I don't know if San Jose will ever "arrive" the way Tom McEnery had envisioned in the past. Reaching 1 million is certainly a step towards that. In the meantime, at least San Jose can say it has more tall buildings than San Antonio. Woohoo! - er, um...Kevin Starr, a professor of history at the University of Southern California and a former state librarian, said 1 million people is a distinct urban threshold.
"When a city reaches a million, it reaches a certain transformative population," Starr said. "You are dense enough then to get anything done that you want to get done. So let those people that don't want San Jose to be a big city move to Redding — seriously. This place was destined to be an important American city right from the beginning."
01 May 2009
San Jose reaches 1 million
It's a development that doesn't really make a difference in putting a ballpark plan together. Still, civic leaders and pols pushing for a ballpark will undoubtedly point to San Jose's newly minted seven-figure population.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
51 comments:
the ballpark in san jose is a great idea. currently oakland wont let go so thats ok too, just make sure all 1mil people can get to the a's easily.
bart fremont to colesium is 25 mins
(new warm springs station is on the way)
vta 180 from diridon to fremont bart is about 1 hr
and vta 180 from great mall to fremont bart is 36 mins
when condos don't work in a ballpark village, build them as apartments, and let essex or archstone or avalon manage/own them.
to rule out the san jose option for a ballpark is a very bad move, all options need to be kept open to have the best chance at making the closest decision to perfection.
Obligitory OVER NINE THOUSAND! er... ONE MILLION!
interesting...I thought San José had passed a million about 5-6 years ago...
San Jose passed Detroit in population 5 years ago.
isn't Detroit's population shrinking?
over 1,000,0000 with a skyline built out of legos...haha. jk...I had to go there, but congrats to SJ, its been a long time coming. Finally a city in Nor Cal over a mil...but seriously change that height limit so people would actually be able to tell. If you want to act like a big city you got to look like one.
San Jose has one million and Oakland has 2.4 million in the Oakland Metro Area of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties.
It's irrelevant how many people a "city" has as far as a baseball market. The region, and accessibility to the fans in that region, is what matters.
Also, I've been to San Antonia many times and San Antonio has far taller buildings than San Jose. Heck, Oakland has taller buildings than San Jose.
Nothing really changed in the populace or landscape of the valley. San Jose simply incorporated enclaves of county land. In the long run, this means only slightly more than tall buildings in Oakland or San Antonio.
Well sure if you want to start counting neighboring counties Santa Clara County has 1.8 million. And Santa Cruz has another 250,000. And that doesn't count folks in southern San Mateo or Alameda Counties who are far closer to San Jose than many Contra Costa residents are to Oakland.
The height limit is SJ is due to the proximity of the airport to the downtown. Tall buildings don't make a city, density does. The notion that cities need tall buildings to lend legitimacy is silly and dated. Seems like SJ could use some more landmarks, a ballpark even, rather than more office space if it wants to become a premier city.
Navigator,
As ML has posted previously, 22 miles is the magic number for baseball attendance. That is the radius from which an MLB team draws the vast majority of its fans. If you consider the huge number of weeknight games played in MLB, it becomes more obvious why this is so.
San Jose and Oakland have comparable populations within a 22 mile radius of likely ballpak sites. The differentiating factors are (1) demographics of the population within that radius; (2) corporate base within that radius; and (3) nearby competition. San Jose wins on these factors hands down.
BTW, I've been to San Antonio very recently, and it most certainly does NOT have taller buildings than San Jose, and least not anywhere in the downtown core.
Size err...I mean height matters?? Give me a break--Washington DC, Paris France and other world class cities limit the height of their buildings--as dback said its about density--geez--tall spirals rising out of nowhere do nothing to create a balanced landscape---or a livable city--
Unequivocially, downtown San Jose is the best site for MLB in NorCal--better even than SF--which is what the Giants now realize. In addition to surpassing the 1M mark in populaton SJ is also the wealthiest big city---money talks and it translates into season tickets and overall support--
Silly LW and MLB to think that SJ is a better location to support baseball than Oakland...not to mention the 49er's and potentially the Raiders
If anything, this news will bolster SJ's argument to MLB that it shouldn't belong in the territory of the SF Giants. Seriously, a team playing in a "burgh" of 800,000 can hold hostage a city of 1 million over 50 miles away!? Lastly...hey Navigator, Oaklands metro population is actually 4 billion if you add all the county's in the state, all the states in the country, and all the country's of the world (LOL to your post!).
So Anon 7:43:
You think every Bay Area sans Warriors team should be located in SJ? Not to beat a dead horse from previous discussions, but that makes sporting events quite inaccessible to a majority of Bay Area sports fans. I will freely admit that SJ deserves another team one way or another, but let's not carried away buddy.
And yes, it is density not height that matters for making cities sustainable, prosperous and exciting in the coming years. Unfortunately, SJ is not at all dense.
dback--agree SJ is not that dense--as of yet--nothing keeps it from continuing to increase its density in the downtown core--and this can be done with limiting the height of downtown buildings to 20+ stories--nearly twice as much as DC's restriction
Second, I am not advocating that SJ/SCC have all the sports teams--rather pointing out that it is the first choice of many of our local owners including the A's, '49'ers and potentially the Raiders--something tells me they know a bit about economics
Last, accessibility issues will continue to improve as HSR and BART are added to CalTrain, ACE, and Light Rail hubs--and last I looked the freeway system had lanes to bring cars into SJ as well
We already know where most Oakland A's fans come from. Marine Layer has already posted that information.
Alameda County has 27% of all Oakland A's fans who attend games. Contra Costa County has 20%, and San Francisco County 13%. Marin County and points north account for another 6.6 % of Oakland A's fans. In total 67.3% of Oakland A's fans come from north and east of Oakland, with the City of Oakland having the most fans per capita than any city in the Bay Area.
Also, Oakland is at the very geographic center of the 7 million residents of the Bay Area, and has a far better regional transportation network with BART, Amtrak, and Ferry service, than does San Jose. In other words, Oakland is accessible to every part of the Bay Area while San Jose is limited to mostly the South Bay and the southern peninsula. That's the difference.
Also, a not very good Golden State Warrior basketball franchise has no trouble getting 19,000 fans on a regular basis to buy expensive tickets at Oracle Arena next door to the ballpark constantly denigrated by Lew Wolff and his apologists. Also, the Oakland Raiders put 62,000 fans in Lew Wolff's stadium on a consistent basis. International soccer draws crowds of 50,000 at the Coliseum in Oakland. Even the San Jose Earthquakes draw their biggest crowds in Oakland.
The problem is not Oakland. The problem is an inept ownership who has shown complete disdain for its hometown and has run this franchise with a one foot out the door mentality for many years.
Also, you're wrong when you say that San Jose has taller buildings than San Antonio. There's a building in San Antonio which fronts the River Walk which is well over forty stories just to name one. Also Hemisphere Tower is well over 500 feet. Get your facts straight about Oakland, AND, San Antonio.
Here's a list of tall buildings in San Antonio. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_San_Antonio
Navigator--you gotta get some new material---gettting very old---10,000 season ticket holders--and years of poor attendance and you want the A's ownership to try the same thing all over again and expect a different result--thats the definition of insanity--and give me a break on the height of buildings--who gives a f***--SF has lots of tall buildings but not much a sports fan base in the city of SF--
"We already know where most Oakland A's fans come from.
You mean, where they don't come from.
"Alameda County has 27% of all Oakland A's fans who attend games. Contra Costa County has 20%, and San Francisco County 13%. Marin County and points north account for another 6.6 % of Oakland A's fans."
Well, duh. As has been posted repeatedly, MLB teams draw primarily from a 22 mile radius. You don't even need the statistic; logic tells you the same thing. These numbers will be instantly reversed once the team moves to San Jose so what, exactly, is your point?
"Also, Oakland is at the very geographic center of the 7 million residents of the Bay Area,"
Sigh, this same tired, dimwitted trope. Geographic center does not equal population center. Both cities have comparable populations in the relevant radius, but San Jose has superior demographics. Any supposed advantage of "geographic centeredness" is completely neutralized by the fact there is already another team equally centered. And finally, access to Martinez and Vallejo is simply not as important as access to Palo Alto and Cupertino.
"and has a far better regional transportation network with BART, Amtrak, and Ferry service, than does San Jose."
Flat out not true. I'll see your BART and raise you a Caltrain, a lightrail, an Amtrak and an ACE. And once BART and high-speed rail get there, San Jose will be vastly superior in transit links.
"In other words, Oakland is accessible to every part of the Bay Area while San Jose is limited to mostly the South Bay and the southern peninsula. That's the difference."
This is idiotic. You persistently ignore the truism that Oakland's convenience to San Jose is exactly the same as San Jose's convenience to Oakland. Somehow, when we're talking about a San Jose park it's "You'll lose the sacrosanct East Bay fan base!" but when we're talking about an Oakland park it's "Silicon Valley executives will happily travel to Oakland in order to buy suites, in fact they'll choose Oakland over San Francisco to do so!"
"Also, a not very good Golden State Warrior basketball franchise has no trouble getting 19,000 fans on a regular basis to buy expensive tickets at Oracle Arena next door to the ballpark constantly denigrated by Lew Wolff and his apologists. Also, the Oakland Raiders put 62,000 fans in Lew Wolff's stadium on a consistent basis."
Supporting an NFL or NBA team is not the same as supporting an MLB team. Lots of cities can support those sports; very, very few can support MLB. An MLB team has twice as many games and four times as many tickets to sell as an NBA team. You also ignore the blindingly obvious fact that there is only one NBA team in the Bay Area, while there are two MLB teams.
"The problem is not Oakland. The problem is an inept ownership who has shown complete disdain for its hometown and has run this franchise with a one foot out the door mentality for many years."
Blah, blah, blah. Every owner except the sainted Walter Haas was a demon, blah, blah, blah. (Ignoring the fact that Steve Schott, with his penny pinching ways and one foot out the door mentality actually achieved the same average attendance during his reign, 19,000 as Haas did).
I hope you understand, when you show such consistent disregard for both facts and logic, you're really undermining your case. If you can't even admit blindingly obvious truths like "the team will make more money in Santa Clara County" and "attendance has historically been poor in Oakland," you're not going to persuade anyone.
Anon 5;17,
You obviously have great disdain for, and care very little about the current fan base. You think a great deal like Lew Wolff. Your premise is that we should move a baseball team to wherever there is the most money in a region regardless of how it inconveniences the fans in the entire region. Why don't we move the Tigers to Auburn Hills and the Cleveland Indians to Shaker Heights since there is very little money in downtown Detroit and in downtown Cleveland?
According to your logic we should build a ballpark wherever is most economically feasible to build a ballpark regardless of where the fan base is located. You conveniently forget that Santa Clara County is full of San Francisco Giant fans, not Oakland A's fans.
Also, if you look at a map of the Bay Area, you will see that San Jose is located in the very southern portion of the region. Therefore, the map tells me that San Jose is not accessible to fans from Marin County, Oakland, Walnut Creek/Concord and San Francisco. As a matter of fact, only 10% of Oakland A's fans come from Santa Clara County. Keep in mind that this County has nearly 2 million residents.
Also, I don't buy your premise of a 22 mile radius. Limiting yourself to a 22 mile radius is ridiculous. You have teams all over the Country which draw from various states. You're attempting to negate San Jose's obvious non central location by shrinking the possible market. And, that's exactly what Lew Wolff would do by corning himself in a southern pocket of the Bay Area filled with San Francisco Giant fans. It makes no sense.
SAN JOSE IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!! This is the same tired discussion that keeps going back and forth and it's really just getting old. I don't care how pretty a picture San Jose tries to paint, it's just not going to happen. All San Jose tries to do is show how superior they are to Oakland. Small market teams are small market teams. It is what it is. There are plenty of other small market teams in the leagues that are just fine where they are. If the Pirates(another team that has low attendance) can get a new ballpark, then there shouldn't be any reason why Oakland shouldn't one either.
When will all the San Jose partisans realize that when the new ballpark is built in Oakland, things will very much change for the better as far as attendance numbers goes. It's inevitable that the A's will end up in Oakland before they ever move down to the South Bay whether they get a new ballpark or not. And the San Jose A's fans will also continue to support the Oakland A's for many more years to come.
Oaklanders, just relax and know that we have nothing to worry about. Things are in fact moving very quickly behind closed doors rest assured. We are not about to take this lying down when there's a golden opportunity for Oakland leaders to keep the team at home where they belong. The city of Oakland is what it is today because of all the difficult times we have learned to endure throughout history. We are a bunch of fighters that will rise victorious in this battle.
I just can't wait for the day when San Jose once again realizes that MLB will never come to the South Bay. Maybe the Sharks should think about moving to Oakland...the city of Championships if they ever want to win the Stanley Cup.
Right now, Oakland civic leadership would improve their efforts ten-fold if they'd start holding their breath and stomping their feet.
I hate to burst your bubble Anon 7:09, but if San Jose doesn't happen the A's will in all likely hood move to greener pastures. The ownership group and MLB can't continue losing money in Oakland forever. It's just bad business.
Back on the mainland...
Well, it's official...San Jose is the only US city with 1,000,000+ residents that doesn't have a top three sports franchise (MLB, NFL, NBA)...however, this will change soon.
Anon 7:09,
It doesn't matter that YOU think MLB won't happen in San Jose. What really matters is what Wolff and MLB think.
Anyhow, why does Oaklands ballpark plans have to be so secret? As a San Jose supporter/Partisan AND long-time A's fan, even I can get excited over an Oakland plan that's kick A$$! Let's see it!: ballpark site/plan (renderings?), financing method (Oakland/Alameda sales tax hike?), corporate sponsorship/naming rights partner (Kaiser, Port of Oakland?). Enough with this secrecy crap! Let's bring optimism to all Bay Area A's fans; East Bay, South Bay, North Bay, Peninsula, etc.
And despite what Navigator (again) falsely claims, there are A's fans in the South Bay/San Jose; I'm one of the many. But, again, putting forth nonsense without any proof/facts to support whatsoever. I feel for ya brah...I really, truly feel for ya.
Anon 9:42 you need to get your facts straight.
"First, they have no place to go to — 70 percent of the baseball owners won't change the (Giants' San Jose) territorial rights. And (Wolff and previous owner Steve Schott) haven't ever lost money in Oakland. They have the lowest payroll. They get parking and concessions. The last soccer game at the Coliseum drew 47,000. The A's got 90 percent of that money."
-Ignacio De La Fuente
Sorry folks, but the A's aren't going anywhere.
IDLF knows about as much about how the owners will act on this as you and me. Which is to say - nothing. He can keep running his mouth though, it's pretty entertaining.
anon 10:27,
It doesn't matter what IDLF says either! Who the hell is he anyway?! What really matters is what Lew Wolff and MLB have to say about the A's future. Who knows! Heck, they may say the A's belong in The "O". But again, it's what they say, not what you say, IDLF, Navigator, anon blah blah...
ML, are you implying that his comments are most likely false? That IDLF has no credibility as a long standing Oakland City Council member?? And that the owners have in fact been losing money in Oakland??
Who the hell are you Tony D anyway!? It's what they say, not what you say, Dan or anon blah blah...
Seriously if that's what you think, then your comments don't mean crap either.
As a matter of fact De La Fuente co-chairs the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Joint Powers Authority, overseeing the City’s Coliseum/Arena complex and three professional sports franchises. I think he's a little more qualified to talk about this matter than any of us including ML who runs a blog and probably attends meetings here and there.
Is IDLF on MLB's Executive Council? Or the relocation committee? Does he have the ear of Bud Selig? No? Because if he doesn't have those responsibilities, he has as much say on the matter as any of us - which is as I said before - none.
His standing as a pol or on the Coliseum Authority has zero bearing on the T-rights matter.
"First, they have no place to go to — 70 percent of the baseball owners won't change the (Giants' San Jose) territorial rights."
And did you know, 87?% of all statistics are made up on the spot? Obviously, IDLF has no way of knowing this, and pulled this statistic out of his ass.
Further, even assuming it's true, there are other places they can go. The first municipality that decides they're willing to invest in a publicly-financed stadium - whether it's Portland, Vegas, Oklahoma City or Omaha - will trump the crappy attendance and lousy stadium that exists in Oakland. If you're hanging your hat on, "The A's will stay here as long as there's a dole and as long as no other city puts up some cash," that's a pretty slim reed.
"And (Wolff and previous owner Steve Schott) haven't ever lost money in Oakland."
Because they are on the dole. But that could change as of the next collective bargaining agreement. And, the fewer teams that need this dole because they have succeeded in building a new park, the more likely it is to go away. It is not a firm foundation on which to base a business valued at $300-400 million.
"They have the lowest payroll."
Yah, and that's just wonderful for A's fans. Let's keep them in Oakland so we can make sure they have the lowest payroll forever and alwayus.
"They get parking and concessions."
Virtually all professional sports teams do.
"The last soccer game at the Coliseum drew 47,000."
Well, that proves it's a viable market for baseball.
"The A's got 90 percent of that money."
Yah, and there's no reason to think they couldn't still do that with an A's ballpark in San Jose. Even if they chose to keep playing their marquee soccer events in Oakland. No matter what the wild-eyed crazies would wish, the Oakland city-fathers are not going to turn down free money, especially not after losing one of their two major tenants.
Let's not ignore the fact that IDLF was one of the masterminds behind the Raider deal. Clearly, this is an intellect to be reckoned with.
"You obviously have great disdain for, and care very little about the current fan base."
Actually, I have a great deal of love and respect for the current fan base - I am part of it. I have a thing for underdogs. The problem is, it's too small. All the devotion of the folks who are part of it does not make up for their small numbers. I honestly believe the choice is South Bay or out-of-market. Notwithstanding the emotional protestations of certain bloggers, South Bay is clearly the better option for the vast majority of existing fans.
"You think a great deal like Lew Wolff."
Because he is a businessman and a rational person.
"Your premise is that we should move a baseball team to wherever there is the most money in a region regardless of how it inconveniences the fans in the entire region. Why don't we move the Tigers to Auburn Hills and the Cleveland Indians to Shaker Heights since there is very little money in downtown Detroit and in downtown Cleveland?"
