Oakland Loses the A's

[NiftyNiblick]

There seems to be enough residents to fill a hockey arena.



I'm sure they will, but there are more residents than you think in Las Vegas.

I'll admit to not spending a lot of time in residential areas!

Yes, there are people there in Vegas,
but in big Eastern cities, the surrounding area is just more smaller cities.

Vegas has a desert near it, which is also nice for photographs and stuff,
and even for burying bodies if need be,
but not many living people hang out there.

 

[cawacko]

Eh, methinks the Las Vegas crowd will support the team better than Oakland. And that Oakland stadium was pathetic.
I was 16 when my Senators moved to become the Texas Rangers in 1972. I still follow them to this day.
World Champs, baby.

You stayed a Rangers fan once the Nationals came to town? Or I should ask, did you become a Nationals fan?

 

[Walt]

I wonder if they'll rename the team. Las Vegas A's sounds stupid. Las Vegas Gamblers?

Technically, they are the Athletics. They were originally the Philadelphia Athletics, but called the A's. Then they became the Kansas City A's. And on to the Oakland A's. I guess this will be their fourth city.

Their name comes from the Athletic Club of Philadelphia.

 

[Damocles]

Technically, they are the Athletics. They were originally the Philadelphia Athletics, but called the A's. Then they became the Kansas City A's. And on to the Oakland A's. I guess this will be their fourth city.

Their name comes from the Athletic Club of Philadelphia.

Still a stupid name.

 

[Walt]

Still a stupid name.

I actually think Athletics is even stupider than A's, but it is history.

Dodgers were from people in Brooklyn "dodging" streetcars. It was a derogatory name for people of Brooklyn, and is not exactly a heroic name, but somehow sounds better.

 

[cawacko]

Still a stupid name.

Woah, Woah, Woah. The A's are an iconic name. Come on now Colorado, don't be mad...

 

[Damocles]

I actually think Athletics is even stupider than A's, but it is history.

Dodgers were from people in Brooklyn "dodging" streetcars. It was a derogatory name for people of Brooklyn, and is not exactly a heroic name, but somehow sounds better.

When they moved to LA the "meaningfulness" of the name was lost, it is silly to keep it. Now, of course it is "tradition" but even the Dodger name is stupid where it is. Like Utah Jazz. Once they moved from New Orleans they should have changed that name, Utah is not known for its Jazz...

 

[Airstrip One]

I wonder if they'll rename the team. Las Vegas A's sounds stupid. Las Vegas Gamblers?

Well, the name was retained from Philadelphia to KC to Oakland, so, there is that.

EDIT: I guess this has already been pointed out.

Normally, I always assume that Oakland is the culprit for why teams such as the Raiders and Warriors won't stay there. It does appear that the owner of the A's has been pretty underhanded and dishonest with the city over the past several years.

 

[Damocles]

Woah, Woah, Woah. The A's are an iconic name. Come on now Colorado, don't be mad...

I think the Rockies is a stupid name, that is stolen from the hockey team that left in the early 80s (I think) and became the Jersey Devils. Reduxing the name for a baseball team was stupid. Once the team moved from Philly there is no reason to keep the silly name. It simply doesn't keep it's historic meaning, I mean the "Athletics" from the Athletics Club of Philadelphia? Why would Oakland want that "history"?

 

[cawacko]

Well, the name was retained from Philadelphia to KC to Oakland, so, there is that.

There are people in Oakland who want the team name to stay in case Oakland were to get an expansion team they would be the A's. Don't know if that will happen or not.

 

[Damocles]

There are people in Oakland who want the team name to stay in case Oakland were to get an expansion team they would be the A's. Don't know if that will happen or not.

Why would any professional sports team want a franchise there now? They got rid of every franchise they had for a pickle and three pieces of lint.

 

[cawacko]

I think the Rockies is a stupid name, that is stolen from the hockey team that left in the early 80s (I think) and became the Jersey Devils. Reduxing the name for a baseball team was stupid. Once the team moved from Philly there is no reason to keep the silly name. It simply doesn't keep it's historic meaning, I mean the "Athletics" from the Athletics Club of Philadelphia? Why would Oakland want that "history"?

While I get your position I like it because it encompasses the history of the team/organization. While a team may move it's still the same organization, the history doesn't go away.

 

[Nomad]

Sad day for the country, but especially in Oakland, California as MLB owners vote to allow the A's to move to Las Vegas. Since this is a political board this falls on owner John Fischer and the incompetence of Oakland's government.

It's a proud city and the A's are a big part of the City's history. Oakland went from having three major professional teams less than a decade ago to none today. Sad sad day.

Is Oakland really even a city per se?

I've heard it said of visiting Oakland, there's no "there" there.

IOW it doesn't feel like a real city because it has little or no character of its own.

More of a bland suburb of San Francisco.

 

[Damocles]

While I get your position I like it because it encompasses the history of the team/organization. While a team may move it's still the same organization, the history doesn't go away.

And when the name changes the history doesn't go away, but the name can have more meaning to the new city. NY Dodgers had meaning, LA Dodgers just sounded like they couldn't afford a new name so they just held on to the generic name it came with. Kind of like naming a Teddy Bear "Teddy" rather than something new, but that one isn't quite as stupid as keeping the "NY" history for a team in Los Angeles.

 

[floridafan]

And when the name changes the history doesn't go away, but the name can have more meaning to the new city. NY Dodgers had meaning, LA Dodgers just sounded like they couldn't afford a new name so they just held on to the generic name it came with. Kind of like naming a Teddy Bear "Teddy" rather than something new, but that one isn't quite as stupid as keeping the "NY" history for a team in Los Angeles.

There never were any NY Dodgers, they were the Brooklyn Dodgers.

 

[Walt]

When they moved to LA the "meaningfulness" of the name was lost, it is silly to keep it. Now, of course it is "tradition" but even the Dodger name is stupid where it is. Like Utah Jazz. Once they moved from New Orleans they should have changed that name, Utah is not known for its Jazz...

A very good point about the Utah Jazz. Of all the states, the Mormon dominated Utah is the least jazz. When I think about it maybe the Latter Day Saint's of Utah should have named their team the Utah Saints... But ironically enough that was already taken by New Orleans(yes, I know football rather than basketball, but you get my point).

 

[Damocles]

There never were any NY Dodgers, they were the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Yah, thanks! Just underlines how stupid it is to cling to such history in Los Angeles though... When you have to explain the name to natives of the city you have hosed up.

 

[Nomad]

Anything A's sounded stupid but it had tradition.

Las Vegas residents aren't enough to support the team.
There's no real metropolitan district around it--just a moonscape of rocks and sand.

Hotels will buy lots of tickets to comp guests.

Baseball season isn't the best season for Vegas unless you like three digit temperatures while you're walking the Strip.

Baseball as an added attraction might help business.

So they build an air conditioned stadium.

Project some kind of digital animation/laser light show on the ceiling.

People will go just to see that.

Fit right in.

 

[cawacko]

Is Oakland really even a city per se?

I've heard it said of visiting Oakland, there's no "there" there.

IOW it doesn't feel like a real city because it has little or no character of its own.

More of a bland suburb of San Francisco.

That was the old Gertrude Stein line about Oakland way back when, “there’s no there there”.

I mean sure, if you’re going to come to the Bay Area you’re very likely to go to San Francisco before Oakland. Bigger city, more to do etc. etc. Most people don’t plan big trips to Oakland.

Oakland is a proud City with a great athletic heritage. Not just the three (former) professional teams but a lot of athletes have come out of Oakland. (It’s also an extremely poorly run City, like really bad, but that’s for another discussion.)

Oakland definitely has character. You know it when talking to the locals. But it’s only 400K people and it doesn’t have what SF offers.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

That was the old Gertrude Stein line about Oakland way back when, “there’s no there there”.

I mean sure, if you’re going to come to the Bay Area you’re very likely to go to San Francisco before Oakland. Bigger city, more to do etc. etc. Most people don’t plan big trips to Oakland.

Oakland is a proud City with a great athletic heritage. Not just the three (former) professional teams but a lot of athletes have come out of Oakland. (It’s also an extremely poorly run City, like really bad, but that’s for another discussion.)

Oakland definitely has character. You know it when talking to the locals. But it’s only 400K people and it doesn’t have what SF offers.

Even if only five or six thousand people went to the A's games,
that's still five or six thousand disappointed people.

They're the ones, after all, who deserved to have a team.