Skip to content

Oakland poised to kill A’s lease

o-co-coliseum Getty Images

The A’s have a new 10-year lease.  Unless they don’t.

A week after the team and Major League Baseball proclaimed that the A’s would play at O.co Coliseum for the next decade, Oakland officals are poised to vote against the deal, which would kill it.  And that could make the Raiders happy.

Via the San Francisco Chronicle, the four city representatives to the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority are expected to vote against the proposed lease on Thursday.

“The [city] council directed us to vote against it,” said Larry Reid, one of the representatives to the Authority. “This process has been extremely frustrating for me. I just hope Major League Baseball and the A’s can have a little more patience with this council.”

A’s co-owner Lew Wolff doesn’t seem to be inclined to renegotiate the terms of a deal that he personally has declared to be done.

“We believe in our dealings with the [Joint Powers Authority that] we are 100 percent finished,” Wolff said.  “We have a 14-month negotiation finished and approved by Major League Baseball and the JPA.  If someone wants to do something else, we have no interest in that. . . .  If we don’t get a positive vote, we’ll be very sad after 14 months of negotiations.”

It’s sad that he’d use a word like “sad” to express his frustrations regarding the city’s reluctance to finalize what could be a bad deal for the city.  No deal is done until it’s done, and it’s now obvious that Wolff prematurely announced that the lease deal was done to pressure Oakland into agreeing to it.

The current least expires after the 2015 season.  If the A’s move, it could become easier to keep the Raiders — since the Raiders really don’t like the dirt infield that comes from sharing the stadium.

Lost in the talk regarding new leases for the current stadium is that both the A’s and Raiders want new venues.

Permalink 48 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill
48 Responses to “Oakland poised to kill A’s lease”
  1. ravensbob says: Jul 3, 2014 9:52 AM

    Both teams should move. Oakland is a dump.

  2. floratiotime says: Jul 3, 2014 9:54 AM

    Raiders … what a clown act they are. Just honk a few noses and toss a few pies. That’ll get them laughing.

  3. donkeydik says: Jul 3, 2014 9:55 AM

    It would be rather funny if both the A’s and the Raiders leave Oakland for other and more appealing markets.

  4. loup1966 says: Jul 3, 2014 9:57 AM

    The Raiders are one of the most important organizations in all of sports for what they have accomplished and the players, coaches and owner that they’ve had. It is a sin that they are forced to play in the dump that the Coliseum has become. Why are the NFL and other owners sitting on their hands? They must know that a new Rauders stadium drive higher revenue, allowing all the other owners to profit.

  5. swede700 says: Jul 3, 2014 10:04 AM

    Welcome to your Portland A’s!

  6. thestrategyexpert says: Jul 3, 2014 10:07 AM

    If you build it in LA, some Oakland fans will still come.

  7. sdelmonte says: Jul 3, 2014 10:16 AM

    The A’s, thanks to the dithering of Selig and the obstruction of the SF Giants, have no place to go. The stadium in San Jose will never be built. And there aren’t really any places with baseball-ready stadiums.

    Whereas LA is still on the board for the Raiders. I can see them going back to the Coliseum or to the Rose Bowl short term while AEG finally finds a way to build somewhere. The Raiders will be gone from Oakland long before the A’s.

  8. jimmyt says: Jul 3, 2014 10:32 AM

    Sure, why not? Cities really don’t need any sports teams or the revenue they generate anyway do they?

  9. wayneflores says: Jul 3, 2014 10:40 AM

    If either team leaves, and the Warriors leave Oakland will be bankrupt. They won’t be able to attract any team to those dumps. Both teams deserve better, both have brought Oakland $$$$$ and put this otherwise get to town on the map. They will be stuck with a shell of an arena and hole for a stadium. Their City Council and Board have always been a torn in the team’s side. Time to get rid of these old cronies and elect some people with a vision of improvement for these teams, or face the consequences. Sad isn’t the word, ignorant is more fitting.

  10. fatediesel says: Jul 3, 2014 10:52 AM

    The way Bug Selig has handled the A’s situation is yet another black mark on his legacy. If he would just say yes or no to San Jose the A’s could try to figure out their next work, but his inaction has left this in limbo for years.

  11. reesesteel23 says: Jul 3, 2014 10:54 AM

    OKC A’s and OKC Raiders! Yea! Lol

  12. thegenoatkinsdiet says: Jul 3, 2014 10:57 AM

    Winning percentages over the past 10 years…
    A’s: 52.0%
    Raiders: 30.6%

  13. uwsptke says: Jul 3, 2014 10:58 AM

    This all goes back to a pissing match between the A’s and SF Giants. Both teams claim to have territorial rights to San Jose, but MLB is backing the Giants despite San Jose being ready to break ground on a new stadium for the A’s (which leaves the Oakland stadium 100% available to the Raiders to do what they please with it).

  14. chargersdiehard says: Jul 3, 2014 11:19 AM

    At least the A’s are competitive! Oakland has been a cellar dweller for like 20 years!

  15. Silver and Black attack says: Jul 3, 2014 11:21 AM

    The Raiders are having a hard time making progress on a new stadium deal because they have been downright awful for the last 10-12 years. I think the team is definitely on the way up now and if they can start winning and get in the playoffs and make some noise in the next 2-3 years, a new stadium in Oakland or elsewhere will be allot easier to get. Everybody wants a winner. NFL franchises don’t just grow on trees for everybody who wants one to go and get it, the Raiders have been bad for several years, but they are an NFL franchise and one of the more popular ones at that, if the lowly clippers are worth 2 billion after having less than 5 winning seasons in 30 years, then you all can do the math on what a storied NFL franchise is probably worth….

  16. laylow47 says: Jul 3, 2014 11:27 AM

    Move the Raiders to the biggest little city Reno,NV

  17. tedmurph says: Jul 3, 2014 11:32 AM

    Al Davis dropped the ball on this. The Raiders and 49ers going in on a new stadium was a no- brainer. If the Jets and Giants successfully pulled it off why couldn’t they?

  18. stew48 says: Jul 3, 2014 11:38 AM

    Reading the various articles and responses, one thing is very clear: This is a horrible mess.

  19. deviouselvs says: Jul 3, 2014 11:41 AM

    I grew up in the east bay. Both teams should stay in Oakland.

    They both deserve to have new stadiums that are respective to their sport.

    The A’s do not need 50,000 seats. Make a park that seats 30,000 to 35,000 with the ability for corporate sponsors. Make it so I can be close to the game!

    With that said if Oakland doesn’t want to “Play Ball”….

    The A’s should try and move to Sacramento or San Jose. There are plenty of companies they can get as corporate sponsors and or ticket sales in those markets and fans that love the team can easily got see a game. Make sure to put the ballpark in walking distance to public transportation and a downtown. San Diego learned how valuable this can be!

    The Raiders should move to LA and build the stadium downtown. There is already a sponsor for the stadium at $700 million for 30 years! That is about $23 million per year for just naming rights! By the time the stadium would be built ALL of the trains will be up in LA and the stadium would be right in the middle! you could take a train from anywhere and be at the game in an hour! No Traffic! There are plenty of corporate sponsors to buy boxes. There is a fan base. There is a downtown area that you can walk to before and after the game. The weather is great! The stadium designed is insane!

    Like I said, I would love to have them both stay but they both deserve to have their own stadium.

  20. 1standinches says: Jul 3, 2014 11:51 AM

    Raiders have a new stadium waiting in LA.

  21. blabidibla says: Jul 3, 2014 11:55 AM

    MLB isn’t “backing the Giants.” Like it or not, the A’s freely gave up rights to the South Bay when the Giants were trying to move a few decades ago. LEGALLY, the A’s don’t have the right to move there without the Giants approval – and Selig can’t just force the issue.

    The only way the A’s move to SJ is if they pay large sums of money to the Giants… money they don’t have. The best course of action is for the A’s to get a new stadium in OAK down near the waterfront.

  22. clashpoint says: Jul 3, 2014 11:59 AM

    “This stadium just ain’t big enough for the both of us!”

  23. cliverush says: Jul 3, 2014 12:00 PM

    Boston sport fans have seen what happens when owners of teams trust politicians, and it is not pretty. Bob Kraft got worked over in his attempt to build a stadium in Boston with his own money. He gave up and settled for Foxboro where he owned the land. The Red Sox prior owners, The Yawkey Trust, attempted to use political juice to take private property around Fenway by eminent domain to build a new park. This failed and they sold. It worked out in the end for both teams to just use your own money and not attempt to rob the taxpayers who don’t have a vested interest.

  24. pooflingingmonkey says: Jul 3, 2014 12:01 PM

    They should move the Raiders to Oklahoma City. Okies have nothing else to do but go to sporting events.

  25. trollhammer20 says: Jul 3, 2014 12:04 PM

    Fresno is calling, line one…

  26. alonestartexan says: Jul 3, 2014 12:05 PM

    Bring the A’s to San Antonio!

  27. texansdan says: Jul 3, 2014 12:20 PM

    The Oakland Raiders——->The San Antonio Padres

  28. lerch77 says: Jul 3, 2014 12:22 PM

    Why the heck can’t the Raiders and A’s get together and create a joint effort to build a state-of-the-art facility that they can both use? I don’t understand this insistence that they each have their own facility to play in…

  29. scoochpooch says: Jul 3, 2014 12:29 PM

    In the late 80s or 90s the Giants were threatening to move to Tampa, the A’s granted them rights to San Jose area by did not include a sunset clause. So the Giants are effectively screwing the A’s and probably forcing them to move.
    Remember no good deed goes unpunished.

  30. longsufferingkcfan says: Jul 3, 2014 12:40 PM

    On behalf of all other law-abiding LA residents, please do not send the Raiders back here. We don’t want them.

  31. realfootballfan says: Jul 3, 2014 12:42 PM

    The Raiders and A’s are fighting over a dump like that Coliseum, which is sad.

  32. granadafan says: Jul 3, 2014 12:47 PM

    Al Davis destroyed the Oakland Coliseum with Mount Davis “luxury” suites which we taxpayers are paying for. They might as well stay. The surrounding area may be a craphole, but it’s in a great location transporation-wise with 880 freeway right there and the BART train just across the traintracks. The Raiders/ A’s/ Warriors owners who are multi-billionaires missed a huge opportunity to develop the area around the stadium with bars/ restaurants to make it more attractive.

  33. rainponcho87 says: Jul 3, 2014 12:53 PM

    SF giants are really popular in the Bay Area and the stadium is right downtown in SF. A baseball team moving to San Jose would have zero effect on them. Any fans that they lost in San Jose would be more than made up for by fans from the East bay who would have gone to an A’s game in Oakland. In Walnut Creek there is a Giants Dugout store and a Willie McCovey restaurant.

    Stop being so selfish SF Giants.

  34. 1bigtex says: Jul 3, 2014 1:04 PM

    The A’s and the Raiders play in the worst stadium in their respective sports, and yet, we have morons such as 1oup1966 claiming that NFL owners are sitting on their hands. How about if Mark Davis took some of that money he has saved by getting that barber school haircut and build a stadium.

    Don’t blame others when it doesn’t happen. Make it happen yourself.

  35. getyourownname says: Jul 3, 2014 1:31 PM

    I don’t know the back story or options in Oakland, but there’s a good reason pro franchises usually don’t like to build multi-sport stadiums, the design compromises mean they tend to fall a little short for everybody.

  36. El Pollo Loco says: Jul 3, 2014 1:32 PM

    The Honolulu Raiders and the Fresno A’s

  37. jm91rs says: Jul 3, 2014 1:46 PM

    They’re going to approve the lease now that MLB gave them permission to move the team if necessary. I really don’t understand why the team wants to stay. Aside from the sewage problems, the place is nearly 50 years old and doesn’t have the amenities of the newer parks. The council is basically asking the A’s to go get a stadium in san jose or elsewhere if they don’t renew that lease for whatever terms the A’s want. And if I’m the Raiders I wouldn’t care if the A’s stay or go, I’d want a new stadium regardless (the team should pay for it themselves of course) there are a lot more advantages to a new stadium beyond just the dirt infield.

  38. jadaruler says: Jul 3, 2014 2:00 PM

    Demolish that dump

  39. r8rsfan says: Jul 3, 2014 2:07 PM

    All I know is the dirt infield has to go. Oakland is broke and they will never be able to provide any financial assistance. IF they build a shiny new stadium in LA, I don’t think there’s any question the team will move.

  40. stevent92 says: Jul 3, 2014 2:14 PM

    I have never met a single person who has ever moved TO Oakland.

    “I think my family and I are going to pick up the pieces, get a fresh start on life, and relocate to Oakland.” –No One Ever

  41. r8rsfan says: Jul 3, 2014 2:25 PM

    Winning cures everything. I lived in Seattle when the Mariners were threatening to move to DC. The team had been pretty bad for an extended period, but they got Griffey, A-Rod, Randy Johnson, etc. and the success generated enough interest that Safeco Field was approved. Soon after, the Hawks got their own building. This situation is similar to Oakland in that the teams shared a venue, and the key reason it was resolved positively is that the team performed on the field first.

  42. bassplucker says: Jul 3, 2014 2:26 PM

    Why would any NFL team want to keep playing in that toilet bowl?

  43. Bob says: Jul 3, 2014 3:34 PM

    Where’s your update? Talks back on between A’s and Oakland and will probably be approved.

  44. Silver and Black attack says: Jul 3, 2014 3:34 PM

    Just win baby…do that and you will have people lined up to work with you on a stadium deal. Perennial winners in pro sports Usually (not always) but usually will get New venues if they need one. just win, that’s all.

  45. orivar says: Jul 3, 2014 3:42 PM

    Come back to Philadelphia!

  46. lerch77 says: Jul 3, 2014 3:50 PM

    “I think my family and I are going to pick up the pieces, get a fresh start on life, and relocate to Oakland.” –No One Ever

    I think there are many folks from Tijuana and points beyond that would disagree with you… ;-)

  47. raiderapologist says: Jul 3, 2014 8:40 PM

    1bigtex says: Jul 3, 2014 1:04 PM

    The A’s and the Raiders play in the worst stadium in their respective sports, and yet, we have morons such as 1oup1966 claiming that NFL owners are sitting on their hands. How about if Mark Davis took some of that money he has saved by getting that barber school haircut and build a stadium.
    ———————-
    Davis has offered up 400 million.

  48. droopy925 says: Jul 5, 2014 12:02 PM

    Screw the raiders keep the A’s the raiders complain about the coliseum but they were the ones who ruined it in the first place ugly monstrosity mount davis

Leave a Reply

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