Hold on to your hats! Major League Baseball has actually taken an active position in the Oakland A’s stadium situation!
With the A’s lease-extension negotiations bogging down in Oakland, officials from Major League Baseball have introduced the idea of having the Giants share AT&T Park with the Athletics in 2014, [the San Jose Mercury News] has confirmed.
Okay, so this doesn’t actually have anything to do with the battle over San Jose, where Bud Selig and Co. are maintaining their radio silence. And the idea of forcing the San Francisco Giants to accept the A’s as a tenant — for how long? how much would they pay in rent? would they get a share of revenues? what happens on dates when both teams are scheduled to be at home? — is almost certainly meant as a stick with which to threaten Oakland into backing down in stalled lease talks, not a serious consideration just yet, anyway.
Still, it’s a sign that Selig is perfectly willing to get involved in the A’s situation, so long as it’s laying down the hammer on city officials, not on another member of the MLB fraternity. And the San Francisco Chronicle’s Matier and Ross report that there’s another hammer on the horizon:
With MLB standing in the way of an A’s move to San Jose, which the Giants claim as their market, team owners John Fisher and Lew Wolff would be expected to look elsewhere if they leave the Coliseum for temporary digs – or perhaps sell the team to out-of-towners.
Absolutely no sourcing on this, so it’s entirely possible it’s just Matier and Ross speculating, or some MLB official trying to start a rumor so that Oakland officials are all “Eeeagh! Boise!” Either way, though, it sounds like Oakland will back down — Matier and Ross cite “one Coliseum official” as saying, “We don’t have any choice. Major League Baseball is driving it” — so don’t expect the A’s to be anywhere other than the Coliseum next year, counting all the rent money that the Budfather’s hardball tactics have saved them.
Neil, I don’t appreciate you ripping on my home town, no matter how ridiculous the argument. Boise hasn’t done anything this stupid yet, so leave them out of it!
Sorry, they’re a meme now. (Click the link.)
How are they going to get this “plan” through the San Francisco land use review and impact report requirements by April 2014? I don’t think Mayor Lee will be approving any waivers while he’s already under the microscope for his Warriors Arena plan. But I guess that’s the fun of Field of Schemes, the threat doesn’t even have to be viable; it just has to be published.
Actually I think it’s a neat idea to share the stadium. Do the A’s really need their own stadium? As for the 10 schedule conflicts, day/night doubleheaders used to be common in MLB, and the A’s could have day games starting at 11am/11:30am. Wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.
After reading the section on the Matier and Ross article about what the Giants would get out of it, it makes a lot of sense to me.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/MLB-may-help-A-s-play-in-S-F-if-no-deal-sources-4952005.php
I think the scheduling conflicts would be pretty easy to resolve. Probably the biggest challenge would be wear and tear on the field. But the part the Giants have to like best is that this is the first step out of the door for the A’s. If this was “permanent” (something like a 10 year lease), there’s no way the Giants would do it. But for 2 years, if it means they’re eventually gone? This is the equivalent of buying a plane ticket for a neighbor you don’t like, if it means that neighbor is gone forever. I’m sure the Giants would make a nice profit from a 2 year lease; they can put up with a little additional wear on the stadium.
And, forget Boise as your meme; I think this would put Sacramento in play. Forget Raley field for that; it cannot be expanded. They’ve already explained that; the land is just too small. But the railyards, with KJ as mayor? I can see it.
BOHICA has never been more appropriate.
Well, if Boise is getting in on having a MLB stadium, we in WA can’t let our economic powerhouse of Spokane fall behind that neighbor to the right. The Spokane Public Facilities District must expand beyond the Spokane Arena in anticipation of an MLB franchise relocation. Oh look, the Mariners’ lease is up in a few years.
I suspect this is exactly what Neil suggests it is (they can’t muster a real threat, so they’ll use the closest thing they have… and try not to think about what they’ll do if Oakland says “fine, no more negotiations. We will not offer you a lease at the coliseum again, period. F*** off”)
But that said, MLB’s present warning shot is not the worst thing in the world… and it seems to me it’s not only a warning shot at Oakland, but at Wolff/Fisher too.
If Lew Wolff won’t pay to get to San Jose and won’t play in the stadium in Oakland and won’t enter into any meaningful negotiations on a new stadium in Oakland (which, like it or not, is the only place the Oakland franchise can presently play), the only reasonable option is for MLB to pressure them to sell or consider relocation to another (non-partner controlled) location.
Lew Wolff has backed himself into a corner and has exactly zero options apart from “hope MLB will give me SJ for free” or “continue playing in the coliseum”.
He may have thought he could bully his way into a free location upgrade, but it seems he can’t (and kudos to MLB for sticking to their guns on that one). So his options are now pretty limited, assuming Bud won’t prevail on the Giants to let him have San Jose for free.
You know what they say, a genius is someone who shoots at something no-one else can see and hits it.
On the other hand, someone who fires indiscriminately at something no-one can see and doesn’t hit it generally gets arrested and thrown in jail. Just sayin’
Not so fast, Chefjoe…. the good taxpaying public of Minot have yet to weigh in…
Or maybe Glendale could double/triple down on the ‘investment’ they have and become home to a third major sports facility that loses money every year (*even when one of them has hosted a superbowl…)
“…and try not to think about what they’ll do if Oakland says ‘fine, no more negotiations. We will not offer you a lease at the coliseum again, period. F*** off\'”
It would be fun to hear them announce: “We’re going to spend January through August making upgrades for the Raiders. Sorry, no room for baseball in 2014. Have a nice day.”
A’s appear about ready to sign a lease extension in Oakland:
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/04/5880030/lew-wolff-athletics-staying-put.html
The quote ” As Long as possible” is exactly what I want to hear.., if I am Giants ownership. The A’s can stay at the Coliseum Site forever as far as we are concerned. If I am the Raiders or an A’s Player? Maybe not so much.
John Bladen, circa 1960:
“You should have known when you moved to South Carolina that you wouldn’t be allowed to vote, Mr. Johnson. It doesn’t matter if injustice exists. You know the rules when you moved here.”
Equating the games played by billionaires with the civil rights movement?
No, nothing insulting about that at all.
I stand by my prediction: In the year twenty-twenty, the A’s, Raiders and warriors will still be calling the Coliseum their home. What odds do you give me?
All three? Maybe 2:1 against, if only because one of them is likely to get lucky. I might give you even odds that at least two of the three will stay put through 2020, though.
EG: Your misguided analogy is both appalling and disgraceful.
Lew Wolff as disenfranchised (presumably African-American) citizen? How so?
He owns what he owns: an MLB team stationed in Oakland. He has no more right to own a San Jose franchise than he does one in New York.
Or is it your position that the ‘rest of the world’ owes it to him to make his business more profitable than it was when he bought it (for the market price of Oakland, I might add, and no other location)?
If Wolff was willing to pay for the market upgrade he wants, he could have been playing games in a new stadium in SJ for at least two years now. He isn’t, thus he hasn’t.
Don’t waste your pity and sympathy on billionaires who want something for nothing. There are legitimate sufferers of disadvantage who deserve it much, much more.
“…. Sorry, no room for baseball in 2014. Have a nice day.”
It would be fantastic, Keith. But I don’t really expect it to happen. MLB’s weak sabre rattle is nothing more than a reaction to Oakland’s (surprisingly stern) negotiating position (5-8 year extension).
I think we talked about them doing something like that (no short term renewal) a few weeks ago… glad to see they seem to have done it.
I suspect it won’t work and they’ll horse trade a shorter term for something they want (whatever that might be… mandatory moustaches on players again?).
Whatever Oakland’s shortcomings, its just nice to see a city that understands that it isn’t utterly without leverage (heck, they even hired a lawyer to do the negotiating… something I don’t believe Glendale ever bothered with…) when dealing with a sports league.
No doubt it’s enough to make a former used car dealer weep…
Boise? Might as well threaten to move them to Botswana then. It’s just as ridiculous.
