Jan 11, 2012, 12:50 PM EDT
The A’s and the Giants have been at odds over the territorial rights to San Jose for a long time now. In fact, I believe we’re coming up on the third anniversary of launching of the famous MLB study that was designed to solve that problem in the first place. I’m sure they’re almost done!
In the meantime, Wendy Thurm made what appears to be an eminently reasonable and workable proposal to solve the problem in a single blog post over at SB Nation. Imagine.
Now obviously people who live in and know the Bay Area — like Wendy — know the dynamics and quirks to all of this stuff way better, but it seems to make sense. The Giants get some extra territory out of this — notably Oakland — and the A’s get to build their new ballpark that, over time, will benefit all of baseball, the Giants included.
So tell me: what’s wrong with this? Why wouldn’t the Giants be interested in such a deal?
- The World Series ratings are low. So what? 24
- John Hart to be named Braves President of Baseball Operations 2
- No, Ned Yost didn’t “out-manage” Bruce Bochy. His players played better 68
- At least Hunter Strickland entertained us last night 34
- Royals even up World Series with 7-2 Game 2 victory 37
- Craig Kimbrel wins Trevor Hoffman Award; Greg Holland gets Mariano Rivera Award 8
- World Series, Game 2: Giants vs. Royals lineups 10
- HBT Daily: Are the Royals doomed, doomed, doomed? 11
- So, if you’re not a fan of the Royals or Giants, who ya got? (129)
- Erroneous Narrative Alert: no, the Giants are not a “gritty,” anti-stats organization (122)
- Pedro Martinez has some opinions about who the new “face of baseball” is (112)
- PANTY RAID! Homeland Security agents confiscate unlicensed Kansas City Royals underwear (108)
- “The Kansas City Royals Are the Future of Baseball” — someone actually said that. (93)