Some other videos you might like: Rays reach (safer) stadium deal, stay in St. Petersburg 📺 th-cam.com/video/YG2UL87Dglc/w-d-xo.html A's relocation vote could impact 7 other MLB teams 📺 th-cam.com/video/NlDlx0ufxfs/w-d-xo.html MLB doesn’t want A’s in 2026 playoffs 📺 th-cam.com/video/0xQYbAxxXuk/w-d-xo.html Report: MLB could vote on Las Vegas, A's in November 📺 th-cam.com/video/H40kiBztcYA/w-d-xo.html A's players on "laughingstock" reputation 📺 th-cam.com/video/NybQnIwD36Y/w-d-xo.html Vegas "demands a winner", but Oakland didn't...? 📺 th-cam.com/video/MFAfXoejBdQ/w-d-xo.html The San Diego Padres aren't Bob Melvin's fault 📺 th-cam.com/video/LEDYvJCHJ68/w-d-xo.html MLB's biggest BUSTS of 2023 📺 th-cam.com/video/WzQPiTwWbgw/w-d-xo.html Can A’s afford to ditch “Moneyball” ways in Vegas? 📺 th-cam.com/video/z62UPHMpXAw/w-d-xo.html
I wish I believed this was a possibility. But if MLB thinks this relocation makes sense, I cannot imagine they'll think expansion in Oakland would make sense. The (b.s.) notion that Oakland cannot support an MLB team is a key part of Fisher's case for the move. Without that belief, the idea that moving a team from Oakland to what would be one of MLB's smallest markets, with only the vaguest of stadium plans in place, makes absolutely zero sense.
It's not just the Royals. The AL expanded in '77 to settle a lawsuit from the city of Seattle about the loss of the Pilots. When the old Senators moved to Minneapolis to become the Twins, the AL expanded and gave us a new Senators franchise (which would subsequently relocate and become the Rangers) the very same year. And of course the Mets' colours represent the old NL teams that they replaced, five years after the Dodgers and Giants moved West.
Was about to say this too. Back in the late 60s when the A’s were moving from KC to Oakland a Missouri Senator was complaining to MLB that the Royals needed to start as a franchise in 1969 instead of 1970 or 1971. Thus the 4 expansion teams started too early than planned in ‘69 including the Seattle Pilots, but the Pilots franchise needed more time to get their ballpark together & they weren’t really ready in 1969. So it was rushed & build together too poorly. As why by 1970 they filed for bankruptcy & Bud Selig & his Milwaukee group bought the team & moved the Pilots to Milwaukee. Converting them to the Brewers.
@@S_Over_Street the senator from Missouri also said ( if anyone remembers when the A's moved to Oakland after the 1967 season)" Oakland is the luckiest city since Hiroshima"
This happened in Seattle when the Pilots moved to Milwaukee and Seattle got an expansion franchise (Mariners) that started 8 years later. And it might happen again with the Sonics soon but with a larger gap from when they left (15 years ago now, time flies).
Brody- here is what I spoke to with the SOS ( Save Oakland Sports) The city of Oakland Supervisors need to approve the most recent agreement that they had with the A’s. Take a vote now and show MLB that they have a done deal with the city. This will show there aren’t any open items. This will also close any ideas of the city being blamed for dragging their feet.
1961 Washington Senators season was the team's inaugural season, having been established as a replacement for the previous franchise of the same name, which relocated to the Twin Cities of Minnesota following the 1960 season, becoming the Minnesota Twins
you could also add the New York Mets to that list of places/teams where it's happened before after a city lost a team, they were the consolation after loosing the Giants and Dodgers. Also the Winnepeg Jets in the NHL moved/name changed and then were returned as an expansion team.
They have to leave the A’s name, colors and history or no dice. A promise from MLB is not enough. If we get a new expansion franchise A’s that is great. By the way, it is Opossum not Possum.
My loyalty to the A's is geographic. I grew up in the East Bay and that was the closest MLB team. I still live here and want to support a team whose games I can actually attend. I love the history and the experiences I've had at the Coli, but if Oakland somehow got an expansion team (unlikely TBH) and they weren't the "A's", I'd still support them over the Vegas "A's".
My loyalty to the A's is unconditional. I'm an A's fan to my core...I have no connection to the city of Oakland would be nice to stay but it ain't gonna happen. To me A's is bigger than something to do on a lazy Saturday night or Sunday afternoon I use my local teams for that.
Why doesn't MLB just "encourage" John Fisher to sell to local ownership, and just grant him ownership of a future team in Vegas. He gets a team there, Oakland keeps the A's. Baseball has done this kind of thing before, with the Expos, Red Sox, and Marlins ownership situation years ago, and that was a lot more complicated than this would be.
@@hotwax9376 I have NY relatives who are. They were heartbroken, and refused to root for the Yankees (no self-respecting National League fan then would adopt an AL team).
@@Liggie55821 Understandable. I'm fairly certain most Brooklyn Dodgers fans (besides Larry King) and most New York Giants fans ultimately became Mets fans. Am I right?
@@hotwax9376 From what I hear, yes. That's why the Mets wear blue and orange, as a nod to the Dodgers and Giants. My father didn't follow the Mets, but that was because he joined the Army in their expansion year and was deployed elsewhere in the country.
Something similar happened in MLS with the San Jose Clash/Quakes becoming the Houston Dynamo, & another version of the Earthquakes currently playing in the Bay Area.
Honestly I think the perfect scenario here is MLB Owners deny the relocation request, Fisher sells, and the team stays in Oakland. MLB then awards Las Vegas the expansion team which they'd rather have anyway, that way they get their own franchise that is Vegas born without all the baggage of the A's. The chance of Oakland getting an expansion team is not a good one yes it's a big region and MLB will no doubt want another franchise in the area eventually, the Giants should not have a total baseball monopoly on Northern California, but I think they'll either go to Sacramento or force the Giants to give up the South Bay territory and award the team to San Jose.
I just feel like MLB would be better to just expand to Vegas with favorable expansion draft rules to jumpstart a new franchise like the Golden Knights in the NHL instead of an A’s team with internal issues as it is.
Like I said several times, if Fisher doesn’t want to sell let him leave and expand with owners that want to be here. A’s have had owners flirting with other cities not focusing on Oakland for many years starting with Steve Schott in 2002. Showing no interest in Uptown site in Oakland. Uptown was ranked number one site in east bay by HOK architecture firm.
Goes back long before that. The As drew only 306,000 fans in 1979, and in fact the year before there was a chance for them to be sold to an oil baron, Marvin Davis, and move to Denver.
@@ldfreitas9437Giants drew lousy at Candlestick when they were good and draw good with new stadium named Oracle. A’s had 108 losses in 1979. Do that in most cities you will draw bad
I've been saying it, if the A's move to LV, there are 3 factors that I can see that would determine if Oakland possibly gets a MLB expansion team over cities like Salt Lake City and Portland as you've touched upon: 1) How much public $ for a stadium site is Oakland offering over other cities? There's already some on the table, but will it be enough? Is there more to be had? 2) How much more or less red tape for a new stadium (local government as well as any potential lawsuits) would be involved comparsd to other cities? 3) Do you want to make Nothern California a 2 team market again? You already have Nothern California with the Giants. Would other owners not want the Giants to have that to themselves? Would you rather add an entirely new market? You'd have to weigh all these costs and benefits of one vs another market. In the end, of course, it'll all come down to $$$
If there is an Oakland ownership group that is vying for an MLB expansion franchise but they cannot work out the logistics in or around the East Bay on a ballpark (if HT or the Coliseum sites fail) then they need a back up plan to vie for an MLB expansion Franchise in Northern California. They should try looking into Sacramento.
While it's true that the East Bay has a large population and a rather wealthy one to boot, MLB is not going to place an expansion team in Oakland. Stadium issues will remain, and it would be MLB, not the Oakland government that would choose an ownership group and that group will have to have a solid stadium plan in place. Also the Giants most likely would be opposed to another team sharing the Bay Area market. The country is changing and evolving with cities and regions that were once small but now large. MLB wants to exploit these areas with the idea that TV viewership will grow and new fans in different regions will also grow the game. It will be a shame if the A's are able to move but if they do, baseball in Oakland will be a thing of the past.
@HHSGDFootballJPD Portland, Charlotte, Montreal, and Vancouver. The bay area is the smallest metro area in the MLB with 2 teams, less than half the size of the next smallest, the Chicago metro area. Dallas, Houston, Washington, Philadelphia, Phoenix, and Boston are all larger with only 1 team each.
@@Maulbert Never thought of or heard anything about baseball in Vancouver. It's an interesting idea, but I think I'd take the wealth of the Bay Area if I were expanding by four teams.
The trade off has already happened in the Bay Area with MLS so there's precedent for this. When the original MLS version of the Earthquakes (though the Earthquakes name was in use long before MLS was a thing via the NASL club of the 70's & early 80's) was forcefully relocated by the league to Houston & becoming the Dynamo after the 2005 season due to San Jose being unable to fund the construction of a soccer specfic stadium, one of the terms of that agreement was that MLS would give San Jose an expansion club within 3 years & San Jose would keep the history & colors of the Earthquakes for that club to use. The main reason why MLS agreed to this was because they wanted to reestablish a presence in one of the biggest soccer markets in the country. The ironic thing about the new Earthquakes when they entered MLS in 2008 is that one of the first investors into the club was John Fisher, the very same man that is determined to take the A's away from the Bay Area. I find it weird that he was so involved in the Earthquakes returning to MLS (and even building them a new stadium in PayPal Park) but yet doesn't really care about the A's to the point he is willing to forever tarnish his name in the Bay Area by moving the team to Vegas, a city that wants baseball but not this particular team or this particular owner.
The thing I don’t get is how in the hell are the A’s not viable in Oakland..but Oakland may be viable for expansion? How does MLB think? Just have LV get the expansion team and keep the A’s in Oakland. I haven’t seen LV begging for the A’s to begin with. This whole situation is being force fed to everyone.
Sadly, the only way Oakland gets an expansion franchise is to do as Seattle did in the wake of the Pilots relocation in 1969 and suing everyone involved. The only problem with doing that is, unlike in the Seattle situation, neither MLB nor the A's have operated in Oakland to an extent of total incompetence and/or bad faith (which was very much a question with the Pilots). And even in the case of Seattle, expansion resulted only (a) following sufficient commitments that the Kingdome was going to be built, (b) MLB had a second market they were interested in entering in the form of Toronto, and then (c) six years of fending off litigation were coming to an end and an actual trial was seen as imminent. Even if a similar series of events ensued in Oakland, you'd be looking at 2030, at the earliest, for a team... and that team would among other things have to pay (i) a franchise fee, (ii) for at least a portion of a stadium, and (iii) a territorial infringement fee to the Giants, who would by default be awarded what's presently the A's territory if the team moved out.
The biggest case against Oakland expansion besides the lack of new a stadium is the insane crime rate and dead downtown due to it. This is an issue shared by many places in California and its something they need to deal with. You can't allow mass theft mobs and homeless encampments to plague your city and expect businesses to want to setup there or even stay.
The people who run Oakland can’t get out of their own way. Who even wants to do business with them? I lived there from 2008 to 2020. I went back a few months ago. It’s unrecognizable. Not only are the A’s on their way out; so many businesses I used to go to have closed. If you want a chance, make your votes count during the next election.
The only way this could happen is if something similar to the NFL's expansion to Houston happens. LA was the first choice for that team based on certain conditions and benchmarks being made. LA failed to meet those benchy so Houston got the Texans.
The Indianapolis Colts ran by Bob Irsay back in the 90s would not sell the name “Colts” to Art Modell so they could be the Baltimore Colts again. I like Indianapolis Colts as is. But Raymond Berry, Johnny Unitas, Tom Matte, Bert Jones etc did not play in Indianapolis. Bitter feelings by former Baltimore Colts.
It could add up to a good shot at expansion. I know the mayor wants a guarantee, but I doubt that happens. You take in A's longer without demand, raised rent. Mend the fence with MLB (have to stop talking about A's, Fisher, move on) and yes, you get time to get your act together with the things you brought up. "No room for error" is needed when the time comes. If they do that, I think MLB probably has them near top or at top. One team out west for expansion in Oak and one east team in Nashville. And yes, it's Oakland born, A's weren't that. Raiders were and they are already gone. Tampa is about to get a deal done reportedly and LV vote is in Nov. likely, so the time to move could be very soon.