Mr. Wolff stated yesterday that this was a non-story. He has every intention of signing the lease once it is finalized. So, he thinks the A’s will be in Oakland next year.
Either MLB or a reporter or both were just getting “antsy”.
However, *if* this was a real story, it would get much more entertaining if everyone could wait until after the football season was over so both the Raiders and A’s leases were up at the same time. Then, just to throw in a curve, start a rumor that one of the two teams (or both) were moving to a very slightly-upgraded Candlestick Park (a place with a videoboard actually smaller than the Coliseum’s).
BTW, any mention of moving the A’s outside of Oakland should include them finally moving to Peculiar, Missouri and fulfilling Charlie O’s threat (or at least move them to Louisville).
John,
Think part of that is specific to baseball – the dense scheduling, relatively short off-season, and need for a pretty special facility with decent capacity means it’s hard to fly the coop quickly.
If I owned an NFL team and wanted to move to Toronto,LA, or Birmingham I could survive in Rogers Centre, the Coliseum, or Legion Field for a year or two. Same with an NHL/NBA team, there’s plenty of rinks that can take a tenant.
With baseball, not counting teams already placed, you’d basically be down to Omaha, Montreal, or Buffalo.
@John Bladen- You cannot argue value of the franchise and buying market share when TV is shared across the board along with marketing rights. This plus franchise values have skyrocketed across the league therefore your argument holds no weight along those lines.
Wolff’s team has gone up to 590M in value from 180M according to Bloomberg despite having the lowest revenue levels in the league, the Giants are worth 1.2B now and lets face it….That includes the East Bay where they have Giants stores and massive marketing efforts. Ever visit the Giants store in Walnut Creek?
Here is the issue Selig has, the A’s want to privately finance their ballpark in San Jose. That eats at Selig’s sole and he punished the Giants for 7 years from getting the All-Star game when they built privately.
Since TV and marketing are shared Selig cannot ask the A’s to “buy” San Jose from the Giants and expect them to build privately as well. Hence Selig has nothing to barter with between the teams.
If San Jose was giving the A’s a “free ballpark” then the A’s would would be well on their way to San Jose, not happening in California.
This and the fact San Jose was given for free to the Giants years ago makes it even worse. Had the Giants “paid” for those rights then your argument holds “some” weight.
Another issue is there is nothing feasible in the East Bay, anyone who thinks so is dreaming and that was why Selig appointed the BRC almost 5 years ago.
Selig even “threatening” to move the A’s into ATT Park puts major pressure on the Giants to make a deal fast. The lawsuit San Jose filed is proceeding and the claims that were thrown out may be appealed as well. That is not dead by a long shot and he knows it full well.
Imagine the Giants sharing ATT Park with the “SF Athletics”?? Especially for an indefinite period of time…..Straight kick to the nuts for the Giants. Especially if the A’s are a winning team.
The A’s TV deal is pretty large and there is no point to leave the market for that alone, even if it means sharing with the Giants, in which case they can add 30M in payroll without having to make a capital investment in a ballpark.
Their concessions, sponsorships, gate revenue would go up big time and they would have access to massive premium seating they lack now….Wolff and Fisher could sit on the Giants heads slowly torturing them forever.
The A’s have no where to go but San Jose, MLB knows it full well but Selig is too much of a coward. In the end I believe San Jose’s lawsuit will pave the way with a settlement.
Selig knows the A’s cannot stay in Oakland at the Coliseum for 5 years, he needs to get them out and him even suggesting ATT Park tells you the A’s will be in San Jose.
John:
What’s appalling and disgraceful is your “them’s the rules” attitude. Try not to get offended over an analogy.
Sheesh.
Offense aside, it’s not the best analogy. Say you want about the desirability of being able to move your business franchise wherever you want, it isn’t exactly a constitutional right.
Voting isn’t actually a constitutional right, FYI.
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2013/may/30/mark-pocan/us-constitution-not-explicit-right-vote-wisconsin-/