Jump to content

bosrs1

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,950

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by bosrs1

  1. bosrs1
    Until the A’s say they have a deal, this is politician hot air...
  2. bosrs1
    Yeah the XII is dead. Now it's just a matter of where everyone ends up when the music stops. And who if anyone takes their place in the Power 5.
  3. bosrs1
    Autocorrect is a :censored:...
  4. bosrs1
    Are we thinking Big XII partition/disillusion is the far more likely outcome rather than the Big XII trying to save itself and acquire replacements?
  5. bosrs1
    Is anyone else reporting an issue with certain ads causing problems with the forums. Specifically you'll be typing and when an ad loads, usually in one of the side spaces, the cursor on the forum section will deactivate like you've clicked away from the comment window and you have to click the cursor back into place to resume typing? It's only started happening recently.
  6. bosrs1
    And so it begins... https://www.ajc.com/sports/georgia-bulldogs/oklahoma-texas-make-first-official-move-toward-joining-sec/TDBSBQXG7ZFIPCUOMPCVNYRNJY/
  7. bosrs1
    Man between this, the Niners bringing back the '94 look, the Rams fixes, the Edmonton Elks rebrand... it's turning out to be a good football uniform year. Nice contrast with MLB where it's been one :censored:show after another this season.
  8. bosrs1
    History. The Pac-8, Pac-10, now Pac-12 is a very old historic name that no one wants messed with, particularly those involved with the old guard schools which are all on the coast.
  9. bosrs1
    Jesus if the SEC and Big 10 start hoovering up the Big 12 you'd have to think the Pac-12 will make some move to expand too, right?
  10. bosrs1
    Actually they’re talking now like the Big 12 would start poaching MWC and Pac-12 schools. Which if the latter happens you’d have to think would lead to the Pac-12 raiding the Mountain West. Silly season has begun again!
  11. bosrs1
    Again, not St. Paul branded, or even in a Big 4 league.
  12. bosrs1
    I mean really Oakland's time passed it by around the time the Coliseum opened. If not for the Raiders situation you detail above, or the fact Charley Finley was desperate to move out of KC from the moment he bought the team (remember he had tried to move the team to Dallas, Louisville, and Oakland a first time in the years prior to the ultimately successful request to move to Oakland) and the fact SF just didn't have an arena really capable of hosting the NBA with the Warriors bouncing around 3 different sub standard venues in and around the city, Oakland likely never would have acquired teams. It was the perfect storm of timing, desperation and lucky circumstances to Oakland's benefit. There's an argument to be made that Oakland has the most successful on-spec stadium construction project ever in that the Oakland Arena had no tenants planned when it was planned, and the Coliseum was made multipurpose instead of football only for its then only expected but not signed tenant, the Raiders, on the slim hope of attracting a baseball team. They ultimately ended up with teams in all 4 major leagues within 5 years of opening, with an ABA team and NASL team briefly stopping by for good measure. One they benefitted from for close to half a century longer than they likely should have. The fact they were able to hang on to the 3 teams they did for as long as they did is actually somewhat shocking and impressive.
  13. bosrs1
    Corrected that while you responded. Point stands, they're not the St. Paul Wild.
  14. bosrs1
    "Small" distinction though, in Minn-St. Paul and Dallas-Ft. Worth, there's no city in the same region even bigger than Dallas or Minneapolis as there is with San Jose in relation to the smaller San Francisco and Oakland. The Bay Area is really a tri polar region of San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland. With Oakland being a distant third to SJ-SF. And as it is Fort Worth and St. Paul don't have any named sports teams. All of the regional teams are either in Dallas, or it's suburb Arlington (but of course they're not named after Arlington, they just play there) and in Minneapolis or named generically. Heck, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Dallas-Fort Worth are good examples of why Oakland either shouldn't have teams, or the ones it has should be named either San Francisco, San Jose or some generic "Bay Area" name (like the Warriors were and Golden Seals went to after trying out the Oakland moniker). Heck, the closest analogue in the US to the Bay Area situation is likely Dallas-Fort Worth. With Dallas being San Jose, Fort Worth being San Francisco, and Oakland being Arlington. Beyond a new ballpark, that may be one solution to help some of the A's problems, rebrand regionally or to one of the two larger cities to broaden appeal. The Angels did so arguably to their benefit. Instead Oakland's new term sheet precludes the A's from doing so much like Anaheim's tried to do in the 90's.
  15. bosrs1
    It also has the distinction of being the most divided off second (really third) city in a market with the A's, Raiders, Stompers all being Oakland teams instead of San Francisco or Bay Area teams. San Jose too for that matter with 2 iterations of the Earthquakes and the Sharks. In Chicago, NY and LA the non-city teams are still generally Chicago, NY and LA teams. The only exceptions today that I can think of are the Anaheim Ducks and NJ Devils (if you consider them a NY city team). Brooklyn is an oddity but only as they're named after what today is a sub-city level political unit (ie: a neighborhood name) but that's a pretty unique to NY situation given the city is made up of multiple counties/boroughs. If the Bay Area were any other location the teams would all be San Francisco teams or Bay Area Teams. But most other regions aren't in the same boat where there's a huge body of water dividing the region's titular city (SF) and third cities (Oakland) from each other, and the titular city not being the largest city, but rather the second largest to what has become the second city, San Jose, which usurped the second city role from Oakland less than 10 years after Oakland started acquiring sports teams (San Jose became the second largest city in the region by 1970 of course became larger than even San Francisco by 1990). All of which probably helps explain why Oakland ended up in this mess in part. Oakland began a protracted era of decline, particularly relative to it's two neighbors, shortly after the A's, Raiders and Warriors moved in. One from which it's never really recovered. Oakland's population today is barely higher than it was in 1950, it's lost all of it's military presence, it's port has long since been surpassed by the LA area, the largest companies in the Bay are in SF or SJ, average household income is by far the lowest of the 3 major Bay Area cities in Oakland... Really if it hadn't acquired the 3 teams in that narrow window when it did, Oakland would never be a choice destination for teams today. They'd all be going for SF adjacent or San Jose adjacent, and they'd be so named after the bigger cities. I was trying to think of some analogy in another two team region, or even one team region where a clear second city existed when it got teams, but then quickly declined to a distant third city, and I really can't think of one.
  16. bosrs1
    Yeah I don’t count the Mariners. And of course San Diego hasn’t lost the Padres. There are a couple cities that have lost teams in 3 but never 4.
  17. bosrs1
    I mean it's not what the A's wanted. It's good they voted yes, but they voted yes on something the A's have already told them is a "no". So really all the city has voted to do is continue negotiations from their side. The A's on the other hand have said this was a no. Whether they stick to that or if they come back to the table *shrug* who knows. But it's not the term sheet the A's had asked them to vote on and they're still almost $400 million apart. To say nothing of still needing the county's buy in on the TIF financing that the city just rejected in their term sheet. In any case the A's are going to Las Vegas for another scouting trip tomorrow.
  18. bosrs1
    That's pretty pathetic. I wonder how many organizations are doing it. Of course being a local SF Bay Area article they don't elaborate on the other teams beyond the Astros. But the implication was that most are doing right by their players, similar to the A's recent food for MiLBers fiasco. Clearly the Cardinals aren't one of them if what your friend is saying is true.
  19. bosrs1
    Meanwhile, the A's just landed on the receiving end of yet another bad piece of news, of their own making regarding their half assed treatment of their minor leaguers in Stockton just hours before the Oakland vote. https://www.sfgate.com/athletics/article/Exclusive-Most-Oakland-A-s-single-A-players-in-16323267.php?utm_campaign=CMS Sharing Tools (Mobile)&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral Even the Astros, loathesome as they can be seen, aren't hanging their Single A guys out to dry like this...
  20. bosrs1
    1 vote against - 0 votes for... 7 members of the council yet to make their position known. Of course we've yet to find out what they're actually going to vote on.
  21. bosrs1
    Probably next year. You'll see a non-gradient number change for the blue, with maybe one or two other tweaks, and you'll see a yellow alt jersey.
  22. bosrs1
    It's a big day, but not for the reason you list. Tomorrow the city council will vote on their own Howard Terminal plans that they released on Friday. The A's have already said if they vote yes on that plan, it's a no vote on the project. The A's have implored the city to vote on the plan the A's presented back in April and asked for a prompt vote on (the OCC thinks 3 1/2 months is prompt). But so far no indication the OCC will be voting on the A's plan for Howard Terminal. The A's are already planning another trip to Vegas for Wednesday.
  23. bosrs1
    Looks like Vegas wouldn't be much of a downgrade attendance wise. The Las Vegas Aviators drew just under 6,000 fans yesterday, despite the weather being humid, brutally hot and intermittently broken up by thunderstorms. The currently playoff qualifying A's on a perfect sunny 75 degree day in Oakland, only drew 8,572.
  24. bosrs1
    God I called it. Oakland produced their own term sheet that only made minor concessions toward the A’s term sheet and they’re going to vote on that next week instead of the A’s sheet as they were asked to. They’ll vote yes on their sheet because it’s theirs and they can say “we said yes” thinking it’ll make the A’s look bad. The A’s will promptly start packing... Oakland pols are so damn predictable.
  25. bosrs1
    Charlotte & Raleigh/Durham? I’ve head both mentioned over the years.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept