McCall Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 6 hours ago, Walk-Off said: On one hand, I think that the A's ownership's lack of progress on both a new permanent home ballpark in the Las Vegas area and securing a post-2024 interim venue is fomenting plenty of leverage for the Oakland and Alameda County governments. On the other hand, I am concerned that Oakland and AlCo will end up overplaying their hand as long as their negotiators insist upon more or less a Cleveland deal -- i.e. a stipulation that if and when the A's relocate, the A's leave behind their intellectual property and history in Oakland and MLB guarantees that one of its next expansion teams be in Oakland. That last part won't happen. They'll just play somewhere else until the new stadium is ready. And there's no way they're leaving behind the A's identity, an identity that started in Philadelphia and whose colors started in Kansas City. 2 Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 There seems to be quite a bit of an overestimation at Oakland's ability here. That city government has been a complete cluster for years which is a big part at why we're in this situation to begin with. There's a lot of parallels here to the dysfunction with the LA Coliseum, which was controlled by a commission of city, county, and state officials and was such a nightmare that USC had to threaten to move in with UCLA at the Rose Bowl before they finally gave up control and allowed USC to control the venue and spearhead its renovation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 I tend to doubt the Bay Area is going to get a second team, regardless of the City of Oakland's government. I know it's a big area, but most two-team metros were established before many southeastern and southwestern cities grew so quickly. Without (hopefully) starting an argument of franchise- vs. city-models of history recognition, I think any agreement to leave the history, etc. behind would result in the official loss of an original AL franchise (not to mention the Swingin' A's). 4 hours ago, McCall said: That last part won't happen. They'll just play somewhere else until the new stadium is ready. And there's no way they're leaving behind the A's identity, an identity that started in Philadelphia and whose colors started in Kansas City. Maybe, maybe not. Times have changed in this regard. As I understand it, if the Twins ever move (a likely occurrence next time the team comes to the taxpayers with their hands out), the original AL team's history dies with the relocation (well, officially it gets put on hold). 1 Quote Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 4 minutes ago, OnWis97 said: I tend to doubt the Bay Area is going to get a second team, regardless of the City of Oakland's government. I know it's a big area, but most two-team metros were established before many southeastern and southwestern cities grew so quickly. Without (hopefully) starting an argument of franchise- vs. city-models of history recognition, I think any agreement to leave the history, etc. behind would result in the official loss of an original AL franchise (not to mention the Swingin' A's). Maybe, maybe not. Times have changed in this regard. As I understand it, if the Twins ever move (a likely occurrence next time the team comes to the taxpayers with their hands out), the original AL team's history dies with the relocation (well, officially it gets put on hold). But the Twins identity originated in Minnesota, not elsewhere before they moved there. Plus, it's rather market-specific. Very few other markets could work with the "Twins" moniker, and nowhere else is it anywhere near as relevant as it is in the Twin Cities. 1 Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sykotyk Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 3 hours ago, McCall said: But the Twins identity originated in Minnesota, not elsewhere before they moved there. Plus, it's rather market-specific. Very few other markets could work with the "Twins" moniker, and nowhere else is it anywhere near as relevant as it is in the Twin Cities. Los Angeles Lakers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDAWG Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 I think that the Twins will have their current stadium being renovated rather than get a new one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sykotyk Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 3 hours ago, GDAWG said: I think that the Twins will have their current stadium being renovated rather than get a new one. Where would the Twins even place a new stadium? Over by Allianz Field? Or, out by Mall of America and go full-circle on locations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VampyrRabbit Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 18 hours ago, OnWis97 said: As I understand it, if the Twins ever move (a likely occurrence next time the team comes to the taxpayers with their hands out), the original AL team's history dies with the relocation (well, officially it gets put on hold). I doubt the Twins are going to move. Minn-StP is the #15 biggest media market in the US, all the markets above them have at least one MLB team or two, and moving to a market that has one team is going to require an absolutely massive relocation fee, probably the biggest in history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 On 2/13/2024 at 10:27 PM, Walk-Off said: On one hand, I think that the A's ownership's lack of progress on both a new permanent home ballpark in the Las Vegas area and securing a post-2024 interim venue is fomenting plenty of leverage for the Oakland and Alameda County governments. On the other hand, I am concerned that Oakland and AlCo will end up overplaying their hand as long as their negotiators insist upon more or less a Cleveland deal -- i.e. a stipulation that if and when the A's relocate, the A's leave behind their intellectual property and history in Oakland and MLB guarantees that one of its next expansion teams be in Oakland. No thanks. We don’t want them! Quote On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostOfNormMacdonald Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 Why are people talking about the Twins moving all of a sudden? Target Field rules and they're in a great location that's already connected to local transport infrastructure. I don't think moving to Bloomington would be a good idea. I love target field and if they ever move I'll be so sad 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDAWG Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 From what I have watched on YouTube, the most likely outcome of the A's talking to the City of Oakland is that the A's hand back their ownership of the Coliseum to the city and that the City will raise the rent dramatically for the A's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 4 hours ago, GhostOfNormMacdonald said: Why are people talking about the Twins moving all of a sudden? Target Field rules and they're in a great location that's already connected to local transport infrastructure. I don't think moving to Bloomington would be a good idea. I love target field and if they ever move I'll be so sad Cleveland Rule -> Twins name not really working elsewhere -> Irrational panic 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walk-Off Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Athletics Nation: A’s, City of Oakland have “positive” first meeting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walk-Off Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 The Salt Lake Tribune: New renderings show how an MLB stadium in SLC could look 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostOfNormMacdonald Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 10 hours ago, Walk-Off said: The Salt Lake Tribune: New renderings show how an MLB stadium in SLC could look Honestly, looks great. Salt Lake Saints has a good ring 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sykotyk Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 4 hours ago, GhostOfNormMacdonald said: 10 hours ago, Walk-Off said: The Salt Lake Tribune: New renderings show how an MLB stadium in SLC could look Honestly, looks great. Salt Lake Saints has a good ring Salt Lake Bees is still a great name to use even for MLB. Beehive State, etc. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Is it 2029 yet? Quote POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digby Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Convinced that Rob Manfred was the victim/champion of some recruiter's error, and that he was meant to be the CEO of a small-time hospital group or pamphlet-printing agency, and he had never heard of Major League Baseball until now. He's been faking his way through ever since. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walk-Off Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 A "recruiter's error" would have been all too easy for Bud Selig to make. Lest we forget, Rob Manfred was the right-hand man of Selig -- who was himself an incompetent, corrupt, cronyistic abomination of a commissioner. Furthermore, Manfred was essentially hand-picked by Selig to be MLB's current commissioner; there were two other candidates (one of whom was backed by similarly incompetent and corrupt Jerry Reinsdorf), but favoritism by Selig seemed to be what swayed enough MLB team owners to pick Manfred. As for an example of Selig's cronyism, an apparently key reason why John Fisher is the present principal owner of the A's -- and why the future of the A's is in such turmoil right now -- is because one of Fisher's co-investors in the A's, Lew Wolff, was in the same fraternity at the same university at the same time as Selig. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 3 hours ago, Lights Out said: Is it 2029 yet? Manfred is a gentile but every photograph I see of him looks like an antisemitic caricature. Like, I don't like making this observation, but I see this photo and immediately slip into Jerry Lewis voice going "pehaps the Joyants I could interest you in?" Quote ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.