Main Sections:
Main Site
Discussion Forum
    All Topics
    New Messages
    Search
    Last Day
    Last Week
    Tree View
    Edit Profile
    Create Login
    Guidelines
    Help
Game Chat
Fund Raiser:
Order Merchandise!

Suggested Reading:
(click cover for info)

cover

Mercury News Poll: Just Say No to San Jose!

OAFC BBS - All Topics: Archive: Mercury News Poll: Just Say No to San Jose!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By jenmed on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 12:03 pm:

The San Jose Mercury News is running a poll asking if it is important to bring MLB to San Jose. This is one of those little things that can help influence the discussion. If you support keeping the A's in Oakland (since that's what the OAFC is all about!), vote to say no to baseball in San Jose.

We will also be conducting our own poll here on the site.

http://forums.prospero.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=kr-mercurynews&msg=757.1&ctx=0

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By pachyderm on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 02:24 pm:

I did my part by voting "NO", so everybody NEEDS to do their part, too. Plus, "yes" have the lead right now, but "NO"s are more replies on message boards.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By tekgraf on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 09:07 am:

I voted. We need to get the east bay and contra costa county to vote no. Tell a friend.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By jerryo1 on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 09:21 am:

"NO" is now ahead by 5 votes.

Cast your "NO" vote, and widen that margin. Let's not leave any doubt in their minds.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By kevink on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 10:12 am:

No is barely ahead, but that 3rd category is also a No vote so it is actually winning by quite a bit.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By jenmed on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 10:13 am:

Ahead a bit more now, but not only that, we should really include "Aren't the Stealth, etc. enough?" So, we're really looking at a 55% - 45% margin.

Also, despite the fact that the rally was the lead story in yesterday's Mercury News, was featured in radio and tv segments, and was organized by the Chamber of Commerce (which is behind Baseball San Jose), the rally only drew about 250 attendees total. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for baseball in San Jose.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/8731042.htm

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By kevink on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 10:45 am:

The only thing I DON'T like about this whole thing is that if people in the valley vote down bringing the A's to San Jose, there will be columns written along the line of "see, Santa Clara county is GIANTS country, and no one cares about the A's here."
Last time the San Jose A's thing came around I read one of the most idiotic articles by a Merc columnist (not even a sports writer). I forget his name, but the whole theme was "we don't want the A's in San Jose because they are 2nd class citizens in the Bay Area, much like the Angels are 2nd class citizens in LA."
The guy didn't know sports and didn't do his research, instead relied on soundbytes from his Giant fan friends.
While I don't want the A's to move to SJ, I also don't want to alienate South Bay A's fans.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Sunday, May 23, 2004 - 07:56 am:

Kevin, I think you should know that San Jose A's fans who support keeping the A's in Oakland are even more devoted fans than those who just want to see the team relocated south so it will be closer to their home.

Mamy people travel from far to come watch the A's (myself included)in Oakland and feel they belong in Oakland.

We're not talking about a convenience store you'd like to have around the corner from where you live. A ballpark belongs in a metropolitan area with a diverse population and demograghics. And it takes many years to build a bond and a connection of the team with a specific city. The Oakland A's have this bond and legacy which would be destroyed and difficult to nurture in San Jose or Santa Clara.

Yesterday, with Reggie being there...opening his heart to the fans...was a true example of the bond I am talking about. Hard to explain but felt by many around with a lump on our throats.

So being from the South Bay and realizing the A's belong in Oakland doesn't mean you're less devoted as a fan nor a second class fan. It means you're well informed, emotional and yet a very realistic fan.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By eyleenn on Sunday, May 23, 2004 - 12:37 pm:

Latest poll results (5/23, 12:30 p.m.):

Yes: 625 (43%)
No: 714 (49%)
Other teams are enough: 104 (7%)

1443 votes cast so far

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By kevink on Sunday, May 23, 2004 - 04:53 pm:

Lil,
I am strongly opposed to the A's playing anywhere but Oakland. I agree with all that you said, but I hate to see the sentiment and articles that come out of a losing effort to get the A's.
Purdy and those guys will be quick to say "we don't want the 2nd class A's anyway" blah blah blah, and that does influence public opinion (mostly the fair weather fans, but we need those!)

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sactodavey on Sunday, May 23, 2004 - 05:17 pm:

common the A's attracted an average of 29k per game over the weekend with a lousy KC and a boring A's team that wins , now why do the A's need to move anywhere or even out of the colisieum we are doing fine right where we are.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By ssblip on Sunday, May 23, 2004 - 10:15 pm:

Sacto:

Because apparently we, uh, can't compete with the big-cash teams unless we build a new stadium.

Wait a minute...we are competing. Wait a minute, that's "we" as in you and me, not the owner of the team. Wait a minute, how did I take my underpants off without removing my pants? Who? What the...?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By simplefan on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 08:41 am:

Blip.. TMI on the pants removal buddy!!!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sjathletics on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 08:55 am:

Looks like I'm going to have to vote a few more times to fix these results =0)~

Don't you people realize how lame this poll is. It doesn't even specifically mention the A's and then you have all you A's belong in Oakland yahoos lobbying for no votes. The results are worthless.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By jenmed on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 09:21 am:

From Merriam-Webster:

"Yahoo: a boorish, crass, or stupid person."

Hmmm, calling those of us who support keeping the team in Oakland "yahoos" is a really valid way of making your point, sjathletics. And here I thought that maybe Ray Ratto's depiction of the executive committee of Baseball San Jose as "self important hyenas" might be a tad bit harsh. If your comments are any indication, I guess I was wrong.

I would call this poll fair game considering that Baseball San Jose also sent the link to its supporters and asked them to vote yes.

You have a lot of nerve coming on a site solely devoted to keeping the team in Oakland and calling us yahoos for that stance.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 09:55 am:

It doesn't even specifically mention the A's and then you have all you A's belong in Oakland yahoos lobbying for no votes.

sjathletics,

I'm glad you noticed the San Jose COC was advised not to mention the A's. That shows they are very aware they are trying to steal the team from Oakland. A team who has an established fanbase who would absolutely refuse to support this ridiculous relocation effort. Not only refuse but fight back.

But above all, that also shows the A's current ownership is once again, devious enough to allow SJ taxpayer money to be invested in an effort to lure the team, while they never really make any commitments.

In the last couple of years, Oakland spent a lot of money with HOK and formed a ballpark committee, which was completely ignored by the A's ownership.

They have a very bad track record of double talk and devious negotiations so who are the yahoos now?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By goldtymer on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 03:14 pm:

sja~

You show some real stones dropping in this forum since your beliefs and goals are opposite.

Since your city is economically driven by a bunch of technology companies and your population is partially deterimned by how many H-1 visas will be allowed in the country each year, perhaps you should pursue building a park for a cricket team.

My point is that the census information in your area is not worth the paper it is printed on because an alarming number of San Jose residents are not even Permanent Residents.

Your data is doo doo

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By oakland_j on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 06:03 pm:

sjathletics,

If you think the poll is so lame then why did you vote? You only think it's lame cause the Yes's are losing by a significant margin.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sjathletics on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 08:22 am:

goldtymer,

Have you looked around in the East Bay lately? The H-1's may work down here but they live over there.

oakland_j,

I was joking about voting and fixing the results. It wasn't worth my time to vote on a pointless poll that holds no political bearing.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By simplefan on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 08:23 am:

Is Fremont really part of the East bay? It seems so detachted from the REAL east bay.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sjathletics on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 10:21 am:

Ah, trying to disown Fremont now. I see how you guys are.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By goldtymer on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 11:40 am:

The point I was trying to make was that having populous and having a baseball population are two different things.

If SJ was a baseball market & the Giants were the SJ team then why was Candlestick always 1/2 empty?

If you move the team away from the Bay Area (Oakland) to San Jose, not only do you lose MANY old Oakland A's fans but you limit the area to SanJose/Milpitas/Fremont.

Those areas have a big foreign market built in that could give a rats ass about baseball.

I would imagine you could throw away a huge part of the market.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By sjathletics on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 11:54 am:

So not only is Fremont not part of the East Bay, San Jose is not part of the Bay Area now. You guys are very informative and I am learning a lot about our area from you.

How is it that the area would be limited to those three areas?? By moving south the A's would have access the the ever expanding South Bay, Salinas, Monterey, Santa Cruz, as well all the fans on the peninsula. I don't see why the Oakland based fans would have any issues either. I go to 20+ games a season there and I live near San Jose.

Your point is flawed goldtymer.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By goldtymer on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 12:24 pm:

If any of my points are flawed, it wouldn't be the first time.

Riddle me this...

Access to the "ever expanding South Bay?"

When do you expect the BART extension to actually finish?

How would you expect San Jose to actually handle traffic and access to such a ballpark?

Traffic sucks there already and there is no BART.

Will the tax payers vote to fund all of these items too?

Will the Govenator unlock some extra funds for your community to plunge into such projects?

Where would this park be built?

Will corporate dollars fund the stadium, the transportation access changes that need to be made, purchase the land and pay off the giants for the territorial rights?

Bottom line is, I may be flawed in some of my arguments but the whole concept of the A's in San Jose is flawed.

One big dumb pipe dream.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By eyleenn on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 12:31 pm:

See Ratto's "bags o' money" column, posted elsewhere on this board.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By nickb on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 01:15 pm:

Fellas, the whole San Jose talk is not just a dream but a camouflage. There is absolutely no way that Selig will force Magowan to turn over territorial rights to the A's - he's said as much time after time after time. Therefore, the only way Schott gets to move his team there is to work out a deal with Magowan. Magowan has said he's not open to this, under any circumstance. Why would he? Give up an ongoing revenue stream to the South Bay in lieu of a one-time payment?? Schott's making noise about the South Bay since a) he has no interest in putting up any of his own money in a park in Oakland b) he knows that he'll never really get permission to move to the South Bay c) when he finally fails in his bid to move to the South Bay, he can throw up his hands and say, "at least I tried to keep'em in the Bay Area" as he accepts a check for $250M from Portland investors. It stinks I know, but I'm convinced this is the most likely outcome.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By goldtymer on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 02:33 pm:

Spot on nick except I am not convinced it is Portland.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 02:38 pm:

I totally agree with several points raised by nickkb.

Schott is not interested in having a ballpark in Oakland and as long as he is the owner, both Selig and Schott will not let it happen.

I also agree that by now, Schott knows Selig will protect Magowan and the Giants investors who would give him a very hard time if he were to renig on their contract with MLB.

The Giants have 16 years left on their 21 million a year debt service and I doubt Schott and/or the San Jose taxpayers would want to pay off Magowan based on that kind of mula.

There's one more school of thought which has been recently floated...even Doug Pappas mentioned this on one of his notes just prior to his tragic death...
that is the possibility of contraction talk resurfacing again after 2006...because of that it is possible that Montreal will remain as sitting lame duck until that time...
and of course we know who the other teams targetted for contraction are...

no...not based on attendance or success...the teams targetted for contraction are the teams who receive large portions of the revenue sharing, Montreal being at the head of the list.

The huge factor that would derail contraction is of course the objection of the Player's Union. They would want a lot of compensation
for giving up a tone of jobs. The new CBA comes up after 2006 season when Selig was to retire. Fat chance.

The A's will continue to be held hostage by Schott until Selig and his cohorts decide its fate. Schott knows he will not lose money, no matter what happens.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By me_94501 on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 03:28 pm:

Good news on the attendance front:
http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=sportsnetwork&page=mlb/teams/037/attendance.aspx?team=037

The A's attendance in up by about 3,000 per game over what it was this time last year. Even with another painful postseason and personell losses (Tejada, Foulke), the team is still drawing well. All the more proof that Oakland can support a team

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By billymac on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 08:13 pm:

While I don't dislike the Giants I will say, if they continue to lose, hopefully some of the swing fans will come back to the east bay.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By goldtymer on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 01:36 am:

Contraction would not be in Snott's best interest. Frankly he loses money. Snott would be much happier driving the value of the team uo and selling it to an interest outside the Bay Area.

I would not be surprised if either a)Another extension is signed with the Coliseum (which would legally block a contraction move) or b) a transfer of ownership is executed, predicated upon the team remaining in Oakland to finish it's contract before the new owners can (and will) move the team to bumfuck egypt.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 05:16 am:

GT, before contraction takes place, MLB pays off the owner by bying the team a la Expos.

Either way, Schott got this team for $68 million when all was said and done. If he sells for $150 he would be making a nice little profit on top of what he has already managed to pocket since '95.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By goldtymer on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 10:54 am:

I understand but he will get much more for the team by pulling the strings of a market starving for a major sports franchise.

He could get 225mm to 250mm

Would you walk away for 150?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 11:05 am:

GT, he doesn't have a choice... Schott is one of MLB bottom feeder owners who are satisfied in playing the role of poor "small market" victim, happy to cash in on his part of the revenue pie.

This economic payoff system put together by Selig rewards the guys like himself (Selig) who's always whining they can't compete while they extort money from their host cities.

Schott is just another minion who will gladly take what Selig dishes out to him as long as it's a nice little profit of doubling his original investment.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By rono on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 01:48 pm:

Contraction is an illusion. It will never happen. It is just a bargaining ploy.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By goldtymer on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 01:58 pm:

rono,

That is a good statement and a popular view.

Woul you mind substantiating that with some supporting facts?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By nickb on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 03:45 pm:

Some people used to say relocation was just an illusion as well. We know that Montreal will eventually be relocated & sold since the owners do not want to carry on this burden forever. Who's to say that with this windfall, they couldn't turn around and pay off an owner of a team that currently receives revenue sharing (i.e., "bottom feeder") in exchange for him contracting his team. These are very viable options in my humble opinion.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - 03:52 pm:

http://www.roadsidephotos.com/baseball/bbb030801.htm

Contraction may very well be a delusion but hardly an illusion...

Above you'll find Roger Noll's report on the delusional death wish by some of the big spenders who feel the 'bottom feeders' should either put up or shut down.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By tekgraf on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 12:44 pm:

I'm wondering if the Haas family knew what they were doing when they sold the franchise to schit?

Did they think that schit would try to move the team?

What do they think now? Do they wish they still owned the team. And would they have waited to find a honest ownership or if not honest, at least going to keep the team in Oakland specifically.

Also what if the Raiders hadn't return. Would schit still be talking about moving to SJ?

"I's gots to know" (Scene from dirty Harry).

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By jerryo1 on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 12:52 pm:

"Do they wish they still owned the team"

I don't think that Walter Haas Sr. cares at this point.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By diamond_lil on Friday, May 28, 2004 - 01:13 pm:

Walter Haas sold the team because he was dying and he needed to put his family business in order and deal with capital gains etc...

His son Wally Haas still goes to A's games but I think he has no regrets for selling when they sold.

Btw, Schott knew the Raiders were coming back and because of that brought the team's selling price from the asking of 85 mil to 75 mil...later, after a bit of whining he was further compensated and ended up paying only 68 mil for the team...
And he played for several years with a no rent lease and got all the concessions as a side business with no revenue from that going to Oaktown, so he was royally compensated on his deal.

The city of Oakland was who took the biggest hit.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By tekgraf on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 12:07 am:

Yes, I know all this. And I'm quite aware Mr. Haas, Sr. is dead.

I'm just wondering if the family feels betrayed by the actions of Schott? Because the reason they sold to him in the first place was to keep the team in Oakland. But instead Schott starts playing victim.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By eyleenn on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 09:37 am:

My cousin is good friends with Wally Haas' daughter, and she has expressed the family's disgust and sadness with the way this ownership has treated the fans.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By tekgraf on Saturday, May 29, 2004 - 09:52 am:

Thank you eyleenn.

I know the former au pair to the Haas family and she concurs with your statement. I just wish the Haas family would come out in public and make that statement and say to selig and the bay area that we sold the team to schott to keep the A's here in Oakland. Not just in the bay area, but Oakland specifically.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By tekgraf on Tuesday, June 08, 2004 - 02:35 pm:

I've notice that the yes votes have now outpaced the yes votes. Yippee!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By tekgraf on Tuesday, June 08, 2004 - 02:36 pm:

Oops, wow, too much guinness. I meant to say:

I've notice that the no votes have now outpaced the yes votes. Yippee!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By oaktownfan on Wednesday, June 09, 2004 - 02:52 am:

Even if a Haas spokesperson did announce, it wouldn't get any media attention here or nationally.

Has Schott even spoken to the Haas family since he bought the team.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message   By 5thtimethecharm on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 11:06 am:

Say it ain't so, Carney! Carney thinks the A's should move to the South Bay. He says we're getting 10,000-12,000 per game, but over a full season we get 27,000 per game, on average:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/06/14/SPG4O75OAL1.DTL



A'S NOTEBOOK
Lansford doesn't bobble on A's future
- Susan Slusser
Monday, June 14, 2004


On Carney Lansford Bobblehead Doll Day at the Coliseum, the man depicted on the figurine put in a big plug for a South Bay stadium for the A's.

Lansford, a Santa Clara native who starred at third base for Oakland in the '80s, said the team "can't survive'' at the Coliseum, echoing statements made by Commissioner Bud Selig in recent years.

"You can't not have concerns,'' Lansford said of the team's viability in Oakland. "I have tremendous loyalty to this organization, but facts are facts, and you can't keep losing guys like (Miguel) Tejada and (Jason) Giambi.

"I'd rather have them go to San Jose or Santa Clara (than leave the Bay Area). As long as they stay in the Bay Area somewhere, that would be the ultimate, but they can't survive on 10,000-12,000 (fans) per game. ... If (a South Bay stadium) is what it takes, then I'm on board. I'll be right there with them.''

The fact Major League Baseball defines the South Bay as "Giants territory'' rankles Lansford.

"I was born in San Jose and raised in Santa Clara and nobody asked my opinion about that,'' he said. "Who gave Bug Selig the approval to talk for Santa Clara or San Jose? A lot of people would love to see them come down there. There will be heck to pay if they try to claim that as Giants' territory.''


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.


 

Questions? Comments? Corrections? Please contact info@oaklandfans.com.