All-Purpose MLB Thread!

#91
Sorry, losing a major distribution channel in your own market is NEVER a good thing.

It’s not like they’re saving millions by not having a bay area radio carrier. They’re losing millions. This is pure A’s PR spin.

Congrats to them on being a first mover in pods and online streaming, but it’ll only be a matter of time before the other teams do the same (those with tv, radio, n online/pods).

On another note: Manfred is done as commissioner. The Kings FO looks like geniuses compared to the way the Astros n Manfred have handled this cheating fiasco.
There's no PR spin, that's just my opinion as a fan. I don't work for the team. If you measure fan support by Facebook likes, the A's rank 25th in MLB right now. Last year Seatgeek made a map of where fans are located based on ticket purchases and Northern California looked like this:
Untitled-2.jpg
So if the Oakland A's actually rank first in fan support in any medium it's noteworthy. Obviously they're going to make note of that on their own website. There's no way they're losing millions by dropping last year's AM talk radio affiliate. If no major FM station in the Bay Area wants to step up and partner with a 97 win team, what do you expect the A's to do here? They can't compete the same way other MLB teams do because their local market share is microscopic. They've chosen to invest in a format they can control instead.

At best radio is only reaching a limited geographical region anyway. If you're reading and posting on this website you have access to an internet connection which means you can still listen to A's games if you want to. If you're in the Bay Area you can listen for free using the Tune In app and if you're out of market like I am (and wouldn't be able to listen to the radio station without an internet connection anyway) then you can purchase an entire season's worth of MLB audio for $20 and listen to every team's audio broadcast whenever you want. Or even better, if you use T-Mobile, they give free MLB.TV subscriptions to their customers every year which means you can still listen to the radio broadcast for free and also watch any game's TV broadcast for free (unless you're in the local blackout region -- the last annoying grasp of greedy cable companies).

So who is losing out here? Only Bay Area based fans with no access to an internet connection. Google and Facebook have blanketed the Bay Area in wi-fi so that's an ever dwindling number. And based on available data it seems like most Bay Area residents and almost all of Northern California are Giants fans anyway. So my question to you is, well, I have two questions for you... (1) Are you actually "sorry" you had to correct me about how lucrative radio contracts are for teams with effectively no market share and (2) Are you even an A's fan? Cause if you're not I don't see why you would care what they do with their resources. We are small in number but those of us who are left embrace the unconventional approach the team takes to everything. It's why a team with almost no local fan base continues to compete in an echelon otherwise reserved only for the big-market elite. *

Like it or not, the future of media is quickly moving away from 20th century technology. As a Los Angeles based A's fan, my access to A's game broadcasts is not changing at all because of this. If I lived in Oakland and had no smart phone or TV and couldn't find a single bar to watch the game in I suppose I would be out of luck but how many fans actually fit in that narrow range? Not enough for the team to bend over backward to submit themselves to the whims of local broadcasters still clinging to a dying format. Sure it looks bad from a PR perspective but only if you're old enough to have ever consumed live baseball games primarily over radio (I'm 37 and I'm still too young for that to apply to me). And I don't know that anything the A's do PR-wise is going to make their fanbase any smaller than it already is. A new stadium and a winning team are their only hope of reversing the trend and clawing their way back into the local market in any significant way.

*Of course, why a team in the Bay Area has one of the smallest market shares in MLB is a whole other topic for a different day.
 
#93
"So my question to you is, well, I have two questions for you... (1) Are you actually "sorry" you had to correct me about how lucrative radio contracts are for teams with effectively no market share and (2) Are you even an A's fan? Cause if you're not I don't see why you would care what they do with their resources. We are small in number but those of us who are left embrace the unconventional approach the team takes to everything. It's why a team with almost no local fan base continues to compete in an echelon otherwise reserved only for the big-market elite. *"

1. No, I'm not an A's fan. I'm a Giants fan, but I live in the Bay Area and have a bunch of friends who are A's fans (a few die hards; season ticket holders), who would listen to radio broadcasts while driving.

2. I live on the Peninsula and used to do a daily commute up and down 280 to Santa Clara in my since garaged 2002 Acura RSX (love that car; never selling it) with its dated radio. Listeniing to KHTK (for Kings games; Kings talk) was near impossible. Once I upgraded to a new car with Sirius, the connection was better, but still a bit spotty at times. Translation: they're going to have a hard time listening to KHTK. Not impossible, but much harder.

3. But the main reason for my reply is SCALE. The A's do not need to invest more capital to do radio. The content that they're spending on pods/online/tv, they could send that out on radio as well. That's what I meant--the radio money would be marginal (last dollar revenue since the cost is being absorbed much earlier from the TV/Online/Pod production). Long story short, losing a major distribution channel is NEVER good. They're spinning it.

4. And my perspective isn't that of a Giant's fan trying to beat down a regional rival. It's purely economic, as stated above in #3.
 
Last edited:
#94
Am I jerk because I don’t care at all and also just find it hilarious that it cost the Dodgers a World Series?

