Stadium/Arena Saga Omnibus

[Jimmy!]

35 minutes ago, B-Rich said:

 

 

 

Let's not forget that AT THAT TIME, the intent of those in OKC-- elected officials, 'business leaders' like Bennett and McClendon, and the locals/citizens, was to obtain an NBA franchise BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. 

 

And they used an opportunity to not simply and graciously TEMPORARILY "host" an NBA team that was affected by probably the worst natural/man-made disaster to ever hit a major league metro area, but to try and KEEP that team for their own and make the temporary move PERMANENT.   The history of that is here on this board, as well as on their own fan boards, and can easily be found on the internet for anyone who wants to look for it.   

And when the (then) Hornets moved back to New Orleans full-time, they successfully used WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY to acquire another team. 

Bennett and McClendon weren't the only jaggoffs involved in that screw job. But I get what  you're sayin'.

 

#disgruntledsonicsfan

[gosioux76]

1 hour ago, B-Rich said:

 

 

 

Let's not forget that AT THAT TIME, the intent of those in OKC-- elected officials, 'business leaders' like Bennett and McClendon, and the locals/citizens, was to obtain an NBA franchise BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. 

 

And they used an opportunity to not simply and graciously TEMPORARILY "host" an NBA team that was affected by probably the worst natural/man-made disaster to ever hit a major league metro area, but to try and KEEP that team for their own and make the temporary move PERMANENT.   The history of that is here on this board, as well as on their own fan boards, and can easily be found on the internet for anyone who wants to look for it.   

And when the (then) Hornets moved back to New Orleans full-time, they successfully used WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY to acquire another team. 

 

Nobody's denying that Bennett, McClendon, et. al, had an agenda in attempting to procure a team of their own. Speaking only for myself, I was responding to a comment that a market playing the role of stopgap host for a nomadic franchise isn't a good indicator of their capability of hosting a full-time franchise. 

 

In the case of OKC, no matter the intent of the business leaders, you can't claim the fans came out to support the franchise out of some subsersive plot to steal another market's franchise. They came because they wanted to, thereby aiding the notion that they can be a good pro sports market. 

 

No doubt, the OKC owners deserve all of the hatred directed their way by Seattle fans. But you can't deny that OKC showed up even when the team wasn't theirs. 

[FiddySicks]

On 1/22/2024 at 8:07 PM, LMU said:

SLC is facing the potential of being a toxic wasteland with all of the exposed chemicals/dust from the disappearing lake so in that regard it’s the perfect foil to Vegas.

Found the A’s new jersey sponsor patch. Looks a little bulky to me.

[GDAWG]

 

[FiddySicks]

I’ve said for awhile now that the best solution to the A’s problem is to just fold the team. Not quite that, but…

 

Source: If A’s don’t find a home, they could disband until Las Vegas

[GDAWG]

43 minutes ago, FiddySicks said:

I’ve said for awhile now that the best solution to the A’s problem is to just fold the team. Not quite that, but…

 

Source: If A’s don’t find a home, they could disband until Las Vegas

 

The Players Association will respond with "over our dead body!"  In other words, they are not going to allow something like that to happen.  There's no way this happens without finding some way to placate the MLBPA.  

[Walk-Off]

For several months now, I have been thinking that the A's might very well suspend operations between their final season in Oakland and whenever a new ballpark for them in the Las Vegas area is open.  Playing a few more seasons in Oakland is likely to come with too many strings attached for the A's and/or MLB to accept.  Crashing at Oracle Park for a few years might constrain the Giants too much.  Going straight to the Aviators' ballpark for the interim seasons risks giving off the worst possible first impression of the A's to people in the Las Vegas market.  Finally, playing temporarily at a minor-league venue that is in neither the Bay Area nor Southern Nevada (such as in Sacramento or Salt Lake City) comes with a high possibility of the locals being reluctant to support what would be a fly-by-night enterprise in their area.

 

As for how the MLBPA could be sold on letting the A's go on hiatus for a few years, I think that the answer lies in MLB staying at 30 teams by granting a single expansion franchise that would launch right when the A's start their hiatus.  MLB could put the A's players through a dispersal draft open to all existing MLB clubs in addition to holding an expansion draft to stock the new team.  With regard to the minor-league affiliates of the A's, either the expansion team could inherit the A's farm system outright or MLB could order or at least allow a reshuffling of minor-league team affiliations.  Finally, once the A's are ready to start life anew as a Las Vegas team, then MLB can grow to 32 clubs by having another expansion franchise debut alongside the revival and relocation of the A's.