Because the the situation of being a one-team market is TOTALLY different than that of a two-team market. If the A's were the only team in the region, Oakland would be an adequate location. Not as good as SF or SJ, but adequate. However, that is not the case.
"According to your logic we should build a ballpark wherever is most economically feasible to build a ballpark regardless of where the fan base is located."
If the current fanbase is inadequate, than yes, it makes sense to seek a new or modified fanbase. Having an MLB team is not an entitlement. And economic feasibility is an essential part of building a new ballpark, not just a "nice to have."
"You conveniently forget that Santa Clara County is full of San Francisco Giant fans, not Oakland A's fans."
This is vastly overstated. There are more Giants fans, but there are plenty of A's fans. And many Giants fans will come to A's games if they play in San Jose. They may or may not change their primary allegiance, but they will come. In any event, the point is bringing in more casual fans. You place way too much emphasis on "the existing fan base." It is not sacrosanct - and it is fluid.
"Also, if you look at a map of the Bay Area, you will see that San Jose is located in the very southern portion of the region. Therefore, the map tells me that San Jose is not accessible to fans from Marin County, Oakland, Walnut Creek/Concord and San Francisco."
And Oakland is not accessible on a weeknight for the South Bay customers who buy suites and club seats. Which drive most of the profits for a modern MLB team.
And all of those regions will continue to have easy access to Major League Baseball in San Francisco.
"As a matter of fact, only 10% of Oakland A's fans come from Santa Clara County. Keep in mind that this County has nearly 2 million residents."
Again, duh. 2/3 of MLB games are played on weeknights. To get to Oakland from the South Bay during rush hour, you must allow 1 1/2 to 2 hours. Surely, when you were bleating about how East Bay fans would be inconvenienced by a move to Fremont, it must have struck you that this inconvenience would be considerably less than South Bay fans endure to attend any sporting event other than hockey? Of course it didn't. But all this changes if the team plays in the South Bay.
"Also, I don't buy your premise of a 22 mile radius."
Of course you don't. Although it is perfectly logical considering the fact that 2/3 of MLB games are played on weeknights, it doesn't fit your self-interested world view.
"Limiting yourself to a 22 mile radius is ridiculous. You have teams all over the Country which draw from various states."
No one said the market was limited to 22 miles. Of course, teams draw from further than that. But that is the primary market. To understand this, again, consider than 2/3 of MLB games are played on weeknights. Ask yourself, how long are you willing to drive after a long workday to get to a baseball game?
"You're attempting to negate San Jose's obvious non central location by shrinking the possible market. And, that's exactly what Lew Wolff would do by corning himself in a southern pocket of the Bay Area filled with San Francisco Giant fans. It makes no sense."
So clearly Lew Wolff, Steve Schott, Peter Macgowan, Bill Neukom, and Bud Selig know nothing about the economics of their sport and their businesses, and you, the brilliant Navigator, with your obvious emotional bias, are the only one who can see the shining economic diamond that Oakland is. C'mon, even you must see how ridiculous this is.
The Oakland A's find themselves at the absolute center of the Bay Area's 7 million residents. They play in a ballpark which is linked to this region via its own BART station. They play in a city rated as having the best weather in the Country by Rand McNally. Downtown Oakland within a twenty mile radius of wealthy communities like Rockridge, Montclair, Orinda, Moraga, Lafayette, Walnut Creek, Danville, Alamo, Kensigton, Pacific Heights, Marina, Hillsborough, etc.
Also, a downtown Oakland ballpark would put the A's within very close proximity to 80,000 workers downtown. A Downtown Oakland ballpark would put San Francisco's financial district a mere ten minute BART ride away. Oakland is by far a superior and central location to the possibilities which exist all over the Bay Area.
Even in a two team market Oakland's market share eclipses many other current Major League markets. There isn't a better market in the Country without a Major League team. There is no better place to go.
Also, if Peter Magowan believed that San Jose was a better centrally located market for baseball than the Oakland/SF area, he would have built his ballpark in downtown San Jose. He didn't!
San Jose already has two of the most exiting sports in the world playing in their city. Soccer and Hockey are fast paced exiting games with tremendous world wide appeal. Enjoy what you have, and stop poaching your neighbor's teams. Give Oakland the Earthquakes and the Sharks, and we'll talk about the A's. OK?
"The Oakland A's find themselves at the absolute center of the Bay Area's 7 million residents. They play in a ballpark which is linked to this region via its own BART station."
Blah, blah, blah. All of which has resulted in 40 years of pathetic attendance despite championship teams.
"They play in a city rated as having the best weather in the Country by Rand McNally."
You are seriously deluded if you believe Oakland has better weather for baseball than San Jose. San Jose has far more warm evenings than Oakland. Most of us do not enjoy freezing our a___ off at a baseball game.
Again, if you actually did an honest assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of your arguments, you would be more persuasive. Statements like this are not helping your credibility.
"Downtown Oakland within a twenty mile radius of wealthy communities like Rockridge, Montclair, Orinda, Moraga, Lafayette, Walnut Creek, Danville, Alamo, Kensigton, Pacific Heights, Marina, Hillsborough, etc."
All of which still offer inferior demographics to the comparable communities surrounding San Jose.
"Also, a downtown Oakland ballpark would put the A's within very close proximity to 80,000 workers downtown."
Again, which still offers inferior numbers and demographics to the workers available near San Jose.
"A Downtown Oakland ballpark would put San Francisco's financial district a mere ten minute BART ride away."
Nearly all of whom will continue to go to Giants games. For some reason, when you talk about Santa Clara county, it's a monolithic wall of Giants fans who will ignore the A's in their midst. But somehow San Franciscans will choose to go to games in Oakland rather than San Francisco. Do you have some kind of a cognitive disability, or are you just pathologically disingenuous?
"Even in a two team market Oakland's market share eclipses many other current Major League markets. There isn't a better market in the Country without a Major League team. There is no better place to go."
Well, San Jose is clearly a better place to go, and pretty much everyone who has an actual financial stake in this and/or knowledge of the demographics thinks so.
However, if by "market without a Major League team" you mean the Bay Area, I actually agree with you. The problem is, all another city has to do to trump this is build a publicly financed stadium, and sooner or later one will. If the A's are blocked from San Jose and their choices are "Crappy old stadium in Oakland;" "Privately-financed stadium in Oakland;" or "Publicly-financed stadium in San Antonio, Portland, Las Vegas, etc.", they will leave.
"Also, if Peter Magowan believed that San Jose was a better centrally located market for baseball than the Oakland/SF area, he would have built his ballpark in downtown San Jose. He didn't!"
The Giants tried to do so multiple times. Again, do you have some kind of a cognitive disability, or are you just pathologically disingenuous?
In any event his plan B, "downtown SF ballpark" is not equivalent to "downtown Oakland ballpark." Especially not "downtown-Oakland ballpark which must compete with an existing downtown-SF ballpark."
"Enjoy what you have, and stop poaching your neighbor's teams."
The vast majority of rational A's fans view this as preserving the team for the market, not poaching someone else's team. In any event, the existing fan base has not earned its sense of entitlement through historic support. This is not the Cleveland Browns, Baltimore Colts, or Seattle Sonics, who truly did get jobbed.
"Give Oakland the Earthquakes and the Sharks, and we'll talk about the A's. OK?"
OK with me, but I wasn't aware Mr. Wolff had appointed you his negotiator on this issue. Must have been because of all your kind comments about him in this space.
The Giants tried to build a ballpark in San Jose several times, and failed?
And NOW you think that the Oakland A's will get public support for a ballpark in downtown San Jose? And I'M delusional?
Also, siting in San Jose in August when its 87 in the sun, isn't my idea of a baseball comfort zone. I'll gladly take the 72* in Oakland.
"The Giants tried to build a ballpark in San Jose several times, and failed?
And NOW you think that the Oakland A's will get public support for a ballpark in downtown San Jose? And I'M delusional?"
Yes, I do think the A's will get support for a downtown SJ ballpark. The Giants were asking for a ton of public money, the A's aren't. There's a big difference between "let me come raid your public treasury" and "let me come invest $500 million of private money in your downtown core during a horrible economy." Wolff has already said he's willing to put it to public vote in San Jose; he knows it's a slam dunk.
"Also, siting in San Jose in August when its 87 in the sun, isn't my idea of a baseball comfort zone. I'll gladly take the 72* in Oakland."
That would be great if this were the 1920s and the games were all played during the daytime. Unfortunately, the vast majority of MLB games are now played at night. "Freezing your a__ off" games are a routine occurrence in Oakland throughout the season. Day games where it's significantly hotter in San Jose than in Oakland would occur only a handful of times a year.
"Again, do you have some kind of a cognitive disability, or are you just pathologically disingenuous?"
My vote's for cognitive disability. Navigator, you are indeed a trip. I believe that attempting to reason with you is about the closest most folks here will ever get to what our State Department routinely experiences when dealing with the likes of Kim Jong Il or what the Mr. Schwarzenegger experiences when dealing with the legislature.
Wow!
Hey anon 5:17, 12:27, 12:51, 9:57, 11:06 and 11:45 (yeah we all know you're same style of writing over and over again)...you're setting yourself up to be very disappointed in the end. The A's will not be moving to San Jose!!! You're starting to sound like a broken record with all your hatred towards Oakland and it's getting really old. You are the lone Oakland basher who does nothing on this blog but hate on the neighboring city and try to put the two great cities and the people against each other. You really do sound like the little kid at a candy store who won't give up until he gets what he wants.
Tell me something, do you really believe that if the new ballpark is built in Downtown Oakland that it would be a bad thing for the city and for MLB?? That attendance will still be below the league average?? That we won't get any corporate sponsorships including from Silicon Valley?? That the weather really sucks in Oakland for baseball?? That there wouldn't be any easy and close access to public transit systems linked with the rest of the Bay Area??? If so then you really must be crazy.
If you really dislike Oakland that much then why the hell aren't you a Giants fan??? You live in Giants territory anyways. You have said how much easier it is for you to get to AT&T park, then just go watch baseball there and don't step foot in Oakland again!! It's people like you who seemed to be totally naive to the beauty that Oakland has to offer, get over yourself please. SAN JOSE will NOT be getting a MLB team anytime soon!!! I thought this was covered in the past many many times. Even by Lew Wolff and Bud Selig themselves.
I can't wait to see you copy and paste my comments so that you can break it down one by one and tell me why Oakland sucks and why San Jose is the greediest city in the country.
12:28 said, "If you really dislike Oakland that much then why the hell aren't you a Giants fan??? You live in Giants territory anyways."
I guess I should be a Giants fan. I live in Giants territory. I grew up an A's fan among Giants fans. Wait a minute, let me correct myself. I grew up in a territory that didn't belong to anyone, but was given to the Giants when I was a teenager. That's it, the decision has been made for me.
Seriously anon, you should consider proofreading your comments before you hit the publish button. Your last comment was one of the most asinine things I've ever had to displeasure to approve as moderator.
Fine, I take back the "you live in Giants territory anyway" remark, but even you ML...why don't you answer the rest of my questions then??
Anon 12:57 has got to be Nav---same pointless arguments each time---no logic--no facts---just emotion---getting very very old--
"If you really dislike Oakland that much then why the hell aren't you a Giants fan??? You live in Giants territory anyways. You have said how much easier it is for you to get to AT&T park, then just go watch baseball there and don't step foot in Oakland again!!"
Isn't it the Oakland boosters who always talk about proximity to San Francisco and the many fans? MrOakland (whom I can only hope is navigator) at OAFC even brought up how players will be bored in San Jose after formerly relying on San Francisco for entertainment. Wow, way to play up Oakland! It's really that city which should be rooting for the Giants since they're seemingly living in the reflected glow. After all, they share the world's greatest mass transit system with abnormal rails and squeaky cars.
when will you guys learn that Nav is the local blog Troll.....every blog/forum has one....stop feeding the troll and put him on ignore...he s just doing this to get under the skin of SJ partisans.
Your ridiculous baiting comment should disqualify you from ever commenting again here, but I'm a nice guy so I'll oblige.
Silicon Valley companies will not flock to an Oakland ballpark simply because it's built. Some will go. For others it needs just as accessible to them as AT&T Park if not moreso. San Jose fits that bill. Oakland does not.
Wolff and Selig made statements 3 years ago to keep the East Bay in focus. That doesn't mean they are applicable now. Honestly, some of you are arguing that the South Bay can't happen, while others argue that the South Bay was the plan all along. Which is it?
Weather for day games is lovely in Oakland. It doesn't get much better. For night games, especially in April-May-September, San Jose is better to the tune of 7-10 degrees with less marine layer and wind effects. The average summer high is a dry 80-82. Not exactly sweltering.
"Your ridiculous baiting comment should disqualify you from ever commenting again here, but I'm a nice guy so I'll oblige."
was that directed towards me ML? (Anon 1:07)
"was that directed towards me ML? (Anon 1:07)"
No it wasn't. It can be hard to follow with all of the anons here.
"Hey anon 5:17, 12:27, 12:51, 9:57, 11:06 and 11:45 (yeah we all know you're same style of writing over and over again)"
Actually, 11:45 is not mine. Reposting to agree with my own post would be truly pathetic. None of the posts between 11:45 and this one are mine, either. Just to keep the record straight.
"...you're setting yourself up to be very disappointed in the end. The A's will not be moving to San Jose!!!"
And we know this because deranged anonymous bloggers say so either in all caps or exclamation points. Well, you've got me convinced.
I believe the A's most likely will move to San Jose. If they don't, they'll leave the area. Not for a few years, but eventually. The reasons are simple economics, which all the emotional rants in the world cannot change.
"You're starting to sound like a broken record with all your hatred towards Oakland and it's getting really old."
Hmm, another cognitive disability. You're just not understanding what I'm writing. I don't hate Oakland; I actually have deep affection for the city. I've rooted for both the A's and Raiders for decades. I spend a lot more time in Oakland than in San Francisco. I wish Oakland nothing but the best, think it has great potential, and hope it experiences a great renaissance.
However, it is a simple fact that Oakland is not a viable location for a privately financed MLB ballpark under current MLB economic conditions and with the Giants right across the bridge.
NFL, yes; NBA, yes; MLB, no. The demographics and corporate base is just not there; proximity to these is incredibly important in a competitive environment. Historic support for the team does not give cause for confidence, either.
Acknowledging these facts does not constitute "hating" on the city. Many of the more rational Oakland-only boosters have acknowledged them as well.
"You are the lone Oakland basher who does nothing on this blog but hate on the neighboring city and try to put the two great cities and the people against each other."
As noted above, I am not an Oakland basher, and if I were, I would be far from the only one. All the blog posts you've read here about Oakland crime, Oakland being ghetto, etc: Not mine.
"You really do sound like the little kid at a candy store who won't give up until he gets what he wants."
I just have no tolerance for bullshit. When folks come on here and misrepresent or distort facts ("the A's have had great attendance over the years!"), make idiotic arguments ("the distance from Oakland to San Jose is way, way farther than the distance from San Jose to Oakland!"), or bash a terrific owner who proposes to spend hundreds of millions of private dollars to keep the team in its home market, I tend to rise to the bait.
"Tell me something, do you really believe that if the new ballpark is built in Downtown Oakland that it would be a bad thing for the city and for MLB??"
It would be a GREAT thing for the city, but a bad thing for MLB. That's why it won't happen.
"That attendance will still be below the league average??"
Absolutely. It'll be better than now, but still below league average. Almost all the other league teams have new venues too, but don't face the competition the A's would nor the complete absence of corporate base.
"That we won't get any corporate sponsorships including from Silicon Valley??"
You'll get some, just not enough to be viable.
"That the weather really sucks in Oakland for baseball??"
Again, reading comprehension: I never said the weather sucks in Oakland for baseball. I responded to Navigator's argument that it was "best in the area." In an era when most games are played at night, it clearly isn't.
"That there wouldn't be any easy and close access to public transit systems linked with the rest of the Bay Area???"
Show me where I wrote something as idiotic as that? I said San Jose has equivalent transit now, and will eventually have far superior transit. Again, reading comprehension.
"If you really dislike Oakland that much then why the hell aren't you a Giants fan??? You live in Giants territory anyways. You have said how much easier it is for you to get to AT&T park, then just go watch baseball there and don't step foot in Oakland again!! It's people like you who seemed to be totally naive to the beauty that Oakland has to offer, get over yourself please."
Not at all. As written above, I love Oakland. I love underdogs, I love Billy Beane's maverick, intellectualize approach and Oakland's underappreciated status both as a city and a team appeals to me much more than San Francisco. Again, reading comprehension.
"SAN JOSE will NOT be getting a MLB team anytime soon!!!"
Well, if you're prepared to use both all caps and not one, not two, but three exclamation points in the same sentence, it must be true. Glad we got that cleared up.
"I thought this was covered in the past many many times. Even by Lew Wolff and Bud Selig themselves."
And of course, circumstances never change. By the way, do you read the newspapers at all? You might want to look up some of their more recent pronouncements on this subject.
"I can't wait to see you copy and paste my comments so that you can break it down one by one"
Your wish is granted. You're welcome.
Hey anon 2:21, I believe you have just set the benchmark for words per post on this site. Congratulations!
Also, I have to handed to you. You had me in stitches comparing me to the North Korean dictator. I will say that I'm about a foot and a half taller and I don't have straight black hair. Other than that, we are pretty similar.
"Hey anon 2:21, I believe you have just set the benchmark for words per post on this site. Congratulations!"
Thank you. I like to stretch myself.
"Also, I have to handed to you. You had me in stitches comparing me to the North Korean dictator. I will say that I'm about a foot and a half taller and I don't have straight black hair. Other than that, we are pretty similar."
As posted previously, this one wasn't mine. I thought it was funny, too, but I can't take credit for someone else's work. Glad to see you're keeping a sense of humor about all this though.
Choose an identity! It will be so much easier, and more fun, to insult each other if we didn't have to guess who is who based on time signatures.
Reveal my secret identity? That would make it so much harder to fight crime...
Post a Comment