A's headed to Las Vegas
 

It seems like it's all but official now with the purchase of the land. Thoughts?

So this will be the Athletics, not only 4th different city, but 4th different state to call home.

Guessing this is tops in MLB. Braves also have called 3 different states home along with the Browns/Orioles/Brewers(different from the modern day Brewers).

It’s good for baseball

Their stadium is terrible, the owner was not investing in the team and the fans rightfully gave up on the team.

Hopefully new stadium, new excitement and new funds for a competitive team

-
I thought they were actually going to pull off a new ballpark in Oakland this time around but lets face it, projects like this are not at the top of our California bureaucrats list, they're too busy banning natural gas, raising our taxes, and doing their best to alienate the middle class.

Congrats to Nevada and Las Vegas, should be a nice re-start for such a storied franchise.

And every thread needs a card...
-

i am surprised they lasted in Oakland for as long as they did.

Amazing news for the Athletics!

Better be a covered stadium because even at 7pm in August it's over 100

they did say it would be a max 35K seated stadium with a retractable roof

as an oakland fan they can play in heaven ,,they stink

How things have changed.

At one point Mays was "banned" because he invested in and did some PR stuff for a casino. Welcome back when that all ended.
Having a franchise in Vegas would have been nearly unthinkable.

Now? No problem.

Gambling money is paying for that, one way or another.
Baseball pretty much isn't baseball anymore.

To avoid the obvious hypocrisy they should have and induction ceremony for both Jackson and Rose during the home opener.

I wouldn't agree with it but someone could make a case for Rose, but Jackson took a bribe to throw World Series games, no way he ever gets in.

The case against Rose is far stronger than that against Jackson. There is no evidence Jackson took any money and he sure didn't do anything to throw the World Series. He hit .375, had 12 hits, the most of any player, 18 total bases, also most of any player, and hit the series' only HR. He also made no errors in the field.

Rose bet on his own team and when he didn't bet on the Reds, gamblers knew he wasn't going to be trying to manage to win, so they would bet against the Reds. His actions directly affect the game on the field, in contrast to Jackson who always played to win.

Looks like they're headed back east - they should be back in Philly by 2075 :D

Theres no evidence he took any money? Jackson admitted taking $5000 from Lefty Williams and his batting average is not evidence of anything, a player doesn't need to to make an out in every AB, only ones that matter, especially when pitchers are in on the fix. Jackson said he was double-crossed for the other $15000 that he was promised. Hes just as guilty as the rest.

Believe that Mantle was involved with that also. Would have been curious to see how MLB would have treated Mays if he alone was involved, and not Mantle as well.

And as to your last point regarding Joe Jackson and Pete Rose, I've been saying for years that Jackson, in particular, got screwed by MLB. And especially by his then team owner, Comiskey, to whom Jackson reported what had happened, and even tried to return the money he was given, but had never asked for. Instead of turning around and reporting the fixing activities to the then AL President, Ban Johnson, or anyone else in baseball's hierarchy at the time, Comiskey asked Jackson to say nothing to anyone about it, and then kept it from everyone else as well, so he could continue to keep his team together, and the money he was making off of it. When the fixing issues finally came out, MLB punished Jackson, an involuntary party to the fix, for allegedly breaking a rule(s) that did not actually exist at the time the alleged infractions occurred. But they, MLB and by then Commissioner Landis, did virtually nothing to Comiskey, who intentionally and deliberately kept his knowledge of the fixing activities quiet from MLB and the other team owners. The main reason given for Jackson's permanent ban from baseball was that even though he didn't appear to actively take part in the throwing of games, he knew of the fix, but didn't turn his teammates in, despite telling Comiskey what had happened. Yet Comiskey was also just as guilty IMO as Jackson then, if not even more so, by intentionally not telling anyone else in MLB at the time what he knew. Which begs the question, why wasn't his ass immediately thrown out of MLB and banned for life as well? It is simple, Landis was being paid by the MLB team owners, which included Comiskey, for the job as baseball's first ever Commissioner, that he likely had handed to him as a delayed repayment/thank you for his part in the eventual squashing of the Federal League's lawsuit against MLB from several years earlier. The lying, hypocrisy, and outright greed of MLB hasn't changed a bit. It is still all about the money, and doing whatever is in the best interests of MLB, and their owner's wallets. Just look at how they handled the Astros cheating scandal a few years ago. It seems pretty clear that back then, the only real issue for MLB was how to best take care of the situation so the baseball owners would suffer the least negative financial impact as possible. What else is new, right?

I still think MLB won't do anything to alleviate past misjustice laid upon Jackson, until after Rose passes on. I've often said that MLB will continue to punish Rose with the ban, keeping him out of the HOF, because of his initial denial and reaction to MLB's efforts to punish him when his gambling activities first became known. And despite MLB's now obvious hypocritical embracement of the gambling industry, I can easily see MLB not wanting to give Rose the satisfaction of being inducted into the HOF while he's still alive. IMO, Jackson's problem is that MLB can't do right by him without also then facing criticism for their handling of Rose, and extend the same corrective action to Rose as well. So, they'll likely just wait till Rose passes before looking at possibly correcting anything. Time will tell.

Where do you get your "facts"?

Go read a book about the Black Sox and stop making up stuff.

Nobody is going to see the same A’s team just because they play in Vegas. It makes no sense and it’s rarely ever worked. The only way for a team to be successful financially and with the fans is TO BE A GOOD TEAM.

The Packers play on Green Bay. If you’re wondering why a team in a podunk town is able to outdraw teams in major metropolitan cities it’s on the field.

About a decade after they should have. The last game I went to last season had maybe 600 fans and not even the staff gave a damn. Was a lot of fun actually, they let people just watch from wherever and do whatever, they weren’t even fully charging for food and beverage. I like the modernized area of the seating with the bar, pool tables, and standing decks but nobody here goes to see them and the crowd of drug dealers out front and unsafe transit you have to take to get there further limit the crowd.

It's impossible to block Vegas after so many states legalized sports gambling after the courts changed the hold Vegas and Atlantic City held.

We have sports gambling in Michigan now, should they have been forced to move all 4 professional teams for a decision at the state legislative level?

I expect the gap of not having the NBA in Vegas to be filled in the next few years as well. They do an amazing job of bringing in teams alienated by local governments and have a solid fanbase along with a cheap airfare for visiting fans to attend as well.

If I was any of these teams asking for improvements I would be looking at Vegas already.

Baseball was at least publicly taking the high road and avoiding gambling at all costs. Putting a franchise in Vegas is just hypocritical unless they abandon the rules they've had for a hundred years.

But that seems to be the new "in" thing, chase the money while making the produt worse.
Other sports have at least acknowledged the gambling aspect while trying to keep players and officials out of it.

But "everyone is gambling so it's ok!"

Eff it, I'm getting out my Hartford Jai Ali glasses and displaying those instead of baseball stuff.

Always follow the money. That’s Business

The gambling money, the growing market, the tourist market

A’s can only do better than what it has just hope they then invest some of the new money when it comes into players to be more competitive

They've recently made sports betting legal here.

And it's made things weird and not better. Like the Celtics series, the time spent on the radio maybe highlighting a particular matchup instead focused on general playoff betting, and whether one of the players would score more or less than a certain number of points. Yawn....

Sports gambling embraced by the powers that be has opened the floodgates, its no longer about the sport it's about the line, nobody cares about protecting the moral aspect anymore.

Lifelong A's/Oakland fan here...

The A's have a small but loyal fan base, however the current ownership has done everything they can to alienate that fan base while using the City of Oakland as a bargaining chip to get a deal in Las Vegas. That appears to have been the plan all along.

The only catch is that the ownership wants LV/NV to pay for the stadium with public money and only want to reap the benefits. They are such horrible people and bad businessmen that it's very likely that the LV deals will fall through, or the public money will not be there and they will be a team with no home when the Coliseum lease expires in 2024.

As a teenager growing up in Oakland in the 1970s it was a golden era. Three baseball championships, one NBA championship, three Super Bowls, and well the Oakland/California Golden/Not Golden Seals, loveable losers as they were.

Even though I don't live there any more I'm rooted in Oakland, when/if they leave I'm done with them, just like the Raiders. As it stands they are a MLB team in name only.

Now it comes out in the recent Reggie Jackson documentary that Reggie had an ownership group that had a better offer but Selig let his buddy Lew Wolff have the team instead. Despite the fact he eventually went to the hated Yankees, Reggie is still beloved in these parts and having him as a part owner of the A's would have been awesome.

Well said J Stone
and all fans of teams emphasizes with you.
Sadly that is the reality of Sports. That way to many teams use their city or other cities for leverage to get what they want and how they want it. Which of course is for the public to pay for stadium so they can maximize their profits.
The only thing that I partially disagree on is that I believe the City of Oakland has dragged their feet for to long and could have done more both sooner(as short term bandaid like helping improve the stadium) while they figured out the long term solution of a new stadium.

There is truth to that but don't forget that Oakland got royally screwed by Al Davis and the Raiders (twice) and I think they had no choice but to proceed carefully.

As for improvements to the stadium, it's the lipstick on a pig argument. No lie it's a dump...but it is OUR dump! Best option on the table was probably to rebuild on the spot but the Giants were unwilling to share their ballpark while that was being done.

They could easily do renovations during the offseason if they really wanted to. Fenway gets renovated pretty often, always during the off season.

Apparently the As publicly funded stadium was slow getting anywhere so now they're getting Ballys to build them one.

not disagreeing but the As Owners cannot worry about what the raiders did and they have to as a business think about making money and in that dump of a coliseum does not help.
The City and the Owners both played games and sadly the few A's fans that are left suffer for it

Need to bump this! What a turn of events by politicians! Redirecting money already tabbed for other projects to fund the stadium...and politicians say no way. Who thinks the A's won't get the money for publicly financing their stadium? I wouldn't want to publicly finance a team that willingly chooses to lose either. I hope Fisher doesn't get the money.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

and they said they took a poll and over 76% off the public was not in favor of financing the stadium.

Could things get any uglier