Naaaaaa, #BeatLA forever. Any means necessary. I hope they beat them again.
Yeah, you are a jerk ;) Because you know you'd have a different opinion if it involved your team rather than NY or LA. Truth.
 
#95
On another note: Manfred is done as commissioner. The Kings FO looks like geniuses compared to the way the Astros n Manfred have handled this cheating fiasco.
Word.

Honestly, I posted on twitter recently that IMO Manfred is the worst commissioner in all pro sports. Goodell of the NFL is awful, and Selig before Manfred wasn't good -- but they've both been better than Manfred.

MLB has typically had lower tier commissioners compared to the NFL, NBA and NHL.
 
#96
There's no PR spin, that's just my opinion as a fan. I don't work for the team. If you measure fan support by Facebook likes, the A's rank 25th in MLB right now. Last year Seatgeek made a map of where fans are located based on ticket purchases and Northern California looked like this:
View attachment 9593
WOW. That map is fairly telling.

Honestly, I've always felt the A's would be worlds better off moving to SAC.

Yes, they'd still be 2nd fiddle to the Giants initially and for the foreseeable future. But over time the A's would build up an actual fan base in a top 20 media market. They'd take a huge chunk out of that orange in NorCal. Just like the KINGS did when they moved to SAC and turned what was primarily Lakers and Warriors territory into their own kingdom.

I know the vast majority of Giants fans here in the valley wouldn't switch allegiances, but they'd have all the current A's fans in SAC and those from the Easy Bay plus they'd add new fans that didn't really care beforehand, as well as plant seeds with the youth growing up in the greater metro area, including all the way up to Reno.

However, the A's owner is stubborn and won't relocate. Thus will always have a very small footprint as depicted in that map.
 
#97
Oh, are those baby Astros upset that other players are saying mean things about them now? Cry me a river. Give back your tainted World Series rings then. They've cost the A's a division win two yeaes in a row by demolishing the rest of the league with 100+ win seasons fueled by elaborate sign stealing schemes. Everybody knows you cheated last year bud, regardless of what's written in that report. If you're so much more talented than everyone else why did you feel the need to cheat in the first place?

The Astros and their players are an utter embarrassment. When someone cheats and gets caught, shouldn't it remove their right the get angry at others for being upset about it??? SMH.

Then, to try to argue with a straight face that it's didn't help and that the WS title was won fair and square?

These clowns are unreal.

If it didn't help, they wouldn't have done it. Do these guys really believe the general public is that freaking stupid?

I saw today that many youth baseball leagues are banning the use of the Astericks Astros nickname. I'm actually glad to see that. Hopefully it helps show the youth that, even if they get away with it in terms of MLB allowing them to keep the WS title, that society won't allow them to be so lucky.

From now on that team mascot name will be synonymous with "cheating". When someone tries to cheat at monopoly, someone else will say "don't pull an Astro".

I just hope MLB finally buckles under the pressure and vacates the title. That's the only thing they truly deserve and have earned at this point.
 

SLAB

Hall of Famer
#98
Yeah, you are a jerk ;) Because you know you'd have a different opinion if it involved your team rather than NY or LA. Truth.
Totally the truth. But it happened to LA. And the AL, which I don’t care about. So I’ll stay planted in Jerkville. Honestly life is so much easier when your team is awful and you don’t have to worry about things like winning and titles. :p
 
#99
Totally the truth. But it happened to LA. And the AL, which I don’t care about. So I’ll stay planted in Jerkville. Honestly life is so much easier when your team is awful and you don’t have to worry about things like winning and titles. :p
At least, unlike the Astericks, you can tell the truth and not be angry and bitter about it when you do. ;)
 
If there's any message board anywhere that should stand up and unashamedly celebrate an owner being stubborn and refusing to move a team (even to a nearby market), it's a Sacramento Kings board. So, good on him!
I totally disagree.

Completely different situations and circumstances.

If the A's had the fan footprint, attendance and loyalty like the KINGS, then I'd wholeheartedly agree. But they don't.

And even though the KINGS local enemy, the Warriors, has certainly dominated in terms of competitiveness and in media coverage the past decade, the KINGS still maintain a very large and loyal fan base across NorCal. While the fan disparity and footprint between the A's and Giants in their respective sport is at a different level.

I'll never root for a beloved franchise with tremendous fan support to relocate, such as the Seattle Supersonics, Cleveland Browns or Oakland Raiders.

However it's a totally different ball game for me when a franchise doesn't have that level of footprint/support, such as say, the Kansas City Kings before they moved to SAC. Or a dozen other pro teams from today's climate that could be named.

So, no, I don't believe this message board should stand up and unashamedly celebrate the A's owner for being stubborn and refusing to move his team that doesn't have half the fan support of any the other NorCal teams to a location where they'd have a fighting chance not to forever be the red-headed step child of a fellow MLB franchise.

If the KINGS had been in the same situation as the A's and Clippers with respect to being under that large of a shadow, I'd have understood and supported the desire to move.
 
Last edited:
Kawakami confirming the obvious:

"Folks, you do realize that the A’s would still be on terrestrial radio in 2020 and perhaps many more years if a large (or even mid-sized) Bay Area station really wanted them, right?...

So of course Kaval announced that this was the A’s taking the revolutionary step and reaching out to younger people who don’t listen to terrestrial radio. Of course Kaval had to make it sound like they had this planned all along. But that’s just PR. The A’s knew they were always headed this way, as all teams know they’re headed this way, but they would’ve liked to do it a little later. The main reason the A’s took this step in 2020 is they had nothing close to a better option on the crowded Bay Area radio dial."

See here: https://theathletic.com/1627110/202...d-and-more/?article_source=search&search_text
 
AKA baseball fans driving cars.

That said, depending where you are, KHTK will reach quite a bit of the Bay Area, especially at night, and if I understand correctly, KHTK will continue to carry the A's games.
This is kindof a ridiculous complaint though when you can still listen to the game in your car via your car stereo with a tiny amount of effort. You need either a $2 AUX cable or if you're driving a car older than say 2005 with no Aux port or Bluetooth integration than you need a $10 device that broadcasts your phone audio to an unused radio frequency. I was doing this 16 years ago to listen to my mp3 player in my car. I no longer own a car because I now live in LA and I felt myself slowly turning into this guy... but it seems to me in 2020 if you can't figure out how to stream audio from a device into your car it's because you're making a point of not learning.

"So my question to you is, well, I have two questions for you... (1) Are you actually "sorry" you had to correct me about how lucrative radio contracts are for teams with effectively no market share and (2) Are you even an A's fan? Cause if you're not I don't see why you would care what they do with their resources. We are small in number but those of us who are left embrace the unconventional approach the team takes to everything. It's why a team with almost no local fan base continues to compete in an echelon otherwise reserved only for the big-market elite. *"

1. No, I'm not an A's fan. I'm a Giants fan, but I live in the Bay Area and have a bunch of friends who are A's fans (a few die hards; season ticket holders), who would listen to radio broadcasts while driving.

2. I live on the Peninsula and used to do a daily commute up and down 280 to Santa Clara in my since garaged 2002 Acura RSX (love that car; never selling it) with its dated radio. Listeniing to KHTK (for Kings games; Kings talk) was near impossible. Once I upgraded to a new car with Sirius, the connection was better, but still a bit spotty at times. Translation: they're going to have a hard time listening to KHTK. Not impossible, but much harder.

3. But the main reason for my reply is SCALE. The A's do not need to invest more capital to do radio. The content that they're spending on pods/online/tv, they could send that out on radio as well. That's what I meant--the radio money would be marginal (last dollar revenue since the cost is being absorbed much earlier from the TV/Online/Pod production). Long story short, losing a major distribution channel is NEVER good. They're spinning it.

4. And my perspective isn't that of a Giant's fan trying to beat down a regional rival. It's purely economic, as stated above in #3.
Right but, purely in economic terms, the reason the A's are marginalized in their local market and unable to find a favorable deal with a Bay Area radio affiliate has very little to do with them abandoning the radio format and whatever percentage of their fans are only willing to listen to games that way. This is a situation that has been slowly developing over the last 20 years. There's a long long history of baseball in the Bay Area (the A's celebrated their 50th season in the Oakland Coliseum in 2018 and the Giants played their first game in Candlestick Park in 1960 so this is their 60th year in San Francisco, though obviously they've moved to a new stadium since then). There's way too much to cover here, but regarding the perception that the Giants are the dominant force in the Bay Area market, that's a relatively recent development:



This graph is from 2012 so it's already 8 years old but it's pretty clear what happened. The Oakland A's and San Francisco Giants for much of their history were fairly close in average attendance, taking turns as the more popular team in the Bay as winning percentage and the whims of ownership wavered. Then the strike happened in 1994, cancelling the WS and average attendance dropped league-wide. Both teams were on their way to recovering when the Giants opened a new oceanfront stadium in 2000 and started enjoying years of consecutive sellouts while the A's continued to play in a concrete relic from a previous era. Despite consecutive 100 win seasons in 2001 and 2002 and setting a record with a 20 game streak of consecutive victories they still drew a million less fans per season than the Giants in that period.

This graph ends in 2012 which is about the time Lew Wolff was doing everything in his power to convince MLB owners that Oakland was untenable as a market for baseball and he needed permission to build a new stadium in the South Bay -- first in Fremont then in San Jose. Instead of trying to sell out their stadium, the A's under Lew Wolff cut seats every year. Tarps covered the seats in the upper deck, the wall of suites added to the Coliseum in 1996 to lure the Raiders back from LA (affectionately dubbed "Mt. Davis") was eventually closed off entirely. Oh yeah and the Giants were about to win their second WS title in 3 years and then their 3rd a couple years later. So Lew's appeal to move the team to San Jose was ultimately denied because of territorial rights and there's a lingering resentment within the A's fan base over the whole issue because former A's owner Walter Haas granted those rights to the Giants in 1990 for free. Obviously he failed to anticipate the internet age turning Silicon Valley into an economic powerhouse but that's his loss right? He made a bad business decision then sold his stake in the team. So now instead of a two-team market the Bay Area has basically a one team market with a tiny island of A's fans in the two counties they have been allotted.

Oakland fans got kind of tired of Lew Wolff bad mouthing them every chance he got and stopped coming to games so he's been pushed aside by John Fisher as the acting owner and a new commitment has been made to building roots in Oakland. The rest of the Bay Area is firmly within the territory allotted to the Giants by MLB so the only hope Fisher/Beane and co. have of re-building the team's image is getting a new stadium built in Oakland at a waterfront property that can rival the Giants in fan appeal. With that added revenue they should be able to claw their way back to a respectable market share within their own territory. Winning a WS wouldn't hurt either and they do have one of the best young teams in the league right now with a trio of top-rated pitching prospects starting this year. And they've invested in top international free agents, signing top rated Haitian SS Robert Puason last year and reportedly agreeing to a contract with top-rated Dominican OF Pedro Pineda this year. They also struck out on Kyler Murray, but taking a chance on a potential two-way star athlete wasn't a bad idea. The team is investing in players and trying to get a new ballpark built. The radio issue is such an ancillary one that it's not worth worrying about. Especially when it's so easy to listen to the game through streaming services. As I said before, MLB.TV has an audio only service which unlocks all home and away broadcasts for every team for the full season for $20. And if you do live in the Bay Area, the A's broadcasts on the Tune In app are free.

So yeah, it bothers me that fans of other teams are waving their finger at the A's for failing to make a local radio deal, especially Giants fans. I already know that the Oakland fanbase is marginal at best. I already know that most people think Oakland is a joke of a city that doesn't deserve a franchise. (By the way, Oakland's average attendance last year was 20,521 per game. That's 3600 more people than the Kings are drawing per game this season and MLB plays 81 home games a year compared to 41 for the NBA. They've been in their current stadium for over 50 years and won 4 championships there with multiple Hall of Famers so we really shouldn't be comparing fan footprint, attendance, and loyalty). If you don't care to listen to their games anyway, why make a point of telling me how wrong I am for adapting to however the team wants to broadcast their games? You mentioned Satellite Radio and MLB has a contract with Sirius Satellite Radio so that's another way you can still listen to A's games on your car radio. The point is, if you're actually a person who cares about the A's it doesn't matter. To everyone else this is an excuse to point their finger and wag their tongues at the team without even understanding the context.

PS -- If you want some backstory on how Oakland go to the point where they dropped local terrestrial radio entirely, you can read about it here and here and here. Long story short? The A's signed a contract with 95.7 in 2011 to be their flagship station yet by 2018 they only talked about the Giants and Warriors on that station and shifted A's games to other affiliates when the Warriors were in the playoffs. The A's wanted more than minimal coverage on their flagship station and 95.7 said "thanks but no thanks"...

“The A’s sought to be treated special which wasn’t possible at The Game,” said Jason Barrett, former PD at 95.7 the Game and founder of Barrett Sports Media. “That respect is reserved for the Warriors. The A’s ratings and revenue impact on the station was not enough to earn them that type of consideration. I don’t blame the team for looking elsewhere to try and find that type of situation nor do I fault The Game for moving in a different direction. Sometimes the fit just isn’t right for two organizations.”
(link)

Can you really blame the A's for turning their back on a market and format that had already turned it's back on them?
 
This is kindof a ridiculous complaint though when you can still listen to the game in your car via your car stereo with a tiny amount of effort. You need either a $2 AUX cable or if you're driving a car older than say 2005 with no Aux port or Bluetooth integration than you need a $10 device that broadcasts your phone audio to an unused radio frequency. I was doing this 16 years ago to listen to my mp3 player in my car. I no longer own a car because I now live in LA and I felt myself slowly turning into this guy... but it seems to me in 2020 if you can't figure out how to stream audio from a device into your car it's because you're making a point of not learning.



Right but, purely in economic terms, the reason the A's are marginalized in their local market and unable to find a favorable deal with a Bay Area radio affiliate has very little to do with them abandoning the radio format and whatever percentage of their fans are only willing to listen to games that way. This is a situation that has been slowly developing over the last 20 years. There's a long long history of baseball in the Bay Area (the A's celebrated their 50th season in the Oakland Coliseum in 2018 and the Giants played their first game in Candlestick Park in 1960 so this is their 60th year in San Francisco, though obviously they've moved to a new stadium since then). There's way too much to cover here, but regarding the perception that the Giants are the dominant force in the Bay Area market, that's a relatively recent development:



This graph is from 2012 so it's already 8 years old but it's pretty clear what happened. The Oakland A's and San Francisco Giants for much of their history were fairly close in average attendance, taking turns as the more popular team in the Bay as winning percentage and the whims of ownership wavered. Then the strike happened in 1994, cancelling the WS and average attendance dropped league-wide. Both teams were on their way to recovering when the Giants opened a new oceanfront stadium in 2000 and started enjoying years of consecutive sellouts while the A's continued to play in a concrete relic from a previous era. Despite consecutive 100 win seasons in 2001 and 2002 and setting a record with a 20 game streak of consecutive victories they still drew a million less fans per season than the Giants in that period.

This graph ends in 2012 which is about the time Lew Wolff was doing everything in his power to convince MLB owners that Oakland was untenable as a market for baseball and he needed permission to build a new stadium in the South Bay -- first in Fremont then in San Jose. Instead of trying to sell out their stadium, the A's under Lew Wolff cut seats every year. Tarps covered the seats in the upper deck, the wall of suites added to the Coliseum in 1996 to lure the Raiders back from LA (affectionately dubbed "Mt. Davis") was eventually closed off entirely. Oh yeah and the Giants were about to win their second WS title in 3 years and then their 3rd a couple years later. So Lew's appeal to move the team to San Jose was ultimately denied because of territorial rights and there's a lingering resentment within the A's fan base over the whole issue because former A's owner Walter Haas granted those rights to the Giants in 1990 for free. Obviously he failed to anticipate the internet age turning Silicon Valley into an economic powerhouse but that's his loss right? He made a bad business decision then sold his stake in the team. So now instead of a two-team market the Bay Area has basically a one team market with a tiny island of A's fans in the two counties they have been allotted.

Oakland fans got kind of tired of Lew Wolff bad mouthing them every chance he got and stopped coming to games so he's been pushed aside by John Fisher as the acting owner and a new commitment has been made to building roots in Oakland. The rest of the Bay Area is firmly within the territory allotted to the Giants by MLB so the only hope Fisher/Beane and co. have of re-building the team's image is getting a new stadium built in Oakland at a waterfront property that can rival the Giants in fan appeal. With that added revenue they should be able to claw their way back to a respectable market share within their own territory. Winning a WS wouldn't hurt either and they do have one of the best young teams in the league right now with a trio of top-rated pitching prospects starting this year. And they've invested in top international free agents, signing top rated Haitian SS Robert Puason last year and reportedly agreeing to a contract with top-rated Dominican OF Pedro Pineda this year. They also struck out on Kyler Murray, but taking a chance on a potential two-way star athlete wasn't a bad idea. The team is investing in players and trying to get a new ballpark built. The radio issue is such an ancillary one that it's not worth worrying about. Especially when it's so easy to listen to the game through streaming services. As I said before, MLB.TV has an audio only service which unlocks all home and away broadcasts for every team for the full season for $20. And if you do live in the Bay Area, the A's broadcasts on the Tune In app are free.

So yeah, it bothers me that fans of other teams are waving their finger at the A's for failing to make a local radio deal, especially Giants fans. I already know that the Oakland fanbase is marginal at best. I already know that most people think Oakland is a joke of a city that doesn't deserve a franchise. (By the way, Oakland's average attendance last year was 20,521 per game. That's 3600 more people than the Kings are drawing per game this season and MLB plays 81 home games a year compared to 41 for the NBA. They've been in their current stadium for over 50 years and won 4 championships there with multiple Hall of Famers so we really shouldn't be comparing fan footprint, attendance, and loyalty). If you don't care to listen to their games anyway, why make a point of telling me how wrong I am for adapting to however the team wants to broadcast their games? You mentioned Satellite Radio and MLB has a contract with Sirius Satellite Radio so that's another way you can still listen to A's games on your car radio. The point is, if you're actually a person who cares about the A's it doesn't matter. To everyone else this is an excuse to point their finger and wag their tongues at the team without even understanding the context.

PS -- If you want some backstory on how Oakland go to the point where they dropped local terrestrial radio entirely, you can read about it here and here and here. Long story short? The A's signed a contract with 95.7 in 2011 to be their flagship station yet by 2018 they only talked about the Giants and Warriors on that station and shifted A's games to other affiliates when the Warriors were in the playoffs. The A's wanted more than minimal coverage on their flagship station and 95.7 said "thanks but no thanks"...

(link)

Can you really blame the A's for turning their back on a market and format that had already turned it's back on them?
The A’s didn’t turn their back on the market. They didn’t have a choice, as stated in Kawakami’s article. It is never a good thing to lose a major distribution channel.

I don’t think a waterfront park would do the trick for the A’s either. That gap from the waterfront to the Oakland Hills is not fan friendly, to put it mildly. As for SJ, yes, it was dumb to give it up. But A’s games are broadcast in SJ and nothing prevents SJ fans from driving to Oakland. The commute is, in many respects, easier than going to Giants games. A new park would help, but winning would help more. The Bay Area is Giants territory not because of Oracle Park or because the Giants can prevent the A’s from moving to SJ, it’s because the Giants have won 3 out of the last 10 World Series.
 
The A’s didn’t turn their back on the market. They didn’t have a choice, as stated in Kawakami’s article. It is never a good thing to lose a major distribution channel.

I don’t think a waterfront park would do the trick for the A’s either. That gap from the waterfront to the Oakland Hills is not fan friendly, to put it mildly. As for SJ, yes, it was dumb to give it up. But A’s games are broadcast in SJ and nothing prevents SJ fans from driving to Oakland. The commute is, in many respects, easier than going to Giants games. A new park would help, but winning would help more. The Bay Area is Giants territory not because of Oracle Park or because the Giants can prevent the A’s from moving to SJ, it’s because the Giants have won 3 out of the last 10 World Series.
This has been the attitude of San Francisco (and curiously, even Oakland) media as well whenever Howard Terminal is brought up. Nobody seems to think it's going to work, nobody understands why the team won't just go away or build a new ballpark in the same industrial no man's land they currently occupy. But Oakland had four championships before the Giants won even one. Just because the Bay Area is Giants territory now doesn't mean it always has been or always will be. If the A's win 97 games for a third year in a row in 2020 and make some noise in the playoffs for a change will that actually start to impact attendance sometime soon? I hope so. I was at their 50th anniversary game in 2018 and it was thrilling to see the stadium full again and fans engaged with supporting the team.

I think the support will be there in the community if people see the team invest in keeping their star players. That's been a huge factor in declining attendance as well. But it took 20 years of the team being ruthlessly cheap for the mistrust to develop, so it's not going to change back overnight. The die-hards have always been there but it's hard to see how the A's will ever bring in casual baseball fans again if they aren't able to sell a picturesque new ballpark in a downtown location with the pedestrian access and nearby bars that younger fans want. And regardless, I fully support any team with a 50 year history finding a way to make it work. Would my attitude be any different if I weren't an A's fan? I kindof doubt it. Because, as Capt already pointed out, we've been through our own relocation saga in Sacramento and no fanbase deserves that.
 
This has been the attitude of San Francisco (and curiously, even Oakland) media as well whenever Howard Terminal is brought up. Nobody seems to think it's going to work, nobody understands why the team won't just go away or build a new ballpark in the same industrial no man's land they currently occupy. But Oakland had four championships before the Giants won even one. Just because the Bay Area is Giants territory now doesn't mean it always has been or always will be. If the A's win 97 games for a third year in a row in 2020 and make some noise in the playoffs for a change will that actually start to impact attendance sometime soon? I hope so. I was at their 50th anniversary game in 2018 and it was thrilling to see the stadium full again and fans engaged with supporting the team.

I think the support will be there in the community if people see the team invest in keeping their star players. That's been a huge factor in declining attendance as well. But it took 20 years of the team being ruthlessly cheap for the mistrust to develop, so it's not going to change back overnight. The die-hards have always been there but it's hard to see how the A's will ever bring in casual baseball fans again if they aren't able to sell a picturesque new ballpark in a downtown location with the pedestrian access and nearby bars that younger fans want. And regardless, I fully support any team with a 50 year history finding a way to make it work. Would my attitude be any different if I weren't an A's fan? I kindof doubt it. Because, as Capt already pointed out, we've been through our own relocation saga in Sacramento and no fanbase deserves that.
I’ve done that walk from the bart station to Jack London at 10 am, in broad daylight, and there were parts of the walk where I was almost in a full sprint. It’s sketchy. They’ll need to gentrify the surrounding area and reroute the bart station so it stops at the park. I just can’t imagine a situation where, after a game, fans would want any part of walking from the stadium to the nearest Bart station while having to go thru some of the sketchiest parts of west Oakland.
 
I’ve done that walk from the bart station to Jack London at 10 am, in broad daylight, and there were parts of the walk where I was almost in a full sprint. It’s sketchy. They’ll need to gentrify the surrounding area and reroute the bart station so it stops at the park. I just can’t imagine a situation where, after a game, fans would want any part of walking from the stadium to the nearest Bart station while having to go thru some of the sketchiest parts of west Oakland.
I don't know what to tell you. I've made that walk too and it's not even in the top 10 of the sketchiest places I've been. Maybe I'm just lucky. Gentrification is happening everywhere. I'm not sure that it "needs" to happen but it will nonetheless. It's pretty clear we're just not anywhere near on the same page about a lot of things. The Warriors saw more money across the Bay and the Raiders got a blank check from Las Vegas that they were never going to get in California. The A's, as the last team standing, have an oppurtunity to build something special in Oakland where they have a proud history and where baseball has been an important part of the community for generations.

This seems relevant:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sf...s-broke-ground-on-a-ballpark-for-11053070.php

... you can't see what could be if you're only focused on what already is. Baseball in particular is great because it reminds us all what it was like to be a kid. Barry Bonds hitting baseballs into the bay from a construction site - - that's a big kid living out his dream. And kids in Oakland deserve a team that they can root for too. Kids like these guys:




 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
I don't know what to tell you. I've made that walk too and it's not even in the top 10 of the sketchiest places I've been. Maybe I'm just lucky. Gentrification is happening everywhere. I'm not sure that it "needs" to happen but it will nonetheless. It's pretty clear we're just not anywhere near on the same page about a lot of things. The Warriors saw more money across the Bay and the Raiders got a blank check from Las Vegas that they were never going to get in California. The A's, as the last team standing, have an oppurtunity to build something special in Oakland where they have a proud history and where baseball has been an important part of the community for generations...
I've been in that area only once in the last few years and it pretty much scared the crap out of me. Gotta agree with kb02 in that regard.
 
I walk fast and I'm tall (and a dude) so I'm sure that helps. But the tenderloin area in SF felt a lot more sketch to me than any part of Oakland. Also just East of Downtown LA where the Greyhound Station is, that's not a place you want to go if you can avoid it. USC is in the tip of South Central LA and I used to walk to the basketball court there at 1 AM routinely when I was a student. If you're aware of your surroundings it's generally not a problem. The only time someone actually tried to mug me he had 2 friends with him and it was 2 in the morning and he didn't like my Oakland hat but that was where I live now in Burbank which is usually rated as one of the safest cities in the country so you just never know. I stood my ground long enough that his buddies bailed and then he gave up too. My point was just that the Giants had all the same kinds of problems when they built Pac Bell Park in China Basin and they figured it out. The A's can figure out the safety and transportation issues too. It's really just a matter of getting the necessary regulatory approvals and then putting up the money. But I vehemently disagree with anyone who thinks they should find a better situation elsewhere. 52 years of tradition should count for something.
 
[QUOT
I walk fast and I'm tall (and a dude) so I'm sure that helps. But the tenderloin area in SF felt a lot more sketch to me than any part of Oakland. Also just East of Downtown LA where the Greyhound Station is, that's not a place you want to go if you can avoid it. USC is in the tip of South Central LA and I used to walk to the basketball court there at 1 AM routinely when I was a student. If you're aware of your surroundings it's generally not a problem. The only time someone actually tried to mug me he had 2 friends with him and it was 2 in the morning and he didn't like my Oakland hat but that was where I live now in Burbank which is usually rated as one of the safest cities in the country so you just never know. I stood my ground long enough that his buddies bailed and then he gave up too. My point was just that the Giants had all the same kinds of problems when they built Pac Bell Park in China Basin and they figured it out. The A's can figure out the safety and transportation issues too. It's really just a matter of getting the necessary regulatory approvals and then putting up the money. But I vehemently disagree with anyone who thinks they should find a better situation elsewhere. 52 years of tradition should count for something.
It's on par with the TL. If they really wanted to stay in the area, they should look at Alameda and the since abandoned naval base. There's plenty of land there and they wouldn't have the walkability and safety issues that they do now at their current location.
 
The Bay Area is Giants territory not because of Oracle Park or because the Giants can prevent the A’s from moving to SJ, it’s because the Giants have won 3 out of the last 10 World Series.
That has nothing to do with it either. The greater BA, and SAC, were Giants territories long before the Giants won that first title in 2010. I’ve lived my entire life in NorCal dating back to the 70’s and am neither a Giants or A’s fan (between the two, I prefer the A’s) and the Giants have always been the clear cut more popular and followed team. Specifically from the 80’s and on.

Not even close.

Because, as Capt already pointed out, we've been through our own relocation saga in Sacramento and no fanbase deserves that.
You and Cap’t both have brought up the KINGS relocation saga in reference to the A’s when they are completely different situations. They are not comparable, other than the lack of a new facility.

If you guys are against the A’s or any franchise for that matter moving because, well, SAC nearly lost the KINGS once, fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But the reasoning given of “no fanbase or city deserves that” is flawed and overstated.

If a fanbase/city/market can’t or won’t support the team, then deserve has got nothing to do with it. In the cases of SAC and SEA, they had a large footprint and rabid fanbases. Neither was living in the large shadow of a rival franchise in the same sports league. The same applied to the Raiders prior to their 1982 move.

All three were different situations than the A’s.

The A’s have a tiny footprint and long ago surrendered rights to a major media market in their own home Bay area market. Making matters worse, the A’s are dominated by the Giants in the next closest large media market outside the Bay area. Then factor in attendance, which the A’s typically reside in the bottom 3rd of the league. And here you guys are in this very thread debating about their media coverage via TV/radio which, again, pales in comparison to their Bay area counterpart.

Time has shown that the Bay area is unable or unwilling to support 2 MLB teams at an acceptable level.

The KINGS didn’t share any of those problems. The only comparison to be made was the lack of a new facility. But in terms of footprint, local media coverage, fanbase, and the large shadow from a competing franchise, it’s apples and oranges.

Which is why this KINGS fan is apathetic to a potential A’s relocation from Oakland. If the A’s were supported as the Raiders once were prior to 1982, or even as they were at times the past several years, I’d understand and share your POV.

But I’d rather see them thrive some place where they can build a much larger footprint and loyal fanbase. But perhaps I’m the only one on this message board that feels that way. And I’m ok with that. ;)

Regardless, I still stress that what nearly happened in SAC and did happen in SEA is nothing like the A’s current situation. Therefore the notion that KINGS fans should ‘understand‘ and be opposed to it lacks validity IMO.
 
Last edited:
That has nothing to do with it either. The greater BA, and SAC, were Giants territories long before the Giants won that first title in 2010. I’ve lived my entire life in NorCal dating back to the 70’s and am neither a Giants or A’s fan (between the two, I prefer the A’s) and the Giants have always been the clear cut more popular and followed team. Specifically from the 80’s and on.

Not even close.



You and Cap’t both have brought up the KINGS relocation saga in reference to the A’s when they are completely different situations. They are not comparable, other than the lack of a new facility.

If you guys are against the A’s or any franchise for that matter moving because, well, SAC nearly lost the KINGS once, fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But the reasoning given of “no fanbase or city deserves that” is flawed and overstated.

If a fanbase/city/market can’t or won’t support the team, then deserve has got nothing to do with it. In the cases of SAC and SEA, they had a large footprint and rabid fanbases. Neither was living in the large shadow of a rival franchise in the same sports league. The same applied to the Raiders prior to their 1982 move.

All three were different situations than the A’s.

The A’s have a tiny footprint and long ago surrendered rights to a major media market in their own home Bay area market. Making matters worse, the A’s are dominated by the Giants in the next closest large media market outside the Bay area. Then factor in attendance, which the A’s typically reside in the bottom 3rd of the league. And here you guys are in this very thread debating about their media coverage via TV/radio which, again, pales in comparison to their Bay area counterpart.

Time has shown that the Bay area is unable or unwilling to support 2 MLB teams at an acceptable level.

The KINGS didn’t share any of those problems. The only comparison to be made was the lack of a new facility. But in terms of footprint, local media coverage, fanbase, and the large shadow from a competing franchise, it’s apples and oranges.

Which is why this KINGS fan is apathetic to a potential A’s relocation from Oakland. If the A’s were supported as the Raiders once were prior to 1982, or even as they were at times the past several years, I’d understand and share your POV.

But I’d rather see them thrive some place where they can build a much larger footprint and loyal fanbase. But perhaps I’m the only one on this message board that feels that way. And I’m ok with that. ;)

Regardless, I still stress that what nearly happened in SAC and did happen in SEA is nothing like the A’s current situation. Therefore the notion that KINGS fans should ‘understand‘ and be opposed to it lacks validity IMO.
Okay, let me try to be brief...

How can you say that Oakland doesn't support their team the way Sacramento does when they sell at minimum twice as many tickets every season and sold out their 54,000 seat stadium for a playoff game last Fall? Seriously? I understand that baseball and basketball are not the same in terms of how many games are played every year and the average size of a stadium vs. an arena but this is just complete nonsense.

For whatever reason there's a perception out there that either (A) there are no Oakland A's fans or (B) the fans don't support their team. It's the same nonsense talking heads were saying about Sacramento before we refused to give up on our team. "It's a small market, who cares?" "Give them to a bigger city with more money." That's what pisses me off.

The only difference between the Oakland A's and the San Francisco Giants from a business point of view is corporate money and sponsorships which are a direct result of the Giants building a new stadium in 2000. If Oakland had won 3 World Series in the last decade instead of San Francisco you would see a lot more A's hats in Northern California right now. So what? That's just common sense. That doesn't mean Oakland doesn't deserve to have a team. You don't care about the A's moving? Cool. As for the rest of it though, you're dead wrong.

But back to actual baseball, someone posted a link to this on the A's blog and I thought it was a fascinating look at how technology has contributed to modern pitching. They also touch on the Astros cheating scandal in the second half of the interview:

 
It's on par with the TL. If they really wanted to stay in the area, they should look at Alameda and the since abandoned naval base. There's plenty of land there and they wouldn't have the walkability and safety issues that they do now at their current location.
That's not going to happen. The A's have been looking at locations for a new ballpark in the East Bay for almost 20 years. I won't bore you with the details but I'm sure that stuff is all online somewhere if you care to look for it. They've had over a dozen different sites drawn up with preliminary renderings, traffic studies, real estate deals to off-set costs, environmental impact reports, the whole nine. They even talked about building an elevated park over a section of downtown Oakland at one point. The common element in all of these plans failing has been lack of cooperation from local government. The one thing they have going for them right now with Howard Terminal is that the Oakland Mayor and city council are on board and motivated to get that site developed. That's why they've progressed to the point where they actually might break ground at that location within the year. There are no other sites. It's this or nothing. Every site has issues that need to be worked out but what you're suggesting is not even a remote possibility.