This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article. Comments on this page are closed. To find the current version of the article with updated comments, click here.
December 27, 2011
More unsourced rumors of imminent A's-to-San Jose move
And speaking of slow news weeks and rumors, USA Today's Bob Nightengale chimed in over the weekend with this:
All signs and top #MLB sources say that the #Athletics will be granted permission by Feb to move to San Jose.
...and that's it, no further indication of who the unnamed sources are, why we should believe them, whether the permission will include a territorial rights fee to the San Francisco Giants and if so whether it's one A's owner Lew Wolff can afford, etc. Still, it was enough for some people to write entire stories based around an imminent A's move to the South Bay.
The only indication here that there's some fire behind the smoke is that the mayor of San Jose says that Wolff is "optimistic," while yet another unnamed source (this one "close to" Wolff) says he's "very confident" that a move will be approved. Plus, of course, that whole Jerry Reinsdorf thing. It certainly seems like something is coming to a head, but whether it's actually the A's and Giants shaking hands on a territorial handoff, or just Wolff and his friends trying to create momentum for such a deal, there's no way to tell from anonymous talking heads. Tune in again in February. Maybe.
This is all hearsay. I'll believe it when I hear it from Bud Selig's mouth! How can they move? They don't have all the land they need and the city still has to pass a refferendum before they can build a stadium!
Posted by Jose Patino on December 27, 2011 06:48 PM
This is all hearsay. I'll believe it when I hear it from Bud Selig's mouth! How can they move? They don't have all the land they need and the city still has to pass a refferendum before they can build a stadium!
Posted by Jose Patino on December 27, 2011 06:49 PM
San Jose Athletics. Awesome.
Posted by Jim on December 27, 2011 08:14 PM
it's ironic that if they're on the verge of getting what they want,
the a's (as in a daze) are continuing their "buy this magazine or we'll shoot this dog" (national lampoon) style stripping of their roster.
dumping their stopper makes it obvious that these rumors are a mirage. the phrase "irrational exuberance" comes to mind.
Paul, they stated earlier in the fall that the only reason they'd go through with such a restocking of talent (and dumping of their existing valuable pieces) was if it looked like San Jose was going to come to pass. The so called blue ribbon panel issued their decision during the November owners meetings and subsequently the A's have become big sellers. Don't know about you, but that seems to indicate the A's are doing exactly what they stated they'd do if it were coming down SJ's way.
Posted by Dan on December 29, 2011 02:06 AM
"The so called blue ribbon panel issued their decision during the November owners meetings"
Any evidence of this, Dan, or are you just speculating based on the fact they started trading everybody then?
Posted by Neil deMause on December 29, 2011 07:51 AM
Neil, several sources have been quoted as stating the report was made available on or around November 22nd after the panel met with the A's and Selig and requested the A's up the size of Cisco Field in San Jose from 32,000 to 36,000 seats.
Posted by Dan on December 29, 2011 11:43 AM
I doubt that "made their report available" = "issued their decision". The basic research of who'd win and lose from the A's going to San Jose has clearly been complete for a long time now - the holdup has been figuring out a way to indemnify the losers without soaking the winners so much that the deal isn't worth it.
That said, it'd be great for some MLB flunky with a copy machine to show Deadspin some love about now...
Posted by Neil deMause on December 29, 2011 11:51 AM
Indeed it would. None of the reports stated the report had been made public, just that it had been made available to the owners. And then all of a sudden Wolff and Beane start shedding players as they stated they would when SJ became likely or a reality. I believe in coincidences, but that's a pretty big one right there.
Posted by Dan on December 29, 2011 12:03 PM
They did say they'd start "shedding" contracts if SJ became a reality.
However, I don't recall them saying they wouldn't dump contracts if it looked like they were stuck in Oakland for a while longer.
It may mean the SJ issue has been settled in a manner acceptable to both sides. Or it may just mean the A's are once again lowering payroll, determined to live off MLB revenue sharing (like the Pirates, who also used to be good... and who's stadium extortion gambit worked... though it didn't, as it turns out, mean they would spend on par with other teams with new stadia).
Posted by John Bladen on December 29, 2011 03:50 PM
John, actually they said that too. Beane was on record stating if they were going to be in Oakland indefinitely they'd soldier on in a similar vein to what they'd been doing previously.
Posted by Dan on December 29, 2011 04:26 PM