OT: Selig continues to screw San Jose

Time is running out for the City of San Jose to get a ballpark initiative on the ballot this year. Selig's committee has no time limit. Argh. I agree with the SJ Mercury News editorial here.

almost 2 years ago vonde6 34 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Amen.

The sooner this idiot is forced to retire, the better for all of baseball. His “legacy” has already been cemented and the sooner he’s out, the sooner we have a chance to have someone in place that does care about the whole league.

"The ones who want to achieve and win championships motivate themselves." - Da Coach

by Sandberg's evil twin on Jul 14, 2010 8:16 PM CDT reply actions

Calling him an "idiot" is being too kind...

by HotDogDude on Jul 15, 2010 9:57 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions

Ahem.

We can criticize him without the namecalling. Be more creative.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Jul 15, 2010 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions

Judgment free person?

"The ones who want to achieve and win championships motivate themselves." - Da Coach

by Sandberg's evil twin on Jul 15, 2010 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions

If I say that his decision making on almost every topic is beyond

moronic, is that good enough for you?

I take it you actually like Selig.

by HuskerCorner on Jul 15, 2010 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions

No.

I don’t think Al has ever said that. And I didn’t mean it to him as a person, just as a commissioner.

"The ones who want to achieve and win championships motivate themselves." - Da Coach

by Sandberg's evil twin on Jul 15, 2010 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions

No, of course I don't.

You still can make your point without namecalling.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Jul 16, 2010 7:01 AM CDT up reply actions

Better to have the vote in Mar 2011 than Nov 2010

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 15, 2010 8:14 AM CDT reply actions

I know that you live in the Bay Area too

What is your reasoning? A March vote would certainly get a different crowd to the polls than the November vote, but what would make it more agreeable to approving a stadium? Or are you against a stadium? And the expense of an extra vote in March would be a waste.

"Wait, are you saying I'm a sunshine-pumping, koolaid-drinking, Soriano-loving, rainbow-rising, unicorn-riding, double-clutching, Sweet Lou-backing, Hendry-supporting, hey hey whaddya saying, Cubs are going all the waying, glass is overflowing, Rothschild is all-knowing, Cubs fan? - ballhawk

by vonde6 on Jul 15, 2010 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions

The March 2011 vote is much better

The Nov 2010 general election features a vote for a contest for governor offices and one US Senate seat. That usually means a large turnout.

A Mar 2011 vote would be a special election, which usually has significantly lower voter turnout. People more likely to vote in special elections are people who really care about the issue, which is usually people who support the stadium.

As for the stadium vote, if I had a vote (while I work in San Jose, I do not live in SJ), I would vote for it. I think it will be great for the A’s and for San Jose.

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 15, 2010 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions

I voted against the Giants stadium last time

Because it was a bad deal for us local taxpayers.

I think that this time, the terms will be much more favorable, and the location near the Shark Tank and the train station will be a big boost to downtown when it’s not hockey season.

by vonde6 on Jul 15, 2010 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions

If all else fails, blame Selig

Ridiculous. This is an issue of territory and I don’t see the SF Giants just giving away that territory. This is more scapegoating at Selig and should be on Lew Wolff instead.

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 15, 2010 11:53 AM CDT reply actions

Selig needs to broker a deal

Like he did with Baltimore when the Nationals moved to DC.

16 months for a committee investigation, and you blame that on Wolff?

by vonde6 on Jul 15, 2010 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions

Ignorant statement

Selig has left Wolfe and the A’s hanging for over a year now. The report is overdue and is not coming any time soon. Wolfe tried to “honor” the territorial rights issue but the plan to build a stadium in Fremont was blocked by Fremont. Oakland is not a feasible option, so if the A’s are going to stay in the Bay Area, San Jose is the spot for them to go.

The territorial question could be resolved by Selig sitting down with both teams and working out a deal, something Selig has not attempted. Bottom line, Selig has not done much of anything regarding this issue, so he deserves the blame and the scorn.

Just out of curiosity, what exactly has Wolfe done that you blame him for?

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 15, 2010 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions

The territorial question could be resolved by Selig sitting down with both teams and working out a deal, something Selig has not attempted. Bottom line, Selig has not done much of anything regarding this issue, so he deserves the blame and the scorn.

