Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, December 10, 2012

Kettman: Talk of A’s to San Jose Gets Unlikely Boost

I doubt it’s from the Ike Ferrell Advocacy Group.

Baseball’s winter meetings are a bizarre spectacle, a lot of people standing around chasing rumors with not much going on much of the time, which was why it was a big deal when super-agent Scott Boras chose the occasion to talk up the idea of the A’s moving to San Jose.

The reason it was important was this: No one else was talking about it. It generated some tweets and some headlines and focused some attention on a maddening riddle—Why doesn’t baseball take action to resolve the absurd situation?

The facts are very simple: Years ago when the Giants were playing at Candlestick Park and desperate they asked to be granted so-called territorial rights to the San Jose area so they could pursue moving their franchise down there. Instead, they built a swank new ballpark in San Francisco that is the envy of baseball and yet, for reasons not one person can explain, they are being allowed to perpetuate the fiction that they “own” territorial rights to San Jose.

I grew up in San Jose. Back then it was the pathetic cousin of San Francisco. Now it has a larger population and it also boasts great weather for baseball: Anyone who is open-minded agrees it makes sense for the A’s to move there—since Oakland, sadly, is clearly no longer an option—and build an intimate new stadium. I was covering the San Jose Sharks for the San Francisco Chronicle when the team started playing its first games at a new arena in San Jose and the fans went wild. Something similar would happen if the A’s moved to San Jose. It would be good for baseball. It would be good for the Giants, since everyone loves a good rivalry and it’s always much more fun and interesting to have two lively franchises in a market.

So when someone like Boras, who I think of as always having a single agenda (Boras), takes his time to make some obvious points on the subject, I think it’s a good sign.

Repoz Posted: December 10, 2012 at 09:23 PM | 44 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: oakland

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Bhaakon Posted: December 10, 2012 at 10:15 PM (#4321410)
Don't kid yourself, San Jose is still the pathetic cousin of San Francisco. Of course, Oakland is it's red-headed step brother.
   2. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: December 10, 2012 at 10:48 PM (#4321434)
Don't kid yourself, San Jose is still the pathetic cousin of San Francisco. Of course, Oakland is it's red-headed step brother.

Ah San Francisco, where self-importance flows from the mouths of the delusional.
   3. Bhaakon Posted: December 11, 2012 at 01:07 AM (#4321520)
Ah San Francisco, where self-importance flows from the mouths of the delusional.


I live closer to San Jose, actually. When locals say that they're going to the city, they don't mean SJ.
   4. J.R. Wolf Posted: December 11, 2012 at 01:07 AM (#4321521)
When I visited SF, the locals told me not to call it San Francisco but to call it "The City." I laughed. It's not Paris, it's just pretentious - and it's prone to attacks of entitlement, like still claiming San Jose just to hurt the A's.
   5. bobm Posted: December 11, 2012 at 01:31 AM (#4321535)
the locals told me not to call it San Francisco but to call it "The City." I laughed. It's not Paris

It's not Manhattan, either.
   6. J.R. Wolf Posted: December 11, 2012 at 02:16 AM (#4321550)
It's not even L.A.
   7. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: December 11, 2012 at 02:25 AM (#4321557)
When I visited SF, the locals told me not to call it San Francisco but to call it "The City." I laughed. It's not Paris, it's just pretentious

They're weird that way. They told me not to call it "Frisco" either, even though I hadn't actually done that or even thought of doing that. I asked why they found "Frisco" so offensive and no one knew the answer. Then someone looked it up and found out that apparently 19th century miners called it that and SF dwellers didn't want to be associated with miners because they didn't project the urbane sophistication that SF dwellers wanted. Of course no one could explain how that applied in the [then] 20th century.
   8. Flynn Posted: December 11, 2012 at 05:45 AM (#4321586)
San Jose is a very nice, pleasant suburb. I don't understand why people compare it to San Francisco.
   9. Bhaakon Posted: December 11, 2012 at 05:45 AM (#4321587)
the locals told me not to call it San Francisco but to call it "The City." I laughed. It's not Paris

It's not Manhattan, either.


I imagine it's because, for a generation or so, it was the closest thing to an industrial, East Coast-style city for a thousand miles in any direction (and signifcantly more than that in most directions). I also think that "Frisco", "San Fran", and any other abbreviated version of the full name that you care to formulate are loathed by locals, which doesn't leave many alternatives for those who are into that whole brevity thing.


