RFK Stadium in DC?
A soon to be great place for monster truck rallies...
With fantastic BART access.
From Awful Announcing:
San Francisco Chronicle will refer to MLB team as 'Sacramento Athletics' despite guidelines
"The Chronicle's sports editor, Christina Kahrl, who grew up in the Sacramento area an A's fan, signed off on the decision..."QuoteRecent monikers such as the Washington Football Team and Utah Hockey Club have paved the way for the Athletics, the one-word name of the team formerly known as the Oakland Athletics.
While that Major League Baseball franchise plays in Sacramento and awaits the approval and completion of a stadium in Las Vegas, they have created "brand transition guidelines" that insist the team is to be referred to simply as the Athletics or A's, and that their approved initials are "ATH."
The San Francisco Chronicle has decided not to honor those guidelines.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://awfulannouncing.com/mlb/san-francisco-chronicle-sacramento-athletics.html)
Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but I think it's kind of funny how the A's are going to leave behind a stadium in Oakland that had the most seating capacity in Major League Baseball, 56782 fixed seats and up to 63000 with other configurations. Their new stadium in Las Vegas will have lowest seating capacity out of MLB team stadiums, only 33000 seats.
Since I've moved to California not a single A's game I've attended in Oakland had more than 15,000 people in the stands. I don't see 33,000 as being problematic for the A's or really any MLB team in the regular season.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on February 05, 2025, 11:40:36 PMApologies if this has already been mentioned, but I think it's kind of funny how the A's are going to leave behind a stadium in Oakland that had the most seating capacity in Major League Baseball, 56782 fixed seats and up to 63000 with other configurations. Their new stadium in Las Vegas will have lowest seating capacity out of MLB team stadiums, only 33000 seats.
Last year only four teams (Yankees, Phillies, Padres, Braves) had an average crowd that was 90%+ of their capacity. Smaller stadiums in the MLB make perfect sense with 81 home games.
I'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on February 06, 2025, 12:57:19 PMI'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
I don't think there was ever any intention of them being cheap. So far it seems like Las Vegas can support teams and get a draw from tourists visiting town.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 06, 2025, 01:08:37 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on February 06, 2025, 12:57:19 PMI'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
I don't think there was ever any intention of them being cheap. So far it seems like Las Vegas can support teams and get a draw from tourists visiting town.
Raiders tickets for games at Allegiant Stadium are among the most expensive in the NFL. I suspect a lot of them, especially the premium seats, are controlled by the casino resorts and other consolidators who include the game tickets as part of travel packages. Your best bet for lower priced seats would likely be the last couple days before a game, when the packages haven't sold out and the surplus is put on the secondary market.
Quote from: gonealookin on February 06, 2025, 01:29:57 PMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on February 06, 2025, 01:08:37 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on February 06, 2025, 12:57:19 PMI'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
I don't think there was ever any intention of them being cheap. So far it seems like Las Vegas can support teams and get a draw from tourists visiting town.
Raiders tickets for games at Allegiant Stadium are among the most expensive in the NFL. I suspect a lot of them, especially the premium seats, are controlled by the casino resorts and other consolidators who include the game tickets as part of travel packages. Your best bet for lower priced seats would likely be the last couple days before a game, when the packages haven't sold out and the surplus is put on the secondary market.
The casinos hotels are definitely involved with tickets. The last couple times I've stayed in Las Vegas during NFL season the hotels have pushed ticket promotions. One my friends in Fresno is a Raiders fan and recently took advantage of this.
From SF Gate:
The A's Sacramento attendance is visibly atrociousQuoteThe Athletics' first Sacramento games involved a "sellout" with nearly 10% of the tickets given away and two games not filling up the minor league park's seats.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.sfgate.com/athletics/article/as-sacramento-attendance-woes-opening-series-20255748.php)
Quote from: ZLoth on April 05, 2025, 08:57:56 AMFrom SF Gate:
The A's Sacramento attendance is visibly atrocious
QuoteThe Athletics' first Sacramento games involved a "sellout" with nearly 10% of the tickets given away and two games not filling up the minor league park's seats.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.sfgate.com/athletics/article/as-sacramento-attendance-woes-opening-series-20255748.php)
Those pix it looked like 2,000 fans at best.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 06, 2025, 01:08:37 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on February 06, 2025, 12:57:19 PMI'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
I don't think there was ever any intention of them being cheap. So far it seems like Las Vegas can support teams and get a draw from tourists visiting town.
Eventually a Las Vegas relocation/expansion team has to fail, right? The Knights have the advantage of being Vegas' first team, and the Raiders are in the NFL. Maybe the A's bomb in Vegas and warn the NBA to stay away.
Quote from: thspfc on April 05, 2025, 09:08:10 AMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on February 06, 2025, 01:08:37 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on February 06, 2025, 12:57:19 PMI'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
I don't think there was ever any intention of them being cheap. So far it seems like Las Vegas can support teams and get a draw from tourists visiting town.
Eventually a Las Vegas relocation/expansion team has to fail, right? The Knights have the advantage of being Vegas' first team, and the Raiders are in the NFL. Maybe the A's bomb in Vegas and warn the NBA to stay away.
How the NBA has stayed away this long is beyond me. Basketball seems like the perfect sport for the city. UNLV Men's Basketball used to have a huge following when they were good.
Quote from: ZLoth on April 05, 2025, 08:57:56 AMFrom SF Gate:
The A's Sacramento attendance is visibly atrociousQuoteThe Athletics' first Sacramento games involved a "sellout" with nearly 10% of the tickets given away and two games not filling up the minor league park's seats.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (https://www.sfgate.com/athletics/article/as-sacramento-attendance-woes-opening-series-20255748.php)
Baseball (and I think most pro-sport leagues) count the number of tickets sold and provided, not the number of people that attended. There's always going to be freebie tickets given away to nearly every game. And there's usually going to be no-shows. So a sell-out will often include empty seats.
I'm sure the SF Gate knows that too...although the current level of reporting probably doesn't know that, or intentionally excludes that fact.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 05, 2025, 09:50:41 AMQuote from: thspfc on April 05, 2025, 09:08:10 AMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on February 06, 2025, 01:08:37 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on February 06, 2025, 12:57:19 PMI'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
I don't think there was ever any intention of them being cheap. So far it seems like Las Vegas can support teams and get a draw from tourists visiting town.
Eventually a Las Vegas relocation/expansion team has to fail, right? The Knights have the advantage of being Vegas' first team, and the Raiders are in the NFL. Maybe the A's bomb in Vegas and warn the NBA to stay away.
How the NBA has stayed away this long is beyond me. Basketball seems like the perfect sport for the city. UNLV Men's Basketball used to have a huge following when they were good.
Because usually it's difficult for an NBA and NHL team to both do well in a metro the size of Vegas. Prior to the Coyotes moving to Salt Lake this year, the smallest metro with both was Denver.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 05, 2025, 12:53:48 PMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on April 05, 2025, 09:50:41 AMQuote from: thspfc on April 05, 2025, 09:08:10 AMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on February 06, 2025, 01:08:37 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on February 06, 2025, 12:57:19 PMI'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
I don't think there was ever any intention of them being cheap. So far it seems like Las Vegas can support teams and get a draw from tourists visiting town.
Eventually a Las Vegas relocation/expansion team has to fail, right? The Knights have the advantage of being Vegas' first team, and the Raiders are in the NFL. Maybe the A's bomb in Vegas and warn the NBA to stay away.
How the NBA has stayed away this long is beyond me. Basketball seems like the perfect sport for the city. UNLV Men's Basketball used to have a huge following when they were good.
Because usually it's difficult for an NBA and NHL team to both do well in a metro the size of Vegas. Prior to the Coyotes moving to Salt Lake this year, the smallest metro with both was Denver.
I attribute that more to the Coyotes doing everything to fuck up being in Phoenix. The relocation out of downtown was incredibly stupid. Games at America West Arena had a party atmosphere and didn't require an absolute slog to the West Valley. The area in downtown Phoenix has a lot of bars, restaurants, decent parking and freeway access. The Coyotes had a pretty decent turnout before they decided to relocate out to Glendale, even if visiting team fans were much of the draw. Following the move all the Coyotes franchise did was crank out bad teams and consistently cry poor or threaten to move.
That aside, the Suns were always the king of the pro sports franchises in Phoenix. They have almost always been a competitive franchise, and it probably doesn't hurt they were the first pro team in the city.
Well, some of us will be there next Friday to boost the numbers a tad.
Perhaps their prices were indeed out of whack with actual demand...
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 05, 2025, 01:06:55 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on April 05, 2025, 12:53:48 PMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on April 05, 2025, 09:50:41 AMQuote from: thspfc on April 05, 2025, 09:08:10 AMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on February 06, 2025, 01:08:37 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on February 06, 2025, 12:57:19 PMI'll bet the tickets for baseball games in that venue won't be cheap. The stadium's estimated construction cost is $1.75 billion. That's a pretty big price tag to spread across 33,000 seats.
I don't think there was ever any intention of them being cheap. So far it seems like Las Vegas can support teams and get a draw from tourists visiting town.
Eventually a Las Vegas relocation/expansion team has to fail, right? The Knights have the advantage of being Vegas' first team, and the Raiders are in the NFL. Maybe the A's bomb in Vegas and warn the NBA to stay away.
How the NBA has stayed away this long is beyond me. Basketball seems like the perfect sport for the city. UNLV Men's Basketball used to have a huge following when they were good.
Because usually it's difficult for an NBA and NHL team to both do well in a metro the size of Vegas. Prior to the Coyotes moving to Salt Lake this year, the smallest metro with both was Denver.
I attribute that more to the Coyotes doing everything to fuck up being in Phoenix. The relocation out of downtown was incredibly stupid. Games at America West Arena had a party atmosphere and didn't require an absolute slog to the West Valley. The area in downtown Phoenix has a lot of bars, restaurants, decent parking and freeway access. The Coyotes had a pretty decent turnout before they decided to relocate out to Glendale, even if visiting team fans were much of the draw. Following the move all the Coyotes franchise did was crank out bad teams and consistently cry poor or threaten to move.
That aside, the Suns were always the king of the pro sports franchises in Phoenix. They have almost always been a competitive franchise, and it probably doesn't hurt they were the first pro team in the city.
Right. But I'm talking about two franchises competing for ticket sales, sponsorships, etc. in metropolitan areas where there just aren't enough resources.
NHL is in Raleigh, Tampa, Nashville and Columbus.
NBA is in Charlotte, Orlando, Memphis and Cleveland.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 05, 2025, 09:50:41 AMHow the NBA has stayed away this long is beyond me. Basketball seems like the perfect sport for the city.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/basketball/nba-in-vegas-2007-all-star-game-a-disastrous-weekend-2021799/
Las Vegas is about acts that get people into town to spend money. Some things work, some do not. The NBA all-star fiasco caused far more problems than it brought people into gamble. It also failed 20 years before than when Utah played a third of its schedule there for a couple of years. It just doesn't work. Not everything does. It seems F1 is failing there, but to be fair, it has failed in every part of the USA for 70 years. NASCAR ekes by, mostly because the track is out in the desert and a sunk cost and no one is going to tear it down to put up something else. Indy didn't work. The NFL works because it has virtually 100% revenue sharing, it could have a team in any place and it would make money, and because it markets itself to the visiting team. NHL works because of the same marketing to the visitors strategy. A weekend in southern Nevada looks good viewed through the lens of most places where hockey is played and followed in winter. The rodeo worked for a long time, because the people that follow rodeo are really cowboys and that was their one and only vacation for the year. The bowl game didn't work for a long time, because they got BYU a lot, but it does OK now.
MLB seems to be moving to Las Vegas mostly because the A's have no other place to go. It will, likewise, follow the market to the visitors idea, which will work for teams like the Dodgers, Cubs, Yankees and Red Sox, but not so much for most of the league.
The NFL also works in Vegas because of its proximity to LA where the Raiders still have a sizable fanbase.
I don't think it would have worked as well had a team like the Jags moved there.
I agree with you about the As. I think there are just two or three more teams than viable metro areas that will support them.
Quote from: SP Cook on April 06, 2025, 11:54:37 AMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on April 05, 2025, 09:50:41 AMHow the NBA has stayed away this long is beyond me. Basketball seems like the perfect sport for the city.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/basketball/nba-in-vegas-2007-all-star-game-a-disastrous-weekend-2021799/
Las Vegas is about acts that get people into town to spend money. Some things work, some do not. The NBA all-star fiasco caused far more problems than it brought people into gamble. It also failed 20 years before than when Utah played a third of its schedule there for a couple of years. It just doesn't work. Not everything does. It seems F1 is failing there, but to be fair, it has failed in every part of the USA for 70 years. NASCAR ekes by, mostly because the track is out in the desert and a sunk cost and no one is going to tear it down to put up something else. Indy didn't work. The NFL works because it has virtually 100% revenue sharing, it could have a team in any place and it would make money, and because it markets itself to the visiting team. NHL works because of the same marketing to the visitors strategy. A weekend in southern Nevada looks good viewed through the lens of most places where hockey is played and followed in winter. The rodeo worked for a long time, because the people that follow rodeo are really cowboys and that was their one and only vacation for the year. The bowl game didn't work for a long time, because they got BYU a lot, but it does OK now.
MLB seems to be moving to Las Vegas mostly because the A's have no other place to go. It will, likewise, follow the market to the visitors idea, which will work for teams like the Dodgers, Cubs, Yankees and Red Sox, but not so much for most of the league.
I was at that All-Star game weekend in 2007. The Millennium New Years Eve celebration on Las Vegas Boulevard had way more debauchery and chaos.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 06, 2025, 12:07:45 PMI think there are just two or three more teams than viable metro areas that will support them.
I think that is the point. As stated, the NFL can work anywhere due to the revenue sharing. And it is only 8 or 9 games/year, mostly on Sunday. The NHL and NBA are much smaller scales, half the seats and half the games of MLB, and the local TV money is not all that important. MLB has 81 games to sell 35-50K seats to, and local TV is (or was before the recent RSN collapse) ONE-THIRD of team revenue. (To this point, outside Clark County its just desert for hundreds of miles and by the time you get back to a livable place, you are in some other team's local territory.)
