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
    That and trying to get them to hone in on Howard Terminal. The city still wants them to consider, and choose, the Coliseum site.
  2. bosrs1
    I mean the Coliseum is literally falling apart. So it's not like the A's aren't justified in playing hardball with Oakland. Particularly since they're not asking the city to build the stadium or pay for it outright. Especially given this is year 26 of their stadium search.
  3. bosrs1
    Hey at least they finally got around to forcing the Pacific to play as many games as the rest of the league, and standardized the rest down to 72. It's a step in the right direction if nothing else.
  4. bosrs1
    Bingo. Plus if you're able to swindle your current land lord for a new arena (which frankly was what they got as nothing but the outer shell of the old Coliseum Arena survived the rebuild into the New Arena in Oakland), why would you give that up to go be second tenant in a now older and somewhat simpler arena that was built primarily for hockey in San Jose? Not to say it was the right choice, obviously the "new" arena in Oakland was only good enough to keep the Warriors for a little more than 20 years before they bolted anyway.
  5. bosrs1
    Eh I've never bought the argument that the Haas family were trying to play the Giants. Even if the Giants had moved to San Jose I think it's pretty certain they still would have had more drawing potential from SF than the A's would have had. You saw a microcosm of that with the Niners when they moved all but to San Jose and it having no impact positively on the Raiders in Oakland. Sure the dynamics would have been a little different given it's baseball and not football. But fact is East Bay teams other than the Warriors (who were east bay only in location not in practice) have never had much appeal in the city proper. Or anywhere else in the Bay Area for that matter. Other than a few unsustainable years at the close of the 80's, the A's were always second fiddle when on even and even superior footing stadium wise to the Giants. And a San Jose Giants team in a new ballpark would have still had a leg up on the A's all these years financially (maybe even more so not having to pay off a ballpark presuming San Jose would have provided some form of public assistance on an SJ ballpark). And the Giants would still have had the lion share of the draw for most of the last 30 years both in person and on TV due to San Jose being primarily a Giants market even before they had the territorial rights to it (I grew up in the South Bay when the A's were at their absolute peak as a franchise during the Bash Bros. era, and outside my family I didn't need any hands to count how many A's fans I knew).
  6. bosrs1
    Worst part, came out very recently that the Giants apparently had no interest in moving to St. Petersburg, or the South Bay for that matter. Which means all of the A's efforts initially to help them stay in the Bay Area by offering to forego the rights on Santa Clara County... were really even more wasted than we already knew. https://newballpark.org/2021/06/02/ghost-of-blue-ribbon-panel-speaks-out-in-favor-of-the-coliseum/ I mean again, I'm in awe of how much the Giants then owners played everyone. But again, the A's allowed themselves to be played, and then as you say didn't move to rectify it when it became clear the Giants were full of :censored: about moving to the South Bay.
  7. bosrs1
    That's been one of the biggest head scratchers with these alternate football leagues. Rather than pooling resources and putting something together with all of those resources that might have a chance of surviving, they keep coming at it separately completely under capitalized, splitting interest in a scattershot group of cities... and seem shocked when they run out of cash a year in. Rinse and repeat... You put the money that was blown on AAF, XFL 2.0, XFL 2.1 and USFL, and they'd likely have had a great league. Same could be said for minor league soccer for that matter. At least there, there's a somewhat established league with USL. But rather than join up and support it you get numbskulls like the guys hemorrhaging money on NISA. And now MLS is going to be throwing their hat in the ring just to further fragment the Division 3 level.
  8. bosrs1
    Yeah I think with Seattle it's just a case of them being a split fanbase type thing where it's Mariners fans and Seahawks fans with less overlap, same likely in Houston. San Diego and St. Louis were obvious "eff yous" to the NFL for cities recently screwed out of their football teams and no real replacement to root for. San Diego now has the added benefit of a beautiful new stadium to use as a draw as well replacing the decaying SDCCU Stadium. DC I've got no explanation for.
  9. bosrs1
    Honestly the XFL would do well to adopt as much of the CFL's rule set on American sized fields as possible if they want to jump interest. CFL football is IMO far more exciting form of football. And it helps off set some of the deficiencies in the overall quality of the players.
  10. bosrs1
    So which lucky cities do we think will get teams? I'm thinking San Diego might be in the loop this time with a right sized brand new stadium opening in fall 2022 that will be in need of tenants to help pay for its construction cost. Not to mention it's a largely blank NFL market right now with the Chargers gone and having scorched the earth behind them.
  11. bosrs1
    I'm not even sure it's ownership cross over so much as its control of their revenues. In so many rental situations the team has to split revenue with the landlord which is why rentals are usually not preferred. But there are exceptions. Also shocked no one remembered the longest such non-SSS situation in the league up in New England.
  12. bosrs1
    Nah, the Candlestick site sucked. Coldest place in California in mid-summer you could ever watch a night game. That was the one thing that's ok with the move. Yes they hemmed themselves in and built a tiny, cramped and dreary ballpark by modern standards. But the location alone was miles better than Candlestick, and about 15 degrees warmer any given summer night.
  13. bosrs1
    What's wrong with that stadium that they want to bail on it already?
  14. bosrs1
    Honestly I've always felt Oracle is overrated. If it hadn't been built on the water it's an otherwise cramped and somewhat pedestrian park. I went to Coors Field for the first time recently and was shocked how similar they feel, just with Coors being bigger, better sightlined and more spacious (and thus better IMO). That said, Oracle is still a nice park, and it's far and away better than it's nearest competitor across the Bay. And yes it's better than the Rangers new Paul Bunyan sized grill.
  15. bosrs1
    Not really. California's piece of the water rights to the Colorado River will still be utilized due to CA's own growing need and it's agricultural needs. And as they are senior to Nevada and Arizona's, California will continue to take priority. That's not going away even if CA takes some pressure off the water system in coming years from the cities from desal.
  16. bosrs1
    I don't think you'll find anyone who disagrees with that assessment. The Giants as they exist today are a direct result of that near move to what is now Tropicana Field.
  17. bosrs1
    Speak for yourself. We've just opened a giant desal plant near San Diego and have a couple more planned for the area. SoCal may be in the near desert and desert, but we've got direct access to the largest body of water on Earth.
  18. bosrs1
    Before. Though SF emptying out into the east bay hasn’t been helping matters. The Giants made major inroads in the Bonds/roids era, sealed the deal with the World Series runs, and stuck the knife in the A’s locally when they killed San Jose. I mean more power to them as it was well played and the A’s owners have been clueless off field for 30 years now.
  19. bosrs1
    Never heard that particular take. Not that I imagine it holds much water. Oakland teams have never had much appeal in SF or the peninsula.
  20. bosrs1
    Eventually Vegas is going to bomb out. There just isn’t enough water to support Vegas and there never has been. They’ve been living on borrowed time for decades. A same for Phoenix. And being in the middle of the desert, there’s no other source of water for either other than the Gila in AZ for Phoenix. Vegas lacks even that.
  21. bosrs1
    The teams used to share them, which made sense. The A’s did the Giants a solid in he 90’s. Let that be a lesson to you, never help anyone, it’ll just blow up in your face.
  22. bosrs1
    Nah they'll be fine. They all still root for the Warriors. And most of them were Giants fans already, which has been part of the problem.
  23. bosrs1
    Going to be even more fun to watch it blow up in their faces in a few years when Vegas bombs out as a city.
  24. bosrs1
    Honestly that's the feeling I'm getting as well. Last week I thought Vegas was in play but was the backup. Now it's pretty clear it's their preferred choice and will be their only choice if Oakland's city council doesn't give them everything they want on July 20.
  25. bosrs1
    Since it's required to have "In God We Trust" I wouldn't look for it to be any good. Best we can hope for I think is that they don't pull a Georgia and try to adopt another Confederate Flag in place of the battle flag. Honestly I'll be shocked if they don't go with the Bicentennial flag seeing as its the one they're already unofficially using now that the old flag was finally taken out behind the woodshed. It's boring but not blue field with seal boring at least. And it has the In God We Trust.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept