Official admits A's were on MLB's short list

Carissa · 05-03-02, 11:19 AM

Official admits A's were on MLB's short list 05/03 S. Slusser / San Francisco Chronicle
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...3/SP156347.DTL

New York -- For the first time, a Major League Baseball official has acknowledged that the A's -- who reached the playoffs each of the past two seasons and made money the past several years -- were considered for contraction when the issue first arose.

"Oakland was on the list initially, sure," said Bob DuPuy, MLB's president and COO.
Asked why, DuPuy responded, "Lack of facilities, local revenue, ticket sales. . . . There are people in the game who feel the Bay Area can't support two teams."

DuPuy followed by saying the A's currently have nothing to worry about, echoing commissioner Bud Selig's comments this spring. DuPuy also said he met with Oakland city manager Robert Bobb and development director Rosie Rios last week to look at preliminary plans for a possible new stadium in Oakland, and he noted their enthusiasm.

Before meeting with a group of Bay Area reporters, DuPuy stopped by a meeting between the players' union and MLB officials, who are continuing to try to knock out a new labor agreement. The A's player representative, Barry Zito, and assistant player rep, Mike Magnante, were at the negotiations.

Zito was not surprised to hear the A's were on the contraction list at one point. He said Oakland's success on a small payroll disproves the owners' claims of economic disparity and competitive imbalance.

"Baseball doesn't want the A's to win," Zito said. "We make baseball look bad when we go out and win."

DuPuy referred to the A's as "an anomaly," which got a chuckle out of manager Art Howe later. "I've been called a lot of things, but never that," he said.

Baseball's brass says A's are safe, for now 05/03 G. Bell / Sacramento Bee
Without a new stadium, Oakland might face contraction down the road.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports...-2934748c.html

NEW YORK -- As recently as last fall, the A's were on the same contraction block as the moribund Montreal Expos and the embattled Minnesota Twins.

And to stay off it, Oakland had better get a new stadium.

That was the essence of what Major League Baseball president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy had to say Thursday on the game's dirty C-word, contraction.

DuPuy, the top assistant to commissioner Bud Selig, is hosting each team's traveling media contingent at league headquarters in Manhattan throughout the season.

Thursday, it was the A's turn to grab the public relations olive branch that the league is extending while its owners and players continue to barrel head-on into a possible work stoppage. The subject of contracting the A's, with the second-lowest payroll and sixth-lowest annual revenues in the 30-team league, became pertinent.

"When we reviewed clubs initially, Oakland was on the (contraction) list, because of the lack of a new facility, the lack of local revenues and the lack of ticket sales," DuPuy said. "There are people in the game who feel that the Bay Area cannot support two local teams."

But DuPuy added this temporary reassurance:

"I think the commissioner said in spring training that Oakland is not a current candidate for contraction."

The word "current" is operative here.

Selig has said the A's must have a new stadium to create revenue that would close the disparity between the A's and the Yankees. New York has a $125 million payroll, while the A's are at $38 million.

DuPuy said Oakland city manager Robert Bobb visited him last week and provided "the most encouraging report I've seen yet" on an initial-site study for a new ballpark on city-owned property downtown.

He denied the league is pressuring civic leaders in cities, essentially making them choose between funding a new baseball stadium or eventually losing their franchises.

But then he added: "Sooner or later, communities have to make their own choices. We can't subsidize markets just to allow them to have Major League Baseball.

"Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Houston and San Diego (which all approved new stadiums in the recent years) have all stepped up. Other markets, like Montreal and Minnesota have decided not to."

As for the labor mess, A's players' union representative Barry Zito and his assistant, Mike Magnante, attended a negotiation meeting with DuPuy. They don't buy the league's argument that baseball must fix competitive imbalance through increased revenue sharing.

Zito represents his union's stance that the A's, gunning for a third consecutive playoff appearance, are disproving the league's belief that the current economic system is broken.

"Baseball doesn't want us to win," Zito said. "We make baseball look bad when we win."

To which DuPuy responds: "Oakland is the anomaly. They are a great story. But keeping that team intact and getting to and winning a World Series are different issues."

A's were on league's chopping block 05/03 R. Hurd / Contra Costa Times
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/bayarea/s...cs/3188784.htm

NEW YORK - It's no longer a secret. The A's were among a list of teams that commissioner Bud Selig considered for contraction last winter.

Robert DuPuy, the president and chief operating officer of Major League Baseball and the man second in command to Selig, admitted Thursday that the commissioner's office looked into eliminating the A's.

"When we reviewed (contraction) initially, Oakland was on the initial list. Yes," DuPuy said. The reasons, he said, were "a lack of a facility, a lack of generation of local revenue and a lack of ticket sales. And there are people in the game who feel the Bay Area can't support two major-league teams."

That said, DuPuy also reiterated the fact that the A's no longer remain on that list. Selig told the Bay Area media during spring training that "I don't think we should spend a lot of time worrying about the A's being contracted right now."

"I agree with the commissioner," DuPuy said.

DuPuy also seconded Selig's belief that the A's can survive in Oakland only with a new stadium. He said the fact that the A's are closing in on a new five-year lease extension on their current stadium doesn't change that view. He also said the onus is on the city of Oakland to help get a new stadium built.

"No one is holding a gun to the city's head," he said. "... Eventually communities have to make decisions. We can't subsidize a major-league team just so that a community can continue to have one."

Zito deal close

Left-hander Barry Zito said he expects to formalize a new long-term contract with the team during next week's homestand. Zito said the agreement will be for four years, with an option for a fifth. Should the option be exercised, the deal would link Zito to the A's through 2006. He's eligible for free agency in 2007.

cman · 05-03-02, 11:33 AM

I agree completly with Zito - A small payroll team winning...and winning with regular consistency as the A's have, flies right in the face of the " got to have a huge payroll to win bull "

Yet another point on which Uncle Bud is lying... lose money? HAH.

......and since when does a new ballpark equal interest by fans? If your team sucks, your not going to care if they play in new digs. " Oh, team X will be able to compete, once we get this new stadium built "

Silly comish, tricks are for kids!

Sandman · 05-03-02, 12:54 PM

"Selig has said the A's must have a new stadium to create revenue that would close the disparity between the A's and the Yankees. New York has a $125 million payroll, while the A's are at $38 million."

We see how great Detroit and Milwaukee have become with their new ballparks...

Rich · 05-03-02, 01:23 PM

Why Selig is the most dangerous man in baseball. I guess Bud thinks that if you can't beat them, contract them.

uab · 05-03-02, 04:57 PM

Quote:

"Oakland is the anomaly. They are a great story. But keeping that team intact and getting to and winning a World Series are different issues."

Minnesota is no longer a pushover either; they're a player or two away and they still have some great prospects that may become that player or two. They could very easily win the central and they are drawing more fans this season and since they started winning. You can't cut a winning team or tell fans that if you don't anty up the money for a new BP, it doesn't matter how many games you attend or how improved your team becomes. As far as staying intact, didn't the A's sign all those younger players to long term deals? For every Yankee payroll that is high and successful, there is a Dodgers payroll that is not. It's how you spend it and when you sign 'em that makes you competitive. Look at the f'n Rangers and how they spent their money.

Move the Expos to wherever they need to go to draw people. Don't contract it till you have exhausted that option first; afterall it is MLB's own fault in many of these cases for expanding the way it did (I'm looking at you Tampa Bay and Florida).

samantha · 05-03-02, 05:35 PM

the more I hear about Selig the more of a moron I think he is...

bagger015 · 05-03-02, 11:33 PM

I'm not suprised that the A's were on the block. No fan support even when they win. New stadium won't help. All the owners have the money to spend and they choose not to. And money does not buy championships. Baltimore comes to mind recently.
Smoke and mirrors.......Selig et al wanna be magicians......:rolleyes:

05-03-02, 11:19 AM	#1
Carissa The Source Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Long Island, NY	Official admits A's were on MLB's short list Official admits A's were on MLB's short list 05/03 S. Slusser / San Francisco Chronicle http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...3/SP156347.DTL New York -- For the first time, a Major League Baseball official has acknowledged that the A's -- who reached the playoffs each of the past two seasons and made money the past several years -- were considered for contraction when the issue first arose. "Oakland was on the list initially, sure," said Bob DuPuy, MLB's president and COO. Asked why, DuPuy responded, "Lack of facilities, local revenue, ticket sales. . . . There are people in the game who feel the Bay Area can't support two teams." DuPuy followed by saying the A's currently have nothing to worry about, echoing commissioner Bud Selig's comments this spring. DuPuy also said he met with Oakland city manager Robert Bobb and development director Rosie Rios last week to look at preliminary plans for a possible new stadium in Oakland, and he noted their enthusiasm. Before meeting with a group of Bay Area reporters, DuPuy stopped by a meeting between the players' union and MLB officials, who are continuing to try to knock out a new labor agreement. The A's player representative, Barry Zito, and assistant player rep, Mike Magnante, were at the negotiations. Zito was not surprised to hear the A's were on the contraction list at one point. He said Oakland's success on a small payroll disproves the owners' claims of economic disparity and competitive imbalance. "Baseball doesn't want the A's to win," Zito said. "We make baseball look bad when we go out and win." DuPuy referred to the A's as "an anomaly," which got a chuckle out of manager Art Howe later. "I've been called a lot of things, but never that," he said. Baseball's brass says A's are safe, for now 05/03 G. Bell / Sacramento Bee Without a new stadium, Oakland might face contraction down the road. http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports...-2934748c.html NEW YORK -- As recently as last fall, the A's were on the same contraction block as the moribund Montreal Expos and the embattled Minnesota Twins. And to stay off it, Oakland had better get a new stadium. That was the essence of what Major League Baseball president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy had to say Thursday on the game's dirty C-word, contraction. DuPuy, the top assistant to commissioner Bud Selig, is hosting each team's traveling media contingent at league headquarters in Manhattan throughout the season. Thursday, it was the A's turn to grab the public relations olive branch that the league is extending while its owners and players continue to barrel head-on into a possible work stoppage. The subject of contracting the A's, with the second-lowest payroll and sixth-lowest annual revenues in the 30-team league, became pertinent. "When we reviewed clubs initially, Oakland was on the (contraction) list, because of the lack of a new facility, the lack of local revenues and the lack of ticket sales," DuPuy said. "There are people in the game who feel that the Bay Area cannot support two local teams." But DuPuy added this temporary reassurance: "I think the commissioner said in spring training that Oakland is not a current candidate for contraction." The word "current" is operative here. Selig has said the A's must have a new stadium to create revenue that would close the disparity between the A's and the Yankees. New York has a $125 million payroll, while the A's are at $38 million. DuPuy said Oakland city manager Robert Bobb visited him last week and provided "the most encouraging report I've seen yet" on an initial-site study for a new ballpark on city-owned property downtown. He denied the league is pressuring civic leaders in cities, essentially making them choose between funding a new baseball stadium or eventually losing their franchises. But then he added: "Sooner or later, communities have to make their own choices. We can't subsidize markets just to allow them to have Major League Baseball. "Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Houston and San Diego (which all approved new stadiums in the recent years) have all stepped up. Other markets, like Montreal and Minnesota have decided not to." As for the labor mess, A's players' union representative Barry Zito and his assistant, Mike Magnante, attended a negotiation meeting with DuPuy. They don't buy the league's argument that baseball must fix competitive imbalance through increased revenue sharing. Zito represents his union's stance that the A's, gunning for a third consecutive playoff appearance, are disproving the league's belief that the current economic system is broken. "Baseball doesn't want us to win," Zito said. "We make baseball look bad when we win." To which DuPuy responds: "Oakland is the anomaly. They are a great story. But keeping that team intact and getting to and winning a World Series are different issues." A's were on league's chopping block 05/03 R. Hurd / Contra Costa Times http://www.bayarea.com/mld/bayarea/s...cs/3188784.htm NEW YORK - It's no longer a secret. The A's were among a list of teams that commissioner Bud Selig considered for contraction last winter. Robert DuPuy, the president and chief operating officer of Major League Baseball and the man second in command to Selig, admitted Thursday that the commissioner's office looked into eliminating the A's. "When we reviewed (contraction) initially, Oakland was on the initial list. Yes," DuPuy said. The reasons, he said, were "a lack of a facility, a lack of generation of local revenue and a lack of ticket sales. And there are people in the game who feel the Bay Area can't support two major-league teams." That said, DuPuy also reiterated the fact that the A's no longer remain on that list. Selig told the Bay Area media during spring training that "I don't think we should spend a lot of time worrying about the A's being contracted right now." "I agree with the commissioner," DuPuy said. DuPuy also seconded Selig's belief that the A's can survive in Oakland only with a new stadium. He said the fact that the A's are closing in on a new five-year lease extension on their current stadium doesn't change that view. He also said the onus is on the city of Oakland to help get a new stadium built. "No one is holding a gun to the city's head," he said. "... Eventually communities have to make decisions. We can't subsidize a major-league team just so that a community can continue to have one." Zito deal close Left-hander Barry Zito said he expects to formalize a new long-term contract with the team during next week's homestand. Zito said the agreement will be for four years, with an option for a fifth. Should the option be exercised, the deal would link Zito to the A's through 2006. He's eligible for free agency in 2007.

05-03-02, 01:23 PM	#4
Rich NYYF Legend Join Date: Mar 2002	One more reason Why Selig is the most dangerous man in baseball. I guess Bud thinks that if you can't beat them, contract them.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-03-02, 11:33 AM	#2
cman NYYF MVP Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Pacific North West	I agree completly with Zito - A small payroll team winning...and winning with regular consistency as the A's have, flies right in the face of the " got to have a huge payroll to win bull " Yet another point on which Uncle Bud is lying... lose money? HAH. ......and since when does a new ballpark equal interest by fans? If your team sucks, your not going to care if they play in new digs. " Oh, team X will be able to compete, once we get this new stadium built " Silly comish, tricks are for kids!

05-03-02, 12:54 PM	#3
Sandman NYYF MVP Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Staten Island, NY	"Selig has said the A's must have a new stadium to create revenue that would close the disparity between the A's and the Yankees. New York has a $125 million payroll, while the A's are at $38 million." We see how great Detroit and Milwaukee have become with their new ballparks...

05-03-02, 05:35 PM	#6
samantha ouch! Join Date: Mar 2002	the more I hear about Selig the more of a moron I think he is...

05-03-02, 11:33 PM	#7
bagger015 NYYF Legend Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Central Square, N.Y. USA :)	I'm not suprised that the A's were on the block. No fan support even when they win. New stadium won't help. All the owners have the money to spend and they choose not to. And money does not buy championships. Baltimore comes to mind recently. Smoke and mirrors.......Selig et al wanna be magicians......:rolleyes:


			Our 10th Season!