[Sec19Row53]

11 minutes ago, Walk-Off said:

For several months now, I have been thinking that the A's might very well suspend operations between their final season in Oakland and whenever a new ballpark for them in the Las Vegas area is open.  Playing a few more seasons in Oakland is likely to come with too many strings attached for the A's and/or MLB to accept.  Crashing at Oracle Park for a few years might constrain the Giants too much.  Going straight to the Aviators' ballpark for the interim seasons risks giving off the worst possible first impression of the A's to people in the Las Vegas market.  Finally, playing temporarily at a minor-league venue that is in neither the Bay Area nor Southern Nevada (such as in Sacramento or Salt Lake City) comes with a high possibility of the locals being reluctant to support what would be a fly-by-night enterprise in their area.

 

As for how the MLBPA could be sold on letting the A's go on hiatus for a few years, I think that the answer lies in MLB staying at 30 teams by granting a single expansion franchise that would launch right when the A's start their hiatus.  MLB could put the A's players through a dispersal draft open to all existing MLB clubs in addition to holding an expansion draft to stock the new team.  With regard to the minor-league affiliates of the A's, either the expansion team could inherit the A's farm system outright or MLB could order or at least allow a reshuffling of minor-league team affiliations.  Finally, once the A's are ready to start life anew as a Las Vegas team, then MLB can grow to 32 clubs by having another expansion franchise debut alongside the revival and relocation of the A's.

If there are one, or in this case two, places ready for an MLB franchise, the A's could just go there and we could avoid all of these gymnastics.  You're creating problems in search of a solution.

[Walk-Off]

I would argue that John Fisher and his allies across both the A's organization and MLB in general have themselves been creating problems in search of solutions, and thus forcing "gymnastic" ideas to be put into play, ever since Fisher et al. decided last spring to bail on Howard Terminal and instead go full speed ahead on what has become an increasingly convoluted effort to move the A's to the Las Vegas market.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

2 minutes ago, Walk-Off said:

I would argue that John Fisher and his allies across both the A's organization and MLB in general have themselves been creating problems in search of solutions, and thus forcing "gymnastic" ideas to be put into play, ever since Fisher et al. decided last spring to bail on Howard Terminal and instead go full speed ahead on what has become an increasingly convoluted effort to move the A's to the Las Vegas market.

 

Also, this guy could have agreed to sell the A's to Joe Lacob, who was willing to buy the team. Then he could have taken his one billion dollars of profit as compared to his purchase price, and could have used that to get an expansion team for Las Vegas.

[McCall]

33 minutes ago, Walk-Off said:

For several months now, I have been thinking that the A's might very well suspend operations between their final season in Oakland and whenever a new ballpark for them in the Las Vegas area is open.  Playing a few more seasons in Oakland is likely to come with too many strings attached for the A's and/or MLB to accept.  Crashing at Oracle Park for a few years might constrain the Giants too much.  Going straight to the Aviators' ballpark for the interim seasons risks giving off the worst possible first impression of the A's to people in the Las Vegas market.  Finally, playing temporarily at a minor-league venue that is in neither the Bay Area nor Southern Nevada (such as in Sacramento or Salt Lake City) comes with a high possibility of the locals being reluctant to support what would be a fly-by-night enterprise in their area.

 

As for how the MLBPA could be sold on letting the A's go on hiatus for a few years, I think that the answer lies in MLB staying at 30 teams by granting a single expansion franchise that would launch right when the A's start their hiatus.  MLB could put the A's players through a dispersal draft open to all existing MLB clubs in addition to holding an expansion draft to stock the new team.  With regard to the minor-league affiliates of the A's, either the expansion team could inherit the A's farm system outright or MLB could order or at least allow a reshuffling of minor-league team affiliations.  Finally, once the A's are ready to start life anew as a Las Vegas team, then MLB can grow to 32 clubs by having another expansion franchise debut alongside the revival and relocation of the A's.

Where would said expansion team play? The only MLB-"level" stadiums that exist outside of MLB is Olympic Stadium in Montreal and soon the Oakland Coliseum. Any other market would require new stadium construction similar to the time frame of the LV ballpark, which renders the proposed solution moot.

[Walk-Off]

When John Fisher and other A's officials visited the Salt Lake City area recently, what they were at least rumored to explore was the A's playing temporarily not at Smith's Ballpark, the Bees' current home, but rather at the presently-under-constuction future home of the Bees in one of SLC's southern suburbs.

 

What I was thinking, then, was that this expedited expansion MLB team would be awarded to Big League Utah -- which seems to be the best-capitalized of the groups vying publicly for an MLB team in a currently MLB-free area (in other words, more flush with cash than the Portland Diamond Project or the Music City Baseball group in Nashville) -- and would play its first few seasons at that suburban facility intended originally for the Bees while a permanent home for the team in SLC's Power District undergoes an expedited construction.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

36 minutes ago, McCall said:

The only MLB-"level" stadiums that exist outside of MLB is Olympic Stadium in Montreal and soon the Oakland Coliseum.

 

There's also the New Orleans Superdome, which has been renovated recently.  Of a similar size is the Alamodome; both stadiums seat more than 50,000 for baseball — not that that sort of crowd is going to be a concern of the A's.  

 

More to the A's level, we've seen Major League teams in temporary homes in San Juan and Buffalo that seat around 18,000. 

 

I think that this idea of the team going dark for a few years is very unlikely to happen.

[OnWis97]

MLB is major sports league most reliant on having an even number of teams. I cannot imagine several years of an odd number. 

It's fun to play out the scenarios. Is every "A's" game just a forfeit win for the "opponent?"  Do we just use winning percentage with uneven numbers of games played? Does the schedule get 100% balanced so every team  (within each league) has the same number of byes?

I really don't see this happening. It's bad for everyone. Lost home games for other teams, lost ability for the A's to come into Vegas as a competent team, lost MLB roster spots. 

 

I'd say they'll probably have an OKC Hornets situation in Salt Lake City or somewhere. If not that, the options are to play outdoors in the Vegas heat, several lame-duck years in Oakland, or being a 100% road team.

[McCall]

1 hour ago, Walk-Off said:

When John Fisher and other A's officials visited the Salt Lake City area recently, what they were at least rumored to explore was the A's playing temporarily not at Smith's Ballpark, the Bees' current home, but rather at the presently-under-constuction future home of the Bees in one of SLC's southern suburbs.

 

What I was thinking, then, was that this expedited expansion MLB team would be awarded to Big League Utah -- which seems to be the best-capitalized of the groups vying publicly for an MLB team in a currently MLB-free area (in other words, more flush with cash than the Portland Diamond Project or the Music City Baseball group in Nashville) -- and would play its first few seasons at that suburban facility intended originally for the Bees while a permanent home for the team in SLC's Power District undergoes an expedited construction.

This would only work if MLB wanted Salt Lake in the league in 2025. So far, there's no inkling that they view Salt Lake as anything other than a potential temporary home, much less a market they're ready to commit a team to as soon as next year. And if they only want to give them a trial run, then there's no need to make them any other team than the A's.

[McCall]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

There's also the New Orleans Superdome, which has been renovated recently.  Of a similar size is the Alamodome; both stadiums seat more than 50,000 for baseball — not that that sort of crowd is going to be a concern of the A's.  

 

More to the A's level, we've seen Major League teams in temporary homes in San Juan and Buffalo that seat around 18,000. 

 

I think that this idea of the team going dark for a few years is very unlikely to happen.

First off, no way in hell the Blue Jays would ever let another team use Buffalo, even on a temporary basis. It's their Triple-A team in a city they consider part of their market. Secondly, you can't fit a near-regulation baseball field in the Superdome or Alamodome. The Rangers played an exhibition game in the Alamodome about 10 years ago. The dimensions were fine for that, but not for a full-time team for a minimum of 3 years.

[gosioux76]

30 minutes ago, McCall said:

This would only work if MLB wanted Salt Lake in the league in 2025. So far, there's no inkling that they view Salt Lake as anything other than a potential temporary home, much less a market they're ready to commit a team to as soon as next year. 

 

That's exactly why Salt Lake is so willing to be a temporary host. The MLB may not want them now, but a year or two of performing as strong hosts of a vagabond MLB team would do a lot to change the minds of big-league brass. 

[McCall]

3 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

That's exactly why Salt Lake is so willing to be a temporary host. The MLB may not want them now, but a year or two of performing as strong hosts of a vagabond MLB team would do a lot to change the minds of big-league brass. 

Yeah, which makes sense as a host for the A's, but not the "expansion team with the A's on hiatus" team. Otherwise, it's an expansion team that may be gone in a few years, rather than an established team where it's already known that they'll be in another city after that time.

[Ridleylash]

Really, if you're at the point where you're having to consider temporarily moving to a completely different state than the place you're actually trying to relocate to just so you can have a place to stay while you get a stadium built, you've officially reached boondoggle levels of planning.

 

Like, who in Utah is going to give a about a team that views them as nothing more than a stopgap because they don't have anywhere to play where they actually want to be? Literally the only reason the league approved this in the first place was a blind desire to rush into Vegas, and now Fisher seems to be tripping and bumbling pretty much every step to even get the A's there in the first place.

[Walk-Off]

56 minutes ago, McCall said:

Yeah, which makes sense as a host for the A's, but not the "expansion team with the A's on hiatus" team. Otherwise, it's an expansion team that may be gone in a few years, rather than an established team where it's already known that they'll be in another city after that time.

 

To be fair and to be clear, my idea is that an MLB expansion team starting up during a hiatus of the A's would keep playing -- and, preferably, keep playing in its original geographic area -- well after a relaunch of the A's as a Las Vegas club and the debut of another expansion franchise that together bring MLB up to 32 teams.  In short, I am proposing a two-step, asymmetrical expansion of MLB.

 

I realize that my overarching idea is complex.  Then again, John Fisher, his underlings, and the MLB establishment have been entertaining an increasingly complex relocation of the A's, so, in that sense, what I am proposing would be all too fitting.