odds baseball scheisss this up?
Am I the only one that does not see any sort of "smoking gun" in the article?
Well, I don’t know if I would have phrased it as a smoking gun, but it’s the part below ...referring to Matt Nussbaum, deputy general counsel for the players.
Now maybe Nussbaum will dispute that characterization ... but we’ll see.
—Matt asked what ‘economic feasibility’ meant in Section I. I told him it meant that we would only consider playing in neutral sites or without fans if it worked for us economically. I reminded him of Rob’s comments at the outset that playing in empty stadiums did not work for us economically. But I said, for example, that we might be willing to have a conversation about playing some limited number of games in empty stadiums if players agreed to reduce their daily salaries for those games, and if it was part of a larger plan that made economic sense. Matt confirmed that that is what he thought we meant, but appreciated the confirmation.”
These fools trying to strong-arm the A's are so stupid. Who else are they going to get who could/would pay that rent for that facility? I hope this gets very ugly.
These fools trying to strong-arm the A's are so stupid. Who else are they going to get who could/would pay that rent for that facility? I hope this gets very ugly.
they still have plenty of options to leverage against the a's.
why all they need to do is promise the raiders a few renovations and a sweet heart deal and they aren't going anywhere......
on second thought time to lock the warriors down in oakland right......
plan c, lure the xfl team from la to pit against the a's .....
yeah...hello mr beane, why don't we start over on this .....
isn’t that a good thing... I don’t want my city spending money on sports stadiums.
Edit: don’t love in Oakland. Just a general “my city” meaning anywhere I live. I wouldn’t want tax money going toward a sports stadium.