Baseball's vagabonds might be on the move again.
Tuesday's news that the Oakland Athletics have received MLB's blessing to begin exploring options for relocation doesn't necessarily mean that the A's stay in Oakland is coming to end. It does mean that it has gotten to the point where the franchise feels the need to have an exit strategy. Apparently, commissioner Rob Manfred feels the same way.
This could very much be a ploy to entice the city of Oakland to sign off on publicly funded infrastructure investments the team says it needs to make its plan for a new, privately financed ballpark development at Howard Terminal a reality. It could be a ploy to silence some highly vocal local activist groups opposed to the Howard Terminal plan, such as the East Oakland Stadium Alliance, which wants the ballclub to build a new ballpark at the site of its current venue, RingCentral Coliseum, where Oakland has toiled for its entire stay in the Bay Area.
Whatever the motivation actually is for the A's, owner John Fisher and the MLB league office, one way or another it's time to get Oakland's long stadium limbo resolved. RingCentral, formerly known as Oakland-Alameda Coliseum, among other things, was once a nice place to catch a ballgame. But beginning with the horrific addition of Mount Davis -- the view-wrecking, towering edifice of seats built to appease the since-departed Raiders of the NFL -- the stadium has gradually descended to the bottom of baseball's stadium rankings.
The problem is more than aesthetic. Despite fielding many excellent teams over the years, the A's haven't ranked higher than ninth in AL attendance in any season since 2005. In 2018 and 2019, both seasons in which the A's won 97 games, they finished 13th and 10th, respectively. According to Cots Contracts, the A's haven't ranked higher than 17th in Opening Day payroll in any season this century and usually rank in the bottom eight or worse.
Thus, whether it's from owner-related austerity or genuine revenue shortcomings, the history of the A's has always been one of building up a powerhouse team only to see that team dismantled because of money issues. In its travels from Philadelphia to Kansas City to Oakland, and despite featuring all-time greats through history like Eddie Collins, Lefty Grove, Reggie Jackson, Jimmie Foxx and Al Simmons, the Athletics are the only one of the 16 traditional big league franchises that has never had a Hall of Fame player who spent his entire career with the team.
Whether it's finding a way to stay in Oakland or a new city in another region, it's beyond time that the A's settle their long-term situation. Their current lease runs out at the end of the 2024 season, which is not very far away. With the Howard Terminal Project moving at a snail's pace, the team needs to have options.
When the A's hit the West Coast in 1968, their travels seemed to be at an end. Like Dean Moriarty in "On the Road," the bay was as far as they could go because there was no more land. Or so we thought.
If the A's do move, where could they go?
Austin
Pros: The state of Texas has seen what seems like a never-ending upward trajectory of population and at last count was nearing 30 million people. There are five teams in California, including the A's, in a state with just under 40 million. So that's a team for every eight million people. Texas currently has a team for every 15 million people, and its population is projected to grow unimpeded. Austin is a hub of innovation and tech money, with an increasingly strong corporate presence.
Cons: Austin isn't yet a big media market. And neither the Rangers nor the Astros would likely be eager to add a third big league option for baseball fans in Texas, no matter how big its population gets. There is no apparent push for an MLB team already in motion. Nearby San Antonio might be an even better option for a third Texas team.
Portland
Pros: There has been a well-organized push to construct a viable big league stadium in Portland for a number of years. There is plenty of corporate money, led by Nike. In fact, it is former Nike exec Craig Cheek who has been the driving force of the organization behind the stadium effort. The A's would be migrating just up the Pacific Coast a few hundred miles, so baseball's current geographic balance would remain intact. Portland is a proven supporter of its teams.
Cons: It's kind of hard to think of one. If the A's were willing to invest more than $1 billion for the Howard Terminal project, it's hard to see how they could not get something done in Oregon. Of course, at first, it was hard to see how the Howard Terminal deal could fall apart, so these things are never done until they are done. Portland isn't a huge media market, though it is larger than some cities where MLB already resides. Seattle isn't that far away and would have to sign off with sharing its broadcast territory. The Mariners might not want to. Finally: Is Portland even that much of a baseball town?
Nashville
Pros: There are some powerful folks who want a team there, even going so far as to declare that a new team would be known as the Nashville Stars, in honor of Negro Leagues clubs who played there. Of course, that was more an idea for an expansion team. Nashville is a proven major league city, having strongly supported the NFL's Titans and the NHL's Predators over the years. Though Nashville would be on the smallish side among MLB markets, it's also a tourist hub. Nashville is a growing city with a deep corporate presence.
Cons: There isn't a concrete plan in place for a stadium development, though a few sites have been mentioned. The MLS began play with a team in Nashville in 2020 and a new stadium for that club is currently under construction. Is the market oversaturated?
Las Vegas
Pros: The Athletics' old stadium mates, the NFL Raiders, are already there and play in a lavish new stadium. There is plenty of open space around the Vegas area to join them. The NHL's Golden Knights hit the ground running in a city with a growing major league sports profile. And of course Las Vegas is a tourist mecca during normal times. Finally, as baseball becomes more enmeshed in the betting world, what better partner city than Las Vegas?
Cons: Vegas is a small media market. It's hellishly hot there in summer, and while they've long fielded a Triple-A team, a big league club would probably want to play in a domed facility. That is fine, but would it be too antiseptic? In a sport where you need to draw 81 times a season, is there a big enough nontransient fan base to keep the turnstiles spinning?
Charlotte
Pros: North Carolina is a part of a strong baseball region in the Southeast. The current ballpark in downtown Charlotte is one of the most lovely facilities in the minors, though it is not a big league venue, and the team there has always been a strong draw. The city is vibrant, growing and established as a major league market with the presence of the NBA's Hornets, the NFL's Panthers and, nearby, the NHL's Hurricanes, who play in Raleigh. A Charlotte-based MLB team would have the potential to become a regional draw, a la the Atlanta Braves.
Cons: Charlotte and Portland are similar in terms of media market ranking, though both cities are growing and rate ahead of St. Louis, for example, among existing big league towns. Charlotte is still smallish. It's not clear where a stadium would be built and how a project would come together, but you could say the same about all the potential relocation cities. Finally, as mentioned, maybe Charlotte could become a strong regional draw, but the Braves already are. And Atlanta and Charlotte are only 245 miles apart.
Also worth considering but left out for now: Montreal (because the Tampa Bay Rays seem pretty far down the road in a potential partnership with that city) and San Jose, because the A's have tried that before and the powerful Giants did not like the idea.