And how bad would it make John Fisher look, if another ownership team came in and got a park built right away, and started selling out..showing that Oakland was ready to build and support all along
As much as I love this, we need to recognize this “leak” out of MLB for what it is: a tease to get what it wants. MLB understands that the A’s fans have fired up baseball fans across the entire country (yours truly included) and by letting this “slip out” they’re hoping that it’ll take the heat off on moving the A’s. Worst case scenario for MLB, when expansion comes up in 5 years we bring this up and they’re stuck with egg on their face. Best case, this does exactly what they want in getting people to back down because “you’re gonna get a team back in a few years anyways so calm down” and then when the time comes everyone outside of the Bay Area’s forgotten about this whole saga and MLB gets away with this scott-free. With that said, assuming the Athletics name leaves with the team (and assuming the team leaves) I would love a scenario where the next expansion teams are announced as the Nashville Stars and the Oakland Expansions. Expansions fits with the naming convention of the A’s just describing the team (they’re an athletic group so they’re the Athletics, they’re an expansion team so they’re the Expansions), still abbreviates down to one letter (the X’s) that has a deeper meaning (the A’s and Oakland used to be together so whenever the A’s come to town they’re playing their ex). Just my concept, that’s all
Right Brodie: the A's were approved to move to Oakland in 1967. Key vote? Horace Stoneham's YES vote, the Giants' owner! He regretted it later, as for the first time since moving to San Francisco in 1958, the Giants did not draw at least a million fans in 1968.
Rename Vegas A's to hopefully an animal name Rebrand The Oakland A's as an expansion team The Supersonics moved to OKC and eventually The Sonics will come back to Seattle soon Just make sure that everything is in place That's the best way to go
I welcome expansion. I'd rather try my hand with a different owner. We keep the name, the new owner works in good faith on a new ballpark, and we get a fresh start.
Allegiant isn't set up for baseball. They're not going to modify their new $2B stadium to accommodate a baseball team for a few years. No way would the Raiders EVER go back to having to play on a dirt infield. And oh yeah, Mark Davis doesn't care for Fisher.
In the larger scheme of things, this would probably be the best result that Oakland could have as a resolution. Get an expansion team, keep the "A's" naming rights, etc. But Manfraud's awful treatment of Oakland does not lead me to believe that this is in the cards. The dialog has been so snarky, so uncivil, that I am more inclined to think that Baseball would rather figuratively shoot itself in the foot than capitulate. I'm seeing more of a Montreal scenario here than I am Cleveland...I would not have any problem either with just naming a new Oakland team the Oaks or Seals, or whatever, just to get rid of the bad karma of the A's name. Be done with the specter of bad owners, be done with circus tents, be done with the disrespect...Be done with it all...One thing that fascinates me - MLB took it in the chin during COVID. That's why they are so hot-to-trot to get expansion underway - in order to rake in those expansion fees. Waiving a relocation fee never made sense to me from the get-go. That's half a billion lost right there. Sacrificing a guaranteed expansion market to move an established franchise from a larger market there makes even less sense. Every single thing MLB is doing right now is running counter to that mission, which makes me wonder why owners are smoking from Manfred's bowl on all of this, following Fisher into the rabbit hole...
Although it makes a ton of sense, Fisher has trashed the citys reputation too much that people that don't understand the situation take his side. Plus Manfred detests Oakland fans now.
Future expansion into Oakland just isn't likely because there are too many components working against it. I'll name a few here, though I could name much more than these. 1) San Francisco Giants: Does anyone really think that if MLB surrenders the entire Bay Area market to the Giants via A's relocation that the Giants will readily give up that control for a new Oakland expansion team? Don't bet on that at all. 2) Bay Area Politics: I will keep bringing this up until people understand this point. Oakland and Bay Area politicians simply don't understand (nor care about) the business of baseball and how much of a financial investment it takes to establish and maintain a MLB level franchise. Oakland city government already flushed all of their chances with the A's down the toilet with their non-stop meddling, snail's pace progression in negotiations and lack of persistence. Don't look at your local politicians to give you help in future expansion. 3) No Ownership Group: Name one billionaire who lives in the Oakland side of the Bay Area who would be willing to buy an expansion franchise. Get back to me on that one... 4) Stadium Site?: If not Howard Terminal, then tell me where the new stadium would be located in Oakland? That dovetails back to my 2nd point. Will you have enough money to pony up for a new stadium? Hunger and build is a non-factor imo. It doesn't matter if Oakland/Bay Area pushes for expansion post-A's, if MLB doesn't see the value in it, it won't happen. Period. Business of baseball. No matter how corrupt it is, understand the business.
As much as I want to believe this could happen I’m really not convinced we would be the prime candidate in the west for expansion purely because of the way this league has treated Oakland and its fans and even if we get better owners we’re still in the same place that got us into this sorry mess in the first place
I don’t see it happening. Only way I see a team returning to the Bay Area )if A’s leave), is if MLB forces the Giants to allow an expansion team in the South Bay. MLB wants a Battery setup and South Bay is where that king of money is located.
The giant Stomper-the-elephant sized issue with any expansion team in Oakland is territorial rights. Yes, we are a large market, but the frustrating fact is that the Giants have thoroughly out-competed the A's over the last decades. Sad to admit that as die-hard A's fan, but we're in a bad spot and need to face the facts. I don't think expansion works here at all if the Giants are still so dominant. MLB has infamously shown no interest in changing this dynamic, so I think the idea is DOA. Sacramento on the other hand could be possible
I appreciate your reporting and your passion for Oakland baseball, but let’s face it, MLB does not want the A’s in Oakland or the Bay Area. The City of San Jose acquired the land adjacent to Diridon Station for a new A’s ballpark, but the San Francisco Giants claimed territorial rights in 2012. MLB backed the Giants to block the move. Now, the site of the proposed ballpark will be developed by Google for new offices and housing. One can argue that the positive economic impact of Google will be far greater than an A’s ballpark.
Do what the NBA did. A’s identity stays in Oakland with history for the new team. And Vegas would be old franchise but the “expansion” team with the A’s roster and staff.
If there is a chance that the A’s do relocate to Las Vegas, then Fisher and his cronies should have to forfeit the rights of the athletics name rights,colors and everything else after they move away from Oakland. Then MLB should let Oakland and Nashville or Salt Lake City have first choice of expansion teams.