But where else are the going to go? The usual suspects (Portland, somewhere in North Carolina, Salt Lake City, Montreal, Nashville, some foreign county, etc.) all get thrown out, but all have fatal flaws. We may just have 2 to 4 more baseball teams than we have places to put them.
The idea that F1 is failing in Austin or Florida doesn't ring true to me. The Drive to Survive influence has had a significant influence on American spectation of the sport. Las Vegas certainly has had issues with the street format, though.
Probably doesn't hurt that the constructor's champion team at McLaren has been headed up by an American, though.
F1 has come and gone in every part of the USA since WWII. It lost about a third of its viewers in Las Vegas in just one year.
F1 economics are dictated by where it is popular, which is to say Arabia, Europe and east Asia. In the USA, eventually, our economy gets out of sync with those and the F1 event dies out, and a new one comes back when they sync up again. Which is why F1 has had over a dozen tracks, all now abandoned by F1, over the years in the USA.
As to "Drive to Survive", Netflix is notorious about not telling ratings, but if you look at what little info it gives away, which is the most watched shows and how few people watched these, and realize DTS isn't listed, you figure out how few are watching. We do know the TV ratings for the races, and they average a little over 1M last year. Which is really low.
Quote from: Henry on December 09, 2024, 03:13:36 PMWith the Raiders and A's now gone, is it safe to say the Coliseum is going to be demolished soon? Or will it spend an extended period unused, like RFK Stadium in DC?
The Oakland Roots and Oakland Soul will both be using the Coliseum for the 2025 USLC/Super League seasons. They were looking at building their own stadium in the nearby Malibu Lot, but seem to have dropped the proposal for now.
First game for the Roots at the Coliseum drew 26,575 fans:
Quote from: SP Cook on April 06, 2025, 01:39:10 PMF1 has come and gone in every part of the USA since WWII. It lost about a third of its viewers in Las Vegas in just one year.
F1 economics are dictated by where it is popular, which is to say Arabia, Europe and east Asia. In the USA, eventually, our economy gets out of sync with those and the F1 event dies out, and a new one comes back when they sync up again. Which is why F1 has had over a dozen tracks, all now abandoned by F1, over the years in the USA.
As to "Drive to Survive", Netflix is notorious about not telling ratings, but if you look at what little info it gives away, which is the most watched shows and how few people watched these, and realize DTS isn't listed, you figure out how few are watching. We do know the TV ratings for the races, and they average a little over 1M last year. Which is really low.
Well, I suppose with how the economy is tanking we'll see what happens. I don't think past trends are totally indicative of future performance with this one, although Las Vegas seems the most vulnerable race right now.
Quote from: SP Cook on April 06, 2025, 11:54:37 AMIt seems F1 is failing there, but to be fair, it has failed in every part of the USA for 70 years.
F1 is failing in Las Vegas because it creates a horrible amount of disruption setting up the track on city streets. Meanwhile, it caters to only the richest of the rich when it comes to patrons. It simply can't bring in enough big-money guests to offset the small-money guests who skip out because there's nothing here for them that week but disruption.
Las Vegas tolerated F1 the first year because it brought in a decent chunk of money. Even then there were winners and losers because only certain properties benefited from it (F1 is great if you're Bellagio or Caesars, but the low-budget Ellis Island more or less gets shut down for a month because it's right on the track but is too low-rent for the F1 crowd). Now that the money it brings in seems to be on the wane, and the have-not properties are starting to revolt, the city's patience with F1 is quickly running out.
And that's before you get to the fact that international visitation has cratered because foreign tourists are afraid of ICE...
Quote from: SP Cook on April 06, 2025, 11:54:37 AMNHL works because of the same marketing to the visitors strategy.
NHL works because the Golden Knights were setting up the year that the 10/1 massacre happened. The team did a lot to assist in the aftermath, so the local populace holds them in high regard for that. Then they were really good in their first season, and they've had a durable fanbase ever since. (You see way more people in the locals parts of town wearing Golden Knights stuff than you do Raiders stuff...and I haven't see anyone wearing A's stuff yet.)
The Golden Knights basically caught lightning in a bottle, so I wouldn't try to compare any other team in any city in any league to them.
I was surprised by how lively Sutter Health Park was during the A's/Mets game on Friday night. I never saw a crowd that engaged in Oakland or at least the size of the Coliseum hid it. There was a particular group of A's fans in my section that were pretty enthusiastic and entertaining to listen to. The Mets had a pretty decent visitor draw.
The parking, ingress and egress at the park were super easy. I guess that I shouldn't be surprised given how much parking is in West Sacramento and Old Sacramento. The one thing I didn't care for much was higher ticket price compared to Oakland, but it wasn't stratospheric either. I'll definitely be going back once the Tigers are in Sacramento.