They're weird that way. They told me not to call it "Frisco" either, even though I hadn't actually done that or even thought of doing that. I asked why they found "Frisco" so offensive and no one knew


Frisco is a city in Texas, Utah, Idaho, Alabama, Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. As far as I (which is to say, Wikipedia) can tell, there's only one currently extant city named San Francisco in the US.
   10. Greg K Posted: December 11, 2012 at 05:53 AM (#4321588)
it was the closest thing to an industrial, East Coast-style city for a thousand miles in any direction (and signifcantly more than that in most directions).

Especially west.
   11. RMc's desperate, often sordid world Posted: December 11, 2012 at 06:32 AM (#4321590)
San JosA's?
   12. robneyer Posted: December 11, 2012 at 07:08 AM (#4321593)
As ever, Repoz's memory astounds me.
   13. bookbook Posted: December 11, 2012 at 10:53 AM (#4321684)
It isn't Manhattan, or LA. and thank God for that.
   14. Fernigal McGunnigle has become a merry hat Posted: December 11, 2012 at 11:01 AM (#4321691)
Frisco is a city in Texas, Utah, Idaho, Alabama, Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. As far as I (which is to say, Wikipedia) can tell, there's only one currently extant city named San Francisco in the US.


Frisco, North Carolina is a gas station on the highway that runs along the Outer Banks. It is not a city under any extant definition of the term.
   15. UCCF Posted: December 11, 2012 at 11:06 AM (#4321694)
Having spent almost no time in San Jose, and having lived the last 6 years in SF, I can state with absolute certainty that San Jose is better than SF. I've lived all over the country, and this is easily my least favorite place to live. Why yes, I'd love to pay triple the cost of living to be in a traffic-congested, self-important, bloated fossil of a city.

This is the New Orleans of the West coast - romanticized as some iconic American destination by people who doesn't actually have to live here.
   16. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: December 11, 2012 at 11:14 AM (#4321703)
Why don't you commute from somewhere else, Whiny McWhinenstein?
   17. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 11, 2012 at 12:36 PM (#4321762)
I like San Francisco and New Orleans but wouldn't want to live in either one. Love to visit though, both great cities for food.
   18. KT's Pot Arb Posted: December 11, 2012 at 12:57 PM (#4321787)
I used to live in Santa Clara, but always enjoyed my visits to Frisco. It was like entering another world, you'd leave the brilliant sunshine for an ominous mist, walk up and down ancient streets manned by boisterous layabouts, and eat the most amazing food.
   19. Willie Mayspedester Posted: December 11, 2012 at 02:01 PM (#4321862)
it was the closest thing to an industrial, East Coast-style city for a thousand miles in any direction (and signifcantly more than that in most directions).


Do any other cities on the west coast have a skyline as big as SF (the proper way to shorten San Francisco by the way)? I'm from Santa Cruz so I have no rooting interest here. LA doesn't and seems more like a suburb than a city to me.
   20. willcarrolldoesnotsuk Posted: December 11, 2012 at 02:31 PM (#4321914)
It will always be Yerba Buena to me.
   21. Steve Treder Posted: December 11, 2012 at 02:55 PM (#4321955)
Do any other cities on the west coast have a skyline as big as SF

No.
   22. Petunia inquires about ponies Posted: December 11, 2012 at 03:18 PM (#4321997)
They told me not to call it "Frisco" either, even though I hadn't actually done that or even thought of doing that. I asked why they found "Frisco" so offensive and no one knew the answer. Then someone looked it up and found out that apparently 19th century miners called it that and SF dwellers didn't want to be associated with miners because they didn't project the urbane sophistication that SF dwellers wanted. Of course no one could explain how that applied in the [then] 20th century.

It's just one of those things that isn't done because it isn't. It's nothing to do with miners so there's no reason to evince surprise that the fictional explanation based on that theory doesn't have any currency. Nobody from around here calls it 'Frisco' or 'San Fran' because those aren't local nicknames for the city. So calling it that isn't loathsome or offensive, it just marks you as an outsider. Being marked as an outsider in any context invites scorn.

There really doesn't have to be any underlying sociopsychology or what have you. It's just not what it's called.

As [19] notes, 'S.F.' is really one of the few commonly accepted nicknames for San Francisco, but verbalizing 'S.F.' leaves a lot to be desired. Hence 'the City.' Everyone knows what you're talking about when you say that anywhere in the greater Bay Area, so while one is free to think it sounds pretentious, that's what's most often used.