Baseball is the one sport that should not move to Vegas. MLB should work to keep every team stay in their current market then expand into Charlotte NC and SLC Utah. Forget about Vegas
Oakland doesn't have a case for a new MLB expansion they lost the Warriors they lost the Raiders and now they are losing the A's Vegas deserves that expansion team more
I am glad some people are realizing that there are other cities than could get an expansion team, or the Athletics. Vegas isn't a great choice because of where the new stadium would be built and where the $ comes from. Oakland? I'll say it again, why should any public $ go to a billionaire's ball park? Salt Lake and Sacramento have really good minor league parks. Either do not have bleacher seating now, and both could have their grandstands expanded. Fenway once had a one deck grandstand. A second deck was added to the roof.
IF MLB were to give an expansion team to the Bay Area, I sincerely hope it would NOT be in Oakland. I have lived in the Bay Area my entire life. Excluding driving through Oakland on the freeway while trying to get someplace else, the only times I am ever in the town is to go to the private terminals at the airport, serve jury duty at court house, or go to Oakland Coliseum to watch A’s games. Luckily, Oakland Coliseum is on the southern end of town, so I barely have to cross city limits to go to games. Oakland is a horrible city with politicians who hate business and who are lenient on crime. People shouldn’t have to spend any more time than necessary in that place. There are so many better places in the Bay Area. If MLB feels the Bay Area is a good market for an expansion team, strip the territorial rights of the South Bay from the Giants and put the team in the San Jose area. Silicon Valley is far superior to Oakland. Or revive the old idea to bring the A’s to Fremont. Fremont is an affluent city with low crime that doesn’t get as cold as Oakland at the times of night games. There are numerous cities that have brighter futures than Oakland.
There's "NO" case for MLB expansion in or around Oakland. Giving Oakland - Alameda - East Bay a future expansion option is ridiculous at best, given many cities and areas have put up money to help build new or renovate parks. Oakland failed putting up money for Raiders (twice), Warriors and A's.
Truth. Of the 4 markets with 2 teams, the bay area is the smallest, less than half the size of the Chicago metro area, which is the second smallest, and it's also smaller than several single team markets like Philadelphia, Houston, and Dallas.
MLB would be handicapping 2 franchises at once. Oakland wants the A's and Vegas wants a Vegas born expansion team, essentially switching them up would be doing both cities a disservice (and themselves financially).
Your market compared to like Salt Lake City get they would build that’s why I think they would dance it open could be an expansion team bigger than them California as far as statewide goSend
Bring back the Oakland Oaks (ABA franchise, 1967 - '69) or the Oakland Seals (WHA franchise, 1967 - '76), and rename them as an MLB franchise!! Then again, regarding the Collesium, maybe not... ☹
@@brodiebrazil We all know the A’s owner wants to move because he is tired of winning every year, too many sell out crowds, and he doesn’t want a new stadium. The A’s are like the WNBA, everyone talks about how great it is but nobody supports them
If A’s stayed in Oakland and build HT it would end up being another empty Loan Depot park. Why? Because the cheap skate owner would find more escudes not to spend money.
I'd always heard that the reason the Royals started play so quickly after the A's left, is that MLB was settling an antitrust lawsuit by KC officials. The haste to get the team playing is why the Seattle Pilots, who started play at the same time, failed -- ownership simply wasn't ready yet.
Uh, you forgot the number 1 thing. The Giants will almost certainly never allow an expansion team in their backyard. The Giants repeatedly block potential A's moves to San Jose several times.
I don't believe MLB would grant an expansion team without Oakland agreeing to fully fund construction of a new ballpark, which is not going to happen. These owners want taxpayer money for stadiums.
Some other videos you might like:
Rays reach (safer) stadium deal, stay in St. Petersburg
📺 th-cam.com/video/YG2UL87Dglc/w-d-xo.html
A's relocation vote could impact 7 other MLB teams
📺 th-cam.com/video/NlDlx0ufxfs/w-d-xo.html
MLB doesn’t want A’s in 2026 playoffs
📺 th-cam.com/video/0xQYbAxxXuk/w-d-xo.html
Report: MLB could vote on Las Vegas, A's in November
📺 th-cam.com/video/H40kiBztcYA/w-d-xo.html
A's players on "laughingstock" reputation
📺 th-cam.com/video/NybQnIwD36Y/w-d-xo.html
Vegas "demands a winner", but Oakland didn't...?
📺 th-cam.com/video/MFAfXoejBdQ/w-d-xo.html
The San Diego Padres aren't Bob Melvin's fault
📺 th-cam.com/video/LEDYvJCHJ68/w-d-xo.html
MLB's biggest BUSTS of 2023
📺 th-cam.com/video/WzQPiTwWbgw/w-d-xo.html
Can A’s afford to ditch “Moneyball” ways in Vegas?
📺 th-cam.com/video/z62UPHMpXAw/w-d-xo.html
I wish I believed this was a possibility. But if MLB thinks this relocation makes sense, I cannot imagine they'll think expansion in Oakland would make sense. The (b.s.) notion that Oakland cannot support an MLB team is a key part of Fisher's case for the move. Without that belief, the idea that moving a team from Oakland to what would be one of MLB's smallest markets, with only the vaguest of stadium plans in place, makes absolutely zero sense.
I believe they are wanting this move because Fisher won’t sell. If he doesn’t want to stay or sell, what can you do but move him.
California shouldn't get anything until Governor Gavin Newsom is in jail.
It's not just the Royals. The AL expanded in '77 to settle a lawsuit from the city of Seattle about the loss of the Pilots. When the old Senators moved to Minneapolis to become the Twins, the AL expanded and gave us a new Senators franchise (which would subsequently relocate and become the Rangers) the very same year. And of course the Mets' colours represent the old NL teams that they replaced, five years after the Dodgers and Giants moved West.
Was about to say this too. Back in the late 60s when the A’s were moving from KC to Oakland a Missouri Senator was complaining to MLB that the Royals needed to start as a franchise in 1969 instead of 1970 or 1971. Thus the 4 expansion teams started too early than planned in ‘69 including the Seattle Pilots, but the Pilots franchise needed more time to get their ballpark together & they weren’t really ready in 1969. So it was rushed & build together too poorly. As why by 1970 they filed for bankruptcy & Bud Selig & his Milwaukee group bought the team & moved the Pilots to Milwaukee. Converting them to the Brewers.
@@S_Over_Street the senator from Missouri also said ( if anyone remembers when the A's moved to Oakland after the 1967 season)" Oakland is the luckiest city since Hiroshima"
Thank you for lifting my spirits Brody
This happened in Seattle when the Pilots moved to Milwaukee and Seattle got an expansion franchise (Mariners) that started 8 years later. And it might happen again with the Sonics soon but with a larger gap from when they left (15 years ago now, time flies).
Brody- here is what I spoke to with the SOS ( Save Oakland Sports) The city of Oakland Supervisors need to approve the most recent agreement that they had with the A’s. Take a vote now and show MLB that they have a done deal with the city. This will show there aren’t any open items. This will also close any ideas of the city being blamed for dragging their feet.
1961 Washington Senators season was the team's inaugural season, having been established as a replacement for the previous franchise of the same name, which relocated to the Twin Cities of Minnesota following the 1960 season, becoming the Minnesota Twins
you could also add the New York Mets to that list of places/teams where it's happened before after a city lost a team, they were the consolation after loosing the Giants and Dodgers. Also the Winnepeg Jets in the NHL moved/name changed and then were returned as an expansion team.
They have to leave the A’s name, colors and history or no dice. A promise from MLB is not enough. If we get a new expansion franchise A’s that is great.
By the way, it is Opossum not Possum.
My loyalty to the A's is geographic. I grew up in the East Bay and that was the closest MLB team. I still live here and want to support a team whose games I can actually attend. I love the history and the experiences I've had at the Coli, but if Oakland somehow got an expansion team (unlikely TBH) and they weren't the "A's", I'd still support them over the Vegas "A's".
My loyalty to the A's is unconditional. I'm an A's fan to my core...I have no connection to the city of Oakland would be nice to stay but it ain't gonna happen. To me A's is bigger than something to do on a lazy Saturday night or Sunday afternoon I use my local teams for that.
Why doesn't MLB just "encourage" John Fisher to sell to local ownership, and just grant him ownership of a future team in Vegas. He gets a team there, Oakland keeps the A's. Baseball has done this kind of thing before, with the Expos, Red Sox, and Marlins ownership situation years ago, and that was a lot more complicated than this would be.
MLB would much rather forfeit a $500 million relocation fee than a $2 billion expansion fee; and I don't think Fisher has $2 billion available.
as a new yorker, i cry for oakland this is going to be a tough story
Are you old enough to remember when the Dodgers and Giants were both there?
@@hotwax9376 I have NY relatives who are. They were heartbroken, and refused to root for the Yankees (no self-respecting National League fan then would adopt an AL team).
@@Liggie55821 Understandable. I'm fairly certain most Brooklyn Dodgers fans (besides Larry King) and most New York Giants fans ultimately became Mets fans. Am I right?
@@805fillmore I don't have any relatives who were on the West Coast at the time. They were all in NYC or overseas.
@@hotwax9376 From what I hear, yes. That's why the Mets wear blue and orange, as a nod to the Dodgers and Giants. My father didn't follow the Mets, but that was because he joined the Army in their expansion year and was deployed elsewhere in the country.
Something similar happened in MLS with the San Jose Clash/Quakes becoming the Houston Dynamo, & another version of the Earthquakes currently playing in the Bay Area.
Looks like the Browns - Ravens drama from 1995 but Cleveland got their team back in 1999 as the Browns with all the colors, history, records, etc.
Honestly I think the perfect scenario here is MLB Owners deny the relocation request, Fisher sells, and the team stays in Oakland. MLB then awards Las Vegas the expansion team which they'd rather have anyway, that way they get their own franchise that is Vegas born without all the baggage of the A's. The chance of Oakland getting an expansion team is not a good one yes it's a big region and MLB will no doubt want another franchise in the area eventually, the Giants should not have a total baseball monopoly on Northern California, but I think they'll either go to Sacramento or force the Giants to give up the South Bay territory and award the team to San Jose.
You’re totally right, I mean even Seattle might be getting the Sonics back soon
Your awesome brother, you keep my spirit up.
"I know folks, who smoke crack to make more sense than you" - Ex convict, Austin Powers 3 / Gold Member / 2002.
The Houston Oilers are another team I think about. The Oilers left Houston in 1996 and the NFL granted Houston the Texans in 1999.
I just feel like MLB would be better to just expand to Vegas with favorable expansion draft rules to jumpstart a new franchise like the Golden Knights in the NHL instead of an A’s team with internal issues as it is.
Like I said several times, if Fisher doesn’t want to sell let him leave and expand with owners that want to be here. A’s have had owners flirting with other cities not focusing on Oakland for many years starting with Steve Schott in 2002. Showing no interest in Uptown site in Oakland. Uptown was ranked number one site in east bay by HOK architecture firm.
Goes back long before that. The As drew only 306,000 fans in 1979, and in fact the year before there was a chance for them to be sold to an oil baron, Marvin Davis, and move to Denver.
@@ldfreitas9437Giants drew lousy at Candlestick when they were good and draw good with new stadium named Oracle. A’s had 108 losses in 1979. Do that in most cities you will draw bad
I love the idea, but do you think the land would be available?
The Oakland Opossums? I like it.😊
I thought the exact same thing. I can see this happening for Oakland as well, and not just keep the name but also new owners!!!
I've been saying it, if the A's move to LV, there are 3 factors that I can see that would determine if Oakland possibly gets a MLB expansion team over cities like Salt Lake City and Portland as you've touched upon:
1) How much public $ for a stadium site is Oakland offering over other cities? There's already some on the table, but will it be enough? Is there more to be had?
2) How much more or less red tape for a new stadium (local government as well as any potential lawsuits) would be involved comparsd to other cities?
3) Do you want to make Nothern California a 2 team market again? You already have Nothern California with the Giants. Would other owners not want the Giants to have that to themselves? Would you rather add an entirely new market?
You'd have to weigh all these costs and benefits of one vs another market. In the end, of course, it'll all come down to $$$
If there is an Oakland ownership group that is vying for an MLB expansion franchise but they cannot work out the logistics in or around the East Bay on a ballpark (if HT or the Coliseum sites fail) then they need a back up plan to vie for an MLB expansion Franchise in Northern California. They should try looking into Sacramento.
While it's true that the East Bay has a large population and a rather wealthy one to boot, MLB is not going to place an expansion team in Oakland. Stadium issues will remain, and it would be MLB, not the Oakland government that would choose an ownership group and that group will have to have a solid stadium plan in place. Also the Giants most likely would be opposed to another team sharing the Bay Area market. The country is changing and evolving with cities and regions that were once small but now large. MLB wants to exploit these areas with the idea that TV viewership will grow and new fans in different regions will also grow the game. It will be a shame if the A's are able to move but if they do, baseball in Oakland will be a thing of the past.
If the As was in Vegas already and they were adding 4 expanison teams, would Oakland be among the cities they'd want to add?
No dice.
Okay... what are your four cities and why choose are you choosing each one and not Oakland?
@HHSGDFootballJPD Portland, Charlotte, Montreal, and Vancouver. The bay area is the smallest metro area in the MLB with 2 teams, less than half the size of the next smallest, the Chicago metro area. Dallas, Houston, Washington, Philadelphia, Phoenix, and Boston are all larger with only 1 team each.
@@Maulbert Never thought of or heard anything about baseball in Vancouver.
It's an interesting idea, but I think I'd take the wealth of the Bay Area if I were expanding by four teams.
@@HHSGDFootballJPD The Bay area would still have a team.
The trade off has already happened in the Bay Area with MLS so there's precedent for this. When the original MLS version of the Earthquakes (though the Earthquakes name was in use long before MLS was a thing via the NASL club of the 70's & early 80's) was forcefully relocated by the league to Houston & becoming the Dynamo after the 2005 season due to San Jose being unable to fund the construction of a soccer specfic stadium, one of the terms of that agreement was that MLS would give San Jose an expansion club within 3 years & San Jose would keep the history & colors of the Earthquakes for that club to use. The main reason why MLS agreed to this was because they wanted to reestablish a presence in one of the biggest soccer markets in the country. The ironic thing about the new Earthquakes when they entered MLS in 2008 is that one of the first investors into the club was John Fisher, the very same man that is determined to take the A's away from the Bay Area. I find it weird that he was so involved in the Earthquakes returning to MLS (and even building them a new stadium in PayPal Park) but yet doesn't really care about the A's to the point he is willing to forever tarnish his name in the Bay Area by moving the team to Vegas, a city that wants baseball but not this particular team or this particular owner.
The thing I don’t get is how in the hell are the A’s not viable in Oakland..but Oakland may be viable for expansion? How does MLB think? Just have LV get the expansion team and keep the A’s in Oakland. I haven’t seen LV begging for the A’s to begin with. This whole situation is being force fed to everyone.
@togoandmoss yeah excited to make money from visiting fans no different from the Raiders lame ass situation in Las vergas!
One of MLB problems has apparently been solved Tampa Bay has reached an agreement on a new ballpark in St Petersburg
Brodie if you read this I really enjoyed your videos thank you my friend
Sadly, the only way Oakland gets an expansion franchise is to do as Seattle did in the wake of the Pilots relocation in 1969 and suing everyone involved. The only problem with doing that is, unlike in the Seattle situation, neither MLB nor the A's have operated in Oakland to an extent of total incompetence and/or bad faith (which was very much a question with the Pilots). And even in the case of Seattle, expansion resulted only (a) following sufficient commitments that the Kingdome was going to be built, (b) MLB had a second market they were interested in entering in the form of Toronto, and then (c) six years of fending off litigation were coming to an end and an actual trial was seen as imminent. Even if a similar series of events ensued in Oakland, you'd be looking at 2030, at the earliest, for a team... and that team would among other things have to pay (i) a franchise fee, (ii) for at least a portion of a stadium, and (iii) a territorial infringement fee to the Giants, who would by default be awarded what's presently the A's territory if the team moved out.
San jose would be the best option for mlb expansion, not oakland.
Unfortunately that other team is standing in the way of that possibility.
The biggest case against Oakland expansion besides the lack of new a stadium is the insane crime rate and dead downtown due to it. This is an issue shared by many places in California and its something they need to deal with. You can't allow mass theft mobs and homeless encampments to plague your city and expect businesses to want to setup there or even stay.
The people who run Oakland can’t get out of their own way. Who even wants to do business with them? I lived there from 2008 to 2020. I went back a few months ago. It’s unrecognizable. Not only are the A’s on their way out; so many businesses I used to go to have closed. If you want a chance, make your votes count during the next election.
The only way this could happen is if something similar to the NFL's expansion to Houston happens. LA was the first choice for that team based on certain conditions and benchmarks being made. LA failed to meet those benchy so Houston got the Texans.
The Indianapolis Colts ran by Bob Irsay back in the 90s would not sell the name “Colts” to Art Modell so they could be the Baltimore Colts again. I like Indianapolis Colts as is. But Raymond Berry, Johnny Unitas, Tom Matte, Bert Jones etc did not play in Indianapolis. Bitter feelings by former Baltimore Colts.
It could add up to a good shot at expansion. I know the mayor wants a guarantee, but I doubt that happens. You take in A's longer without demand, raised rent. Mend the fence with MLB (have to stop talking about A's, Fisher, move on) and yes, you get time to get your act together with the things you brought up. "No room for error" is needed when the time comes. If they do that, I think MLB probably has them near top or at top. One team out west for expansion in Oak and one east team in Nashville. And yes, it's Oakland born, A's weren't that. Raiders were and they are already gone.
Tampa is about to get a deal done reportedly and LV vote is in Nov. likely, so the time to move could be very soon.
And how bad would it make John Fisher look, if another ownership team came in and got a park built right away, and started selling out..showing that Oakland was ready to build and support all along
As much as I love this, we need to recognize this “leak” out of MLB for what it is: a tease to get what it wants. MLB understands that the A’s fans have fired up baseball fans across the entire country (yours truly included) and by letting this “slip out” they’re hoping that it’ll take the heat off on moving the A’s. Worst case scenario for MLB, when expansion comes up in 5 years we bring this up and they’re stuck with egg on their face. Best case, this does exactly what they want in getting people to back down because “you’re gonna get a team back in a few years anyways so calm down” and then when the time comes everyone outside of the Bay Area’s forgotten about this whole saga and MLB gets away with this scott-free.
With that said, assuming the Athletics name leaves with the team (and assuming the team leaves) I would love a scenario where the next expansion teams are announced as the Nashville Stars and the Oakland Expansions. Expansions fits with the naming convention of the A’s just describing the team (they’re an athletic group so they’re the Athletics, they’re an expansion team so they’re the Expansions), still abbreviates down to one letter (the X’s) that has a deeper meaning (the A’s and Oakland used to be together so whenever the A’s come to town they’re playing their ex). Just my concept, that’s all
Right Brodie: the A's were approved to move to Oakland in 1967. Key vote? Horace Stoneham's YES vote, the Giants' owner! He regretted it later, as for the first time since moving to San Francisco in 1958, the Giants did not draw at least a million fans in 1968.
$2 Billion expansion fee is cheaper than it would cost to buy the A's outright. So it makes the same amount of sense as buying the team.
good point, this was something i realized right after recording.
Rename Vegas A's to hopefully an animal name
Rebrand The Oakland A's as an expansion team
The Supersonics moved to OKC and eventually The Sonics will come back to Seattle soon
Just make sure that everything is in place
That's the best way to go
What you talking about Willis?
We need green and gold colors
I welcome expansion. I'd rather try my hand with a different owner. We keep the name, the new owner works in good faith on a new ballpark, and we get a fresh start.
You forgot to mention Seattle still owns the rights to the Supersonics name
Although the OKC Thunder has the teams records like the 1979 NBA Championship
Why couldn’t the A’s play in Allegiant while new baseball only stadium is built?
Allegiant isn't set up for baseball. They're not going to modify their new $2B stadium to accommodate a baseball team for a few years. No way would the Raiders EVER go back to having to play on a dirt infield. And oh yeah, Mark Davis doesn't care for Fisher.
In the larger scheme of things, this would probably be the best result that Oakland could have as a resolution. Get an expansion team, keep the "A's" naming rights, etc. But Manfraud's awful treatment of Oakland does not lead me to believe that this is in the cards. The dialog has been so snarky, so uncivil, that I am more inclined to think that Baseball would rather figuratively shoot itself in the foot than capitulate. I'm seeing more of a Montreal scenario here than I am Cleveland...I would not have any problem either with just naming a new Oakland team the Oaks or Seals, or whatever, just to get rid of the bad karma of the A's name. Be done with the specter of bad owners, be done with circus tents, be done with the disrespect...Be done with it all...One thing that fascinates me - MLB took it in the chin during COVID. That's why they are so hot-to-trot to get expansion underway - in order to rake in those expansion fees. Waiving a relocation fee never made sense to me from the get-go. That's half a billion lost right there. Sacrificing a guaranteed expansion market to move an established franchise from a larger market there makes even less sense. Every single thing MLB is doing right now is running counter to that mission, which makes me wonder why owners are smoking from Manfred's bowl on all of this, following Fisher into the rabbit hole...
If this is the case, have Fisher sell the Oakland A’s or keep the A’s in Oakland and give Las Vegas an expansion team instead?
Although it makes a ton of sense, Fisher has trashed the citys reputation too much that people that don't understand the situation take his side. Plus Manfred detests Oakland fans now.
Future expansion into Oakland just isn't likely because there are too many components working against it. I'll name a few here, though I could name much more than these.
1) San Francisco Giants: Does anyone really think that if MLB surrenders the entire Bay Area market to the Giants via A's relocation that the Giants will readily give up that control for a new Oakland expansion team? Don't bet on that at all.
2) Bay Area Politics: I will keep bringing this up until people understand this point. Oakland and Bay Area politicians simply don't understand (nor care about) the business of baseball and how much of a financial investment it takes to establish and maintain a MLB level franchise. Oakland city government already flushed all of their chances with the A's down the toilet with their non-stop meddling, snail's pace progression in negotiations and lack of persistence. Don't look at your local politicians to give you help in future expansion.
3) No Ownership Group: Name one billionaire who lives in the Oakland side of the Bay Area who would be willing to buy an expansion franchise. Get back to me on that one...
4) Stadium Site?: If not Howard Terminal, then tell me where the new stadium would be located in Oakland? That dovetails back to my 2nd point. Will you have enough money to pony up for a new stadium?
Hunger and build is a non-factor imo. It doesn't matter if Oakland/Bay Area pushes for expansion post-A's, if MLB doesn't see the value in it, it won't happen. Period. Business of baseball. No matter how corrupt it is, understand the business.
All of that gets addressed
Giants are already doing great financially with A’s in Oakland or not
Joe Lacob has already said he'd buy the A's
@@madera1roja4 Casey Pratt said he knows of five groups that want to buy team.
Casey Pratt said he knows of five groups in Bay Area that want to buy A’s and keep them in Oakland. They would be way better than Fisher.
As much as I want to believe this could happen I’m really not convinced we would be the prime candidate in the west for expansion purely because of the way this league has treated Oakland and its fans and even if we get better owners we’re still in the same place that got us into this sorry mess in the first place
I don’t see it happening. Only way I see a team returning to the Bay Area )if A’s leave), is if MLB forces the Giants to allow an expansion team in the South Bay. MLB wants a Battery setup and South Bay is where that king of money is located.
The giant Stomper-the-elephant sized issue with any expansion team in Oakland is territorial rights. Yes, we are a large market, but the frustrating fact is that the Giants have thoroughly out-competed the A's over the last decades. Sad to admit that as die-hard A's fan, but we're in a bad spot and need to face the facts. I don't think expansion works here at all if the Giants are still so dominant. MLB has infamously shown no interest in changing this dynamic, so I think the idea is DOA. Sacramento on the other hand could be possible
I appreciate your reporting and your passion for Oakland baseball, but let’s face it, MLB does not want the A’s in Oakland or the Bay Area. The City of San Jose acquired the land adjacent to Diridon Station for a new A’s ballpark, but the San Francisco Giants claimed territorial rights in 2012. MLB backed the Giants to block the move. Now, the site of the proposed ballpark will be developed by Google for new offices and housing. One can argue that the positive economic impact of Google will be far greater than an A’s ballpark.
The only way I'd be in favor of expansion for Oakland is if the city retained the name, team colors and legacy of the A's.
Do what the NBA did. A’s identity stays in Oakland with history for the new team. And Vegas would be old franchise but the “expansion” team with the A’s roster and staff.
If there is a chance that the A’s do relocate to Las Vegas, then Fisher and his cronies should have to forfeit the rights of the athletics name rights,colors and everything else after they move away from Oakland. Then MLB should let Oakland and Nashville or Salt Lake City have first choice of expansion teams.
Simply, There are plenty of Oakland fans, who will fill a new building/new team.
A senator from missouri actually threatened to take away MLB's antitrust status unless they granted KC an expansion team
Brodie, i want you to answer my question. Where will the a's play in 2025,2026, and 2027?
Mars, possibly?
Nope. The Martians don't want to share their stadium or locker rooms with another team. Next!
Unfortunately mlb if they approve the move to vegas wont be giving an expansion team to oakland
Would be WONDERFUL! 2 huge problems: 1. MLB brass hates Oakland would never ok this. 2. Oakland politicians can't even. Just not up to the task
I would bet that an Oakland expansion franchise would be a better team before Vegas is.
Baseball is the one sport that should not move to Vegas. MLB should work to keep every team stay in their current market then expand into Charlotte NC and SLC Utah. Forget about Vegas
If Oakland gets an expansion team, if the A’s leave it probably won’t be the A’s because the A’s name was not started in Oakland
And it wasn’t started in Vegas either
Oakland Oaks
Oakland seems more like an mls city than more baseball
Royals paid an expansion fee. The expansion fee is the price of a team, so there will be one.
Oakland oaks
let's dicuss
Oakland doesn't have a case for a new MLB expansion they lost the Warriors they lost the Raiders and now they are losing the A's Vegas deserves that expansion team more
If it’s not the A’s no thank you.
Im so sry brodie. It wont happen.
Not enough players.
How about calling any new team the Oakland Oaks.
I Wish the MLB owners could vote to take the A's away from John Fischer
I am glad some people are realizing that there are other cities than could get an expansion team, or the Athletics. Vegas isn't a great choice because of where the new stadium would be built and where the $ comes from. Oakland? I'll say it again, why should any public $ go to a billionaire's ball park? Salt Lake and Sacramento have really good minor league parks. Either do not have bleacher seating now, and both could have their grandstands expanded. Fenway once had a one deck grandstand. A second deck was added to the roof.
The pro-sports have blacklisted Oakland. They hate this area.
IF MLB were to give an expansion team to the Bay Area, I sincerely hope it would NOT be in Oakland. I have lived in the Bay Area my entire life. Excluding driving through Oakland on the freeway while trying to get someplace else, the only times I am ever in the town is to go to the private terminals at the airport, serve jury duty at court house, or go to Oakland Coliseum to watch A’s games. Luckily, Oakland Coliseum is on the southern end of town, so I barely have to cross city limits to go to games. Oakland is a horrible city with politicians who hate business and who are lenient on crime. People shouldn’t have to spend any more time than necessary in that place. There are so many better places in the Bay Area. If MLB feels the Bay Area is a good market for an expansion team, strip the territorial rights of the South Bay from the Giants and put the team in the San Jose area. Silicon Valley is far superior to Oakland. Or revive the old idea to bring the A’s to Fremont. Fremont is an affluent city with low crime that doesn’t get as cold as Oakland at the times of night games. There are numerous cities that have brighter futures than Oakland.
Or Michael Jordan bought the Hornets relocated back to Charlotte
Then he sold the team lol
If the athletics relocate, Oakland will just become a suburb.
Why would MLB want that?
Las Vegas A’s are coming…🔥
False hope… stop it Brodie
This argument doesn't hold water if Oakland don't build a new ballpark MLB is not coming back and you can blame it on anybody you want to
an Expansion, yust keep the A’s nobody wants the A’s in Vegas
There's "NO" case for MLB expansion in or around Oakland. Giving Oakland - Alameda - East Bay a future expansion option is ridiculous at best, given many cities and areas have put up money to help build new or renovate parks. Oakland failed putting up money for Raiders (twice), Warriors and A's.
I don’t want an expansion team
They take out team away, I can not support anything mLB
Ever
Force that liar Fischer to sell and keep the A’s in Oakland!
💔😫
I think the census among major sports leagues is that the Bay Area is a one team per league market.
Truth. Of the 4 markets with 2 teams, the bay area is the smallest, less than half the size of the Chicago metro area, which is the second smallest, and it's also smaller than several single team markets like Philadelphia, Houston, and Dallas.
@@Maulbert Yes. The hard reality is that the Bay Area just cannot carry two teams.
MLB would be handicapping 2 franchises at once. Oakland wants the A's and Vegas wants a Vegas born expansion team, essentially switching them up would be doing both cities a disservice (and themselves financially).
Your market compared to like Salt Lake City get they would build that’s why I think they would dance it open could be an expansion team bigger than them California as far as statewide goSend
Bring back the Oakland Oaks (ABA franchise, 1967 - '69) or the Oakland Seals (WHA franchise, 1967 - '76), and rename them as an MLB franchise!! Then again, regarding the Collesium, maybe not... ☹
NHL Franchise
Let Oakland keep the A's name for an expansion team. The fans deserve an owner that cares about the city and fans.
MLB would be idiots to put another team in Oakland. They have shown they won’t support a team
How much do you know about the A’s last decade…? The end.
@@brodiebrazil The A’s have had problems since 1989. With a few years here and there.
@@brodiebrazil We all know the A’s owner wants to move because he is tired of winning every year, too many sell out crowds, and he doesn’t want a new stadium. The A’s are like the WNBA, everyone talks about how great it is but nobody supports them
If A’s stayed in Oakland and build HT it would end up being another empty Loan Depot park. Why? Because the cheap skate owner would find more escudes not to spend money.
I'd always heard that the reason the Royals started play so quickly after the A's left, is that MLB was settling an antitrust lawsuit by KC officials. The haste to get the team playing is why the Seattle Pilots, who started play at the same time, failed -- ownership simply wasn't ready yet.
Uh, you forgot the number 1 thing. The Giants will almost certainly never allow an expansion team in their backyard. The Giants repeatedly block potential A's moves to San Jose several times.
It’s not up to Giants it’s up to MLB owners
Orioles owner Peter Angelos begged MLB not to let Expos move to Washington DC because it would cut into his fan base. MLB approved it anyway.
I don't believe MLB would grant an expansion team without Oakland agreeing to fully fund construction of a new ballpark, which is not going to happen. These owners want taxpayer money for stadiums.
why give Oakland another team.