Bud Selig not doing much of anything? What a surprise.

"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra

by Al Yellon on Jul 15, 2010 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions

Selig doesn't have that power or he won't invoke it.

here’s a long but interesting perspective on this that I found on the As SB Nation site

This is all posturing by Wolfe, who is close to Selig

Then I learned something I hadn’t known, which made me think Selig might not be a problem: The commissioner had recruited Wolff as the A’s owner—maybe because he and Wolff had been college fraternity mates.

No more pretending that Wolfe didn’t know how slow baseball moved.

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 15, 2010 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions

If Selig

Doesn’t have the power to have a committee make a decision after 16 months, he should resign for that reason alone.

"The ones who want to achieve and win championships motivate themselves." - Da Coach

by Sandberg's evil twin on Jul 15, 2010 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions

Committee can't make any decision

Just a recommendation. It’s the territorial rights of the SF Giants. I haven’t seen anything where they gain something here. Why should the Giants give up the territory?

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 15, 2010 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions

IMO "territorial rights" is yet another obsolete economic device

like the reserve clause, which was overturned when the game could no longer shelter itself from the modern realities of commerce. The notion of a team claiming a fixed number of square miles and the people living within that area as “theirs” lost all its teeth thanks to the digital communication revolution of the past ten years. With devices like the iPhone and lightning-speed connectivity, passionate fans from Anchorage to Zephyhills can follow every pitch – consequently, every team can now claim the continental U.S. as their “territory”.

I'll go to my grave believing Armando Galarraga tossed the 21st perfect game in MLB history.

by EalyEagle on Jul 15, 2010 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions

I could not agree more

by vonde6 on Jul 16, 2010 12:35 AM CDT up reply actions

It is doubtful that "territorial rights"

would hold up if challenged in court (see Al Davis’ successful suit against the NFL).

That Selig’s committee has not even submitted its findings is further proof of Selig’s ineptitude.Selig is leaving Wolfe and the A’s hanging. The A’s and San Jose have pretty much done what they can. The ball is in MLB’s court. Wolfe is doing what he needs to, holding Selig’s feet to the fire. As an old friend of Selig’s, Wolfe hopefully knows how to push his buttons.

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 16, 2010 8:33 AM CDT up reply actions

Challenged in court?

I don’t know. MLB has that anti-trust exemption.

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 16, 2010 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions

So?

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 16, 2010 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions

How do you challenge this in court?

In 1980 Al Davis attempted to move the Raiders to Los Angeles but was blocked by a court injunction. In response Davis filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL.

MLB has anti-trust exemption = No anti-trust lawsuit

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 16, 2010 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions

No doubt

But the Giants could still be using this to their advantage. They know the A’s can’t a new stadium in Oakland or Freemont. So they block them in San Jose and maybe’s the A’s decide to relocate outside the Bay Area.

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 16, 2010 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions

The Giants are angling for the best compensation they can get in return

that’s all.

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 16, 2010 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions

The Giants got those rights

When they were trying to get a stadium deal in San Jose years ago. That initiative lost, and they went back to San Francisco and got a deal. They are not God-given or constitutional rights.

by vonde6 on Jul 16, 2010 12:34 AM CDT up reply actions

All true

But it’s harder to take that territorial right away now that it has been granted.

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 16, 2010 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions

Not really

the owners can take it away just as easily as it was granted in the first place. If the owners want the A’s in the Bay Area, it has to be SJ, and that means they will give the rights to the South Bay to the A’s (similar to what happened with Baltimore and the Nationals).

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 16, 2010 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions

Don't think that's applicable

MLB owned the Expos and had to move them. Not the same here.

I’m not in the room when these guys discuss this stuff and neither are you. But I doubt they like to bluntly take away from one owner to give to another.

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 16, 2010 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions

Not applicable only because it works against your position.

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 17, 2010 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions

Just saying that's not how these guys work

At least I haven’t seen it. I think the As moving to San Jose is a good idea. I just don’t think the owners will vote to do so unless the Giants are compensated.

"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas

by RiskyBusiness on Jul 17, 2010 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions

No one is saying the Giants will not be compensated

just saying the Giants do not have a veto.

I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren

by lookingdeadred on Jul 17, 2010 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions