December 8, 2013
Who is Shyster?
Or you can search by:
Most Recent Comments
Mike Hargrove Interview (13)
Can they be the California Angels again? (9)
Another great moment in mass transit? (7)
Just another ten-percenter (his mind is like an ocean) (7)
Great Moments in Half-Baked Populism (8)
Shyster's Daily Circuit
Joe Posnanski Blog
Cot's Baseball Contracts
It IS About the Money
Baseball Think Factory
MLB Trade Rumors
Way Back and Gone
Bats -- NYT Baseball Blog
The Biz of Baseball
The Daily Fungo
The Common Man
Jorge Says No!
Baseball Over Here
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Selig clears the A’s way to San Jose?At least that's what KTVU's Lloyd LaCuesta believes he has discovered:
KTVU's Lloyd La Cuesta came up with a letter from Bud Selig to Lew Wolff stating: "I have decided that in the event you are not able to promptly assure the implementation of the desired park in Fremont, you may begin to discuss a ballpark with other communities."
Bloggers in-the-know interpret the letter to mean the same thing: San Jose is A-OK.
Which makes oodles of sense. Yes, San Jose is technically in the Giants' territory, but it's a big ol' city in its own right, it's much more culturally distinct from San Francisco than the East Bay is (if that makes any sense), and given the geography of the place, San Jose is probably less likely to draw fans away from AT&T Park than Oakland did back when people used to go to A's games.
No matter the case, anything that breaks down baseball's illegal and ill-advised territories racket is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.
Posted by Craig Calcaterra at 3:55pm
How does it break down baseball’s judicially-created exemption? That can only be done by Congress…
Posted 12/09 at 05:54 PM
Craig Calcaterra said...
Baseball’s territorial system is entirely of their own devising. The antitrust exemption—some argue—is only a means of protecting the practice from outside attack. If baseball wants to do away with it itself, it is more than welcome to do it.
If Selig agrees to be lax about the Giants’ territorial rights (as he was with some horse trading re: the Orioles’ claim on DC), practically speaking, it will be harder for him to try to protect the next team’s territorial rights when another owner wishes to move.
Posted 12/09 at 05:57 PM
Pete Toms said...
I’ve read a few times ( I don’t recall where ) that Neukom is less opposed to a team in San Jose than Magowan was. I don’t recall why…
Posted 12/09 at 06:37 PM
Sometime next year: “In an unprecedented move MLB Commissioner Bud Selig announced that Fremont and San Jose have tied for the rights to host the formerly-Oakland Athletics. Although the rule book does not specify whether a team can reside in two cities, the commissioner invoked the ‘good of the game’ clause, stating ‘It’s not fair to pick one city or the other. If baseball can tolerate ties in the All-Star Game and in a World Series game, surely it can stand a tie between cities in their bids to host a franchise.’ The compromise, however, will be temporary, as starting in the 2010 season Selig will force the Athletics to play in whichever city they win the most interleague games this season.”
Posted 12/09 at 06:55 PM
APBA Guy said...
I’ve said this before, Wolfe/Fisher need options. San Jose has a good light rail system, access from the Peninsula via CalTrain, and there is a lot of growth South of the city towards Morgan Hill.
But like anywhere else in the Bay area, traffic will be the major debating point.
Still, if the interpretation (and the letter) are true, it’s great to hear that there is more potential movement away from the Mausoleum.
Posted 12/10 at 02:05 PM