[15] is also 100% correct. I live just across the bay from the city, and I barely like to GO there because of the traffic, the expense, the total lack of parking, and the traffic.
   23. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: December 11, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4321998)
San Francisco is funny in that everyone who is from there tells you how great it is to live there because of how unique it is , yet every day some other part of what made it unique disappears to be replaced by the same Big Box stores that dot the rest of the Bay Area.
   24. esseff Posted: December 11, 2012 at 03:24 PM (#4322007)
but verbalizing 'S.F.' leaves a lot to be desired.


Beg pardon.

   25. esseff Posted: December 11, 2012 at 03:34 PM (#4322027)
All seriousness aside, I think the insistence on no Frisco comes from the gospel of Herb Caen.
   26. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: December 11, 2012 at 03:45 PM (#4322049)
All seriousness aside, I think the insistence on no Frisco comes from the gospel of Herb Caen.


I agree. Another part of what I miss about SF was reading his columns in the Chron.
   27. Flynn Posted: December 11, 2012 at 03:58 PM (#4322065)
Having spent almost no time in San Jose, and having lived the last 6 years in SF, I can state with absolute certainty that San Jose is better than SF. I've lived all over the country, and this is easily my least favorite place to live. Why yes, I'd love to pay triple the cost of living to be in a traffic-congested, self-important, bloated fossil of a city.


Then go, nobody's forcing you to stay in San Francisco. Wah wah wah.
   28. Willie Mayspedester Posted: December 11, 2012 at 04:15 PM (#4322105)
I think San Fran is better than saying Frisco, or Cali which for some reason erks me. (Unless you are Notorious BIG)
   29. sardonic Posted: December 11, 2012 at 04:34 PM (#4322140)
Things that are good/great about Bay Area (for me):
1) Huge Asian/Chinese population, particularly from Taiwan (ymmv)
2) Hub of the tech industry (ymmv)
3) Generally very highly educated/thoughtful/achievement oriented people* (probably more than anywhere other than Boston)
4) Good food/restaurant/bar/scene (comparable to other leading metropolises)
5) Easy driving range to everything from the beach, wine country, Lake Tahoe, Yosemite and more.
6) Better weather than almost all other places in the US

*Can be pretentious

Collectively, I can't think of anywhere I'd rather live, particularly as a young Chinese person who works in tech.

Things that I like about SF relative to the rest of the Bay Area
1) Better restaurants/bar/club scene
2) Relatively walkable
3) Close to a lot of jobs (including my current one)

Things that aren't as good about SF
1) Traffic getting in can be bad (can be mitigated by living there, which is what I'm working on)
2) Housing is expensive
3) Asian food is not as good as in the peninsula/South Bay**
4) Kind of dirty

**Excluding Cantonese food

As for San Jose, there's nothing wrong with it, but I'd say unless you lived there or worked there (a large population to be sure), there's just not much reason to go there. As Flynn notes, it's mostly a big suburb.

As for nicknames, I don't really know why people don't tend to say San Fran or Frisco, just that it sounds weird. "The City" makes sense in the context of the Bay Area (or at least peninsula/South Bay, where I live) because SF is the only really urban area in that part of the bay.
   30. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: December 11, 2012 at 04:53 PM (#4322175)
They told me not to call it "Frisco" either, even though I hadn't actually done that or even thought of doing that. I asked why they found "Frisco" so offensive and no one knew the answer. Then someone looked it up and found out that apparently 19th century miners called it that and SF dwellers didn't want to be associated with miners because they didn't project the urbane sophistication that SF dwellers wanted. Of course no one could explain how that applied in the [then] 20th century.

It's just one of those things that isn't done because it isn't. It's nothing to do with miners so there's no reason to evince surprise that the fictional explanation based on that theory doesn't have any currency. Nobody from around here calls it 'Frisco' or 'San Fran' because those aren't local nicknames for the city. So calling it that isn't loathsome or offensive, it just marks you as an outsider. Being marked as an outsider in any context invites scorn.

There really doesn't have to be any underlying sociopsychology or what have you. It's just not what it's called.

As [19] notes, 'S.F.' is really one of the few commonly accepted nicknames for San Francisco, but verbalizing 'S.F.' leaves a lot to be desired. Hence 'the City.' Everyone knows what you're talking about when you say that anywhere in the greater Bay Area, so while one is free to think it sounds pretentious, that's what's most often used.

[15] is also 100% correct. I live just across the bay from the city, and I barely like to GO there because of the traffic, the expense, the total lack of parking, and the traffic.

All of this may be true, but nobody outside San Francisco cares. I thought it strange that the locals assumed I would care, and that they needed to raise the topic. My reaction to their bizarre instruction not to call it "Frisco", which they did consider "loathsome" by the way, was "why are you telling me this, and why should I care?".
   31. Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot Posted: December 11, 2012 at 05:05 PM (#4322204)
I used to live in Santa Clara, but always enjoyed my visits to Frisco. It was like entering another world, you'd leave the brilliant sunshine for an ominous mist, walk up and down ancient streets manned by boisterous layabouts, and eat the most amazing food.


Sure, a 1500 mile drive will result in some environment changes.

I think San Fran is better than saying Frisco, or Cali which for some reason erks me. (Unless you are Notorious BIG)


If you were a true Bay Area resident, Notorious BIG would irk you even more.
   32. sardonic Posted: December 11, 2012 at 05:10 PM (#4322211)
All of this may be true, but nobody outside San Francisco cares. I thought it strange that the locals assumed I would care, and that they needed to raise the topic. My reaction to their bizarre instruction not to call it "Frisco", which they did consider "loathsome" by the way, was "why are you telling me this, and why should I care?".


It's possible that you happened to run into some unusually aggressive people about it, but every large tribe has some people like that, like pink hat wearing Red Sox fans. In general though, I think most tribes of people tend to have strong feelings about naming -- see Myanmar/Burma or Mumbai/Bombay. I have no idea what feelings actual New Yorkers have toward referring to New York as Gotham, if any, but if it wasn't a commonly accepted term within the local community, I wouldn't be surprised to hear about it.
   33. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: December 11, 2012 at 05:16 PM (#4322222)
Speaking of names for New York, I knew a kid at summer camp who insisted on calling NYC "The City" in passing conversation (e.g. "I got this at this music store in The City where they had every Butthole Surfers album"), and responding with a scornful shake of the head to anyone who didn't know that "The City" means New York. Not all of us come from the greater New York area, you windbag. People like that are annoying anywhere.
   34. Into the Void Posted: December 11, 2012 at 05:17 PM (#4322224)
I live just across the bay from the city, and I barely like to GO there because of the traffic, the expense, the total lack of parking, and the traffic.


Though that's the beauty of actually living in the city- I'm close to BART and multiple MUNI lines so I don't need a car, making three of those four things completely non-existent issues for me. I'm going on my eighth year here and my only problem with San Francisco is the majority of people that live here, whom I find so obnoxious, empty, and tech-driven (seriously people, it's ok to not check your phone for a few seconds) that I really want to get the **** out of here. I really miss Chicago in that regard, though I know it's changing there too.
   35. Willie Mayspedester Posted: December 11, 2012 at 06:16 PM (#4322288)
If you were a true Bay Area resident, Notorious BIG would irk you even more.


Ya well I'm from Santa Cruz where we get irked by the word hella so go figure.
   36. phredbird Posted: December 11, 2012 at 07:22 PM (#4322350)
new orleans native who lives in L.A., who visits S.F. as much as possible.

-all the years i lived in new orleans we natives would get a kick out of non-natives who couldn't pronounce new orleans (it's not 'new or-lee-ans', its more like 'noo orlins' or if you are a real yat its shortened to 'n'awlins'.), or who would say 'poor boy' when they meant a po boy. but the people i knew were never snide about it, everybody was pals by the end of the day.

-i love to visit S.F., was warned right away not to call it 'frisco', but since i had spent all my adult life in a similar 'charm' city like new orleans, i knew what that was about, so was careful not to do so. i could see how living there could wear on a person, but i wouldn't mind being able to afford it and give it a go. i really like to visit. btw, the love hate between L.A. and san francisco is mostly one-way. most angelenos really like S.F.

-L.A. is a city. don't mistake that. it is a huge, sprawling city and its a city that is shockingly beautiful and shockingly ugly, sometimes simultaneously.
   37. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: December 11, 2012 at 07:48 PM (#4322376)
sf is a fine food city, but oaklánd´s miles better at the moment.
   38. Flynn Posted: December 11, 2012 at 08:06 PM (#4322402)
SF is always going to hate LA. Angelenos can be as nice as they want, but SF will never forgive them for just being there. We will resent LA until it falls into the ocean for taking our rightful place as the crown jewel of the West Coast. Also F the Dodgers and Lakers and USC. Kings too.

A guy who wrote a book on the Giants-Dodgers rivalry once called SF Brooklyn with a Manhattan state of mind, which is a pretty good analogy. 'Specially cause there's lots of hipsters...

I grew up in San Francisco and I live in London now, so I probably have a different point of view on space than the rest of you. I've also never learned how to drive, which is only possible in San Francisco, New York, Chicago and maybe Boston. But I don't find SF that difficult to live in. Sure it's very expensive, but most coastal big cities are very expensive. Boston was just eye-watering the last time I was there. It's fairly easy to get around in, as long as you're patient and unlike most cities if Muni pisses you off too much you can just walk (BART is great on the other hand). Hell, I walked from the Embarcadero to my aunt's house in the Castro and it only took me about an hour and 15 minutes. It's that small of a city.

The money is a big obstacle, but...meh, it is what it is. I wish I got to have a big backyard like my cousins in Connecticut got, but they all would rather eat knives than move back to the suburbs. I'd be pleased as punch to be back home.
   39. Flynn Posted: December 11, 2012 at 08:10 PM (#4322406)
sf is a fine food city, but oaklánd´s miles better at the moment.


I don't know if I would go that far (there is great food in totally out of the way neighborhoods in SF now) but the rent prices are tightening the screws on adventurous food.
   40. Steve Treder Posted: December 11, 2012 at 08:26 PM (#4322421)
the love hate between L.A. and san francisco is mostly one-way. most angelenos really like S.F.

Not mostly. Just about entirely.
   41. KT's Pot Arb Posted: December 11, 2012 at 08:43 PM (#4322443)
All of this may be true, but nobody outside San Francisco cares. I thought it strange that the locals assumed I would care, and that they needed to raise the topic. My reaction to their bizarre instruction not to call it "Frisco", which they did consider "loathsome" by the way, was "why are you telling me this, and why should I care?".


The denizens of Frisco seem to struggle with how to pronounce the name of their burg, they have to stretch it out with la di da terms to make it "San Frisco" or something like that, sort of like calling a crap "le crepe" in hopes others won't notice the stink.

Frisco is a wonderful place to visit, too bad the collapse of CA will essentially be centered there.
   42. J.R. Wolf Posted: December 12, 2012 at 02:50 AM (#4322687)
True, the food is good in SF - but beyond that, the city is just a big steaming pile of self-absorption and pretentiousness.
   43. Into the Void Posted: December 12, 2012 at 03:03 AM (#4322693)
Please explain how an entire city can be pretentious.
   44. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 12, 2012 at 03:20 AM (#4322697)
I thought San Francisco had a pretty solid theater scene when I was there, I'd say only New York (duh) and Chicago were clearly superior in that respect. I guess liking live theater can be sorta pretentious.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dock Ellis on Acid
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT:  2014 College Football pre-season thread
(2 - 10:37pm, Aug 01)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

NewsblogGraphic designer creates Star Wars/MLB mash-up logos for all 30 teams
(10 - 10:37pm, Aug 01)
Last: clowns to the left of me; STEAGLES to the right

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - August 2014
(26 - 10:36pm, Aug 01)
Last: Dandy Little Glove Man

NewsblogMike Carp designated for assignment, Mookie Betts called up - Over the Monster
(24 - 10:34pm, Aug 01)
Last: DanO

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(213 - 10:32pm, Aug 01)
Last: clowns to the left of me; STEAGLES to the right

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-1
(18 - 10:26pm, Aug 01)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogRosendo ‘Rusty’ Torres found guilty of 5 counts of sex abuse, acquitted of 3 other charges
(14 - 9:19pm, Aug 01)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogGeorge "The Animal" Steele Mangles A Baseball
(160 - 9:12pm, Aug 01)
Last: NJ in DC (Now unemployed!)

NewsblogBill James Mailbag - 7/13/14 - 7/22/14 (Subscription Required)
(11 - 8:40pm, Aug 01)
Last: robinred

NewsblogJose Bautista, Casey Janssen “frustrated” and “disappointed” by Jays’ lack of deadline activity
(6 - 8:31pm, Aug 01)
Last: Random Transaction Generator

NewsblogJim Bowden Caught Stealing From Fake Twitter Account, Deletes Everything
(29 - 8:10pm, Aug 01)
Last: Steve Parris, Je t'aime

NewsblogGiants Designate Dan Uggla, Tyler Colvin
(11 - 7:49pm, Aug 01)
Last: jdennis

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 8-1-2014
(9 - 7:36pm, Aug 01)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogMariners notebook: Zduriencik fires back at critics | Mariners Insider - The News Tribune
(29 - 7:27pm, Aug 01)
Last: Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman

NewsblogCubs deal Emilio Bonifacio, James Russell to Braves
(46 - 7:11pm, Aug 01)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.3828 seconds
52 querie(s) executed