Skip to content

Lew Wolff is buying land in San Jose

Oct 18, 2011, 3:09 PM EDT

oakland athletics small logo

Major League Baseball has not approved the Athletics’ desired move to San Jose yet, and the voters of San Jose have not approved of whatever small portions of a stadium project that would be required, but A’s owner Lew Wolff is on the verge of buying $24 million worth of real estate in San Jose that will one day — maybe — be part of the Athletics’ new home.

I love the quote from the mayor of San Jose about why, in the absence of these approvals, Wolff is doing this:

“It’s so that Lew can go to the commissioner of baseball and say, ‘I control the dirt.'”

Given their territorial claim, I presume the Giants beg to differ on all of that. But I suppose it’s something.

  1. SmackSaw - Oct 18, 2011 at 3:35 PM

    San Jose is further away than Oakland. I don’t understand why the Giants would cause a problem. It’s as far away as Anaheim is from Los Angeles.

    • APBA Guy - Oct 18, 2011 at 3:48 PM


      • clydeserra - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:03 PM

        Greed and a desire for more money

      • paperlions - Oct 18, 2011 at 6:13 PM

        From the Department of Redundancy Department

    • bigleagues - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:48 PM

      Because San Jose sits at the bottom end of the peninsula that San Fran sits at the top of.

      So if you are in San Jose right now, are you more or less likely to drive to San Fran or Oakland to see a game?

      If the A’s move to San Jose, especially with the novelty of a new stadium, it’s not a stretch for the Giants to believe less people will make the trip to San Fran and such a move would generate a renewed interest in the A’s.

      That said, really . . . what does $24 million get you in San Jose? A sandlot?

  2. proudlycanadian - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:02 PM

    Give the Giants Oakland as part of their territory.

    • clydeserra - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:06 PM

      as far as fans go, its already kinda there.

      But more to APBA’s point, San Jose is the seat of Silicon Valley. There is a lot of corporate money there, more so than Oakland. The fight isn’t over fans, its over who gets better access to luxury box customers and advertisers.

  3. halladaysbiceps - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:02 PM

    I think the Athletics need to move back home to Philadelphia. We can support (2) baseball teams again. I would kick the Eagles out of Lincoln Financial Field and convert it into a baseball stadium. I would then move the Eagles back to Franklin Field.

    • uberfatty - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:05 PM

      Would any Phillies fans defect, or are there enough people who don’t follow the Phillies closely who also would root for the A’s? Would be interesting to find out, although this would never actually happen.

      • halladaysbiceps - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:20 PM

        I think we as a city would support both of them. Of course, if they would meet in the World Series, I would 100% back my Phillies.

        I agree though. It would be very interesting. It’s always been a pipe dream of mine to have the A’s back in Philly. I would love to have two baseball teams play here.

      • clydeserra - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:32 PM

        who leads Philadelphia baseball teams in world series titles?

        The A’s!

      • mdpickles - Oct 18, 2011 at 5:15 PM

        Imagine a stadium in Northeast Philly between i95 and the Delaware River? With the amount of interest in baseball in Philly these days, they could draw 1/3 of the Phils crowd and still turn in better ticket sales than Oakland or SJ.

    • clydeserra - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:14 PM

      They should move back to Kansas City and play in the old Kauffman stadium, Artificial turf and all.

      • okobojicat - Oct 18, 2011 at 4:35 PM

        Err, Old Kauffman is the the New Kauffman. They just took out the turf and put in grass.

        or, did I totally miss the sarcasm font?

  4. APBA Guy - Oct 18, 2011 at 6:17 PM

    Relocation could be the end game for the A’s in all this, or at least the next “big stick” that the so-far toothless Wolff uses to generate some movement out of MLB. Who knows, that may be what the “special” committee decides to recommend in their report, expected some time in Stardate 2350.

    Of, course, relocation is exactly what the Giants want, it’s their idea of a win-win: get rid of the A’s in the Bay Area. The A’s win is defined by not having the Giants oppose everything they try to do outside their parking lot in Oakland.

    It would be entertaining to see Wolff try to woo other cities, though. With the overall climate dead set opposed to public financing of a new stadium, he’d probably choose a place with cheap land and a malleable population. Sounds like Vegas, baby.

    • jobooo - Oct 18, 2011 at 7:33 PM

      If Lew Wolff can’t leave his parking lot in Oakland, he won’t even be able to step out of his car in Vegas. Six different teams claim Vegas as their territory.

  5. bsputnik - Oct 18, 2011 at 6:48 PM

    The Athletics: Every city gets a turn.

    • antlerclaws - Oct 19, 2011 at 8:33 AM

      Portland Athletics? Honolulu Athletics? Sacramento Athletics? San Antonio Athletics? Oklahoma City Athletics? Montreal Athletics? Memphis Athletics?

  6. fellspointbird - Oct 18, 2011 at 8:54 PM

    New Orleans Athletics!

  7. leftywildcat - Oct 18, 2011 at 9:45 PM

    Athletics back to Philly? Yeah! Yankees, O’s, and Sox and their fans might love the idea. And it would make sense to put a 2nd team in a metropolis whose one team has sold out its past 200 consecutive home games.

    Stadium in Northeast Philly? Excellent idea, expecially if put right next to a RR station and an I-95 exit.

    I guess I’m able to be sarcastic while I’m dreaming.

  8. kiwicricket - Oct 19, 2011 at 10:35 AM

    ‘I control the dirt.’ Can’t Craig also say that?

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Ramirez (2382)
  2. G. Stanton (2336)
  3. G. Springer (2317)
  4. C. Correa (2308)
  5. J. Baez (2285)