It’s unknown whether John Fisher is some Steve Cohen-like art collector because we know next to nothing about the A’s owner. But if he has some sort of art wing in one of his homes, he could fill most or all of it with renderings from his franchise’s various ballpark ideas throughout Northern California and, now, Southern Nevada.
We’ll forgive you if you can’t keep the A’s plans straight, let alone remember which ballpark drawing matched with which location and what all of them looked like. This process has gone on for nearly two decades and has included three major cities and Fremont, an East Bay suburb about a half-hour south of Oakland. There have been breathless announcements, lawsuits, delays, “parallel paths” … just about everything except shovels in the ground.
The most recent stadium renderings were hastily released mere weeks after the A’s pulled out of a “binding agreement” to acquire land in Las Vegas where the Wild, Wild West Casino used to sit, in order to reach a brand new agreement to build where the Tropicana Hotel now resides.
The whole thing hinges on $380 million in public financing that is being debated in a special session of the Nevada state legislature.
As that process plays out, let’s rank all of the A’s proposed ballpark renderings through the years based on a three-pronged system (each scored from 1-10).
• Location: This is kind of self-explanatory, and as an East Bay resident I’ll try to dive into the details without being too biased against Las Vegas. It’s not their fault that everyone sees Sin City as an easy mark for subsidies-hungry franchise owners. OK, maybe it is kind of their fault. But I’ll go a little deeper than “Las Vegas bad, Oakland good.”
• Features: How much fun, based on observing these drawings, would it be for an A’s fan to watch a game at each of these theoretical parks?
• Aesthetic appeal: It seems kind of silly to build something that costs over $1 billion that doesn’t look all that great, but it happens. (Levi’s Stadium, hello!) This is the most subjective category, admittedly. Some of you might think Levi’s Stadium is attractive because it looks like it has a giant office building taking up most of one side of it, and that’s OK! I generally lean toward the retro ballparks that became popular when Camden Yards took everyone’s breath away, but I’m open to futuristic designs as well. As long as they aren’t hideous.
With all that said, let’s rank these fictional ballparks the A’s will (probably) never build.
1. Howard Terminal
The ballpark concept for the Port of Oakland, within a short walk from Jack London Square, wasn’t perfect. From toxic waste cleanup to infrastructure needs, the amount of work needed to build at this location made it seem unrealistic from the jump.
But compared to the rest of the A’s proposals, this is clearly the most enticing. Building by the water would mean cooler temperatures and more wind than the Coliseum, and a considerably longer walk to the nearest BART stations, but it’s more picturesque than the Coliseum site. (Although it shouldn’t be forgotten that the original version of the Oakland Coliseum had some very nice views of the Oakland Hills before the Raiders came back and erased those with their Mt. Davis monstrosity).
There were two sets of renderings, and both featured lush park-like areas around the top of the perimeter. The first set of images featured an opening in center field where fans could watch games from outside the park and the latter set had a similar terrace area in right field.
The thrust of this plan, other than that it was by far the most ambitious — and the A’s leaned into how they tried something risky to prove that they were truly “rooted in Oakland” — was that in order to compete in a two-team market with a team that has a beloved waterfront park, the A’s couldn’t propose another landlocked stadium that wasn’t in an urban, downtown setting. The dream, one that many A’s fans still cling to, is that Jack London Square and surrounding areas would see the same kind of revitalization that San Francisco enjoyed in the China Basin neighborhood after Pac Bell Park opened in 2000.
The proposed ballpark’s dimensions appear more symmetrical than the previous designs, which seemed heavily influenced by the retro ballpark ideal that most ballparks have employed over the past few decades. Since Oracle Park is 100 percent a modern-retro ballpark, the more futuristic look of the Howard Terminal renderings might not have been the worst idea. Where this park probably falls short from a fan perspective is that the views from inside the stadium pale in comparison to what fans get in San Francisco, where you can see McCovey Cove from the arcade section and most of the Bay and the Bay Bridge from behind home plate to the right-field corner sections — especially if you’re sitting in the upper deck. But the view of the cranes at the Port of Oakland would be an interesting, unique touch.
Location: 9 Difficult but worth the trouble if they could’ve pulled off a plan with so many potential pitfalls. We haven’t even gotten into the fact that parking would be next to impossible, but that’s also an issue in San Francisco.
Features: 8 Not much thought seemed to be given to scoreboards in any of these renderings and fans aren’t quite as enamored with garden spaces as teams seem to be. But the rooftop park was supposed to be open to the public — though only accessible to ticket-holders on game days — and the ability to see into the park as you walk toward the outfield seems cool.
Aesthetic appeal: 8 This stadium would be more of a blimp park, in that it would probably look best via overhead shots on TV thanks to the surrounding water and, yes, the ability to see San Francisco’s skyline in the distance. But at least the park itself looks interesting, in a quasi-futuristic way.
Total: 25
What optimistic people were saying: “We can go from having one of the lowest five payrolls in the league to a top-five or 10, depending on the year. It’s going to be such a remarkable change in our business and I think with the savvy and business acumen of (executive vice president) Billy Beane and (general manager) David Forst, giving them that type of resource is going to be incredible and that’s what we’re striving to do.” (San Jose Mercury News — 2021)
2. Cisco Field (San Jose edition)
The fact that trying to wrench away the territorial rights to Santa Clara County wasn’t the least realistic idea the A’s have had shows you how many far-fetched schemes they’ve hatched over the past two decades. We can debate for hours whether the Giants should’ve kept these rights or ceded them back to the A’s, and once former San Francisco Chronicle columnist Ray Ratto even suggested that Bud Selig might force the Giants to hand those rights back to the A’s as punishment for allowing Barry Bonds’ personal trainer, Greg Anderson, unsupervised access to the team’s clubhouse. Obviously that didn’t happen, and the Supreme Court dismissed San Jose’s antitrust claims against MLB, so the A’s embarked on figuring out something in Oakland.
But if you like old-timey, intimate baseball settings, these designs might excite you most. In the rendering that’s positioned from a view behind center, it appears that this park has about 10 percent of the foul territory at the Coliseum. It’s the only set of renderings with only two main decks (which is the way a park with 35,000 seats or fewer should be). There’s plenty of exposed brick. The right-field wall is interesting, although it seems like it would take an extremely high fly ball to homer down the right-field line.
This region is decidedly inland, without the Bay nearby to keep things relatively cool. So it would probably be a bit too warm to play as many day games at home as the A’s usually do. San Jose doesn’t have much in the way of a skyline or natural vistas to speak of, but it would be a very convenient location for a team given that it’s the city with the highest population in the region. But this will never happen because the Giants will never cede those rights, so it’s probably not worth discussing further.
Location: 8 San Jose is convenient for a lot of folks who don’t want to make the trip up to Oakland, but BART doesn’t run to San Jose so East Bay fans would be forced to drive.
Features: 8 This is a no-nonsense ballpark that doesn’t appear to have any bad seats. It’s difficult to imagine anything would’ve actually been built in San Jose without a lot more attention to suites for tech company execs, which would’ve probably pushed the upper deck a bit higher than it appears in the renderings.
Aesthetic appeal: 8 The surrounding area isn’t exactly gorgeous, but the park looks nice if you’re into the retro thing.
Total: 24
What optimistic people were saying: After years of gobbling up land for a downtown ballpark, the city of San Jose is ready to sell about five acres of prime downtown real estate to the Oakland A’s for $6.9 million — almost a quarter of what the city originally paid for the land and $7 million less than it’s worth on the open market.
The major league discount is detailed in new documents released Wednesday that give the A’s exclusive rights to the land if they build a new stadium near HP Pavilion and Diridon Station.
“I think the price is a fair price when you consider that we want a ballpark, and the A’s will have to pay for the ballpark with their money,” San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed said. “And let’s not forget that if we get a ballpark on the land, we get money and 1,000 jobs or so.” (San Jose Mercury News — 2011)
3. Cisco Field (Fremont edition)
For a while, anyway, the A’s seemed likely to get something done in Fremont. Despite Fremont not having a downtown to speak of, then-managing partner Lew Wolff liked the idea of building a ballpark complex (translation: lots of real estate surrounding the park, including high-end retail) near I-880. Then, like what usually happens when the A’s tell everyone they’re moving somewhere, the whole thing fell apart (in 2009).
Both versions of the Fremont plan appear to have rooftop pools in the outfield. The second set of renderings appears to include the surrounding buildings as a backdrop, similar to Camden Yards.
In the end, it’s probably for the best that this plan didn’t come to fruition … except for the fact that the A’s haven’t been able to get anything done in Northern California. Large retail spaces aren’t the same draws they used to be, so the area around the park would probably have plenty of empty storefronts. Fremont is about 25 miles from Oakland and a shade under 20 miles from San Jose, but making the trek from both areas wouldn’t exactly be fun on weeknights with the traffic seen on the Nimitz.
Location: 7 Fremont is a suburb, which is fine, but public transportation to the site is lacking and there’s nothing special about this particular part of town.
Features: 7 Four decks throughout much of the park doesn’t seem necessary for a stadium with a capacity of 35,000 at most. Both plans seem to feature left-field bleacher decks that appear far from the action. I also don’t get the desire to swim at a baseball game, but totally get that a rooftop pool party could be a draw for some.
Aesthetic appeal: 8 While everything in the outfield looks a little off, at least to me, the stadium itself looks quaint from the outside and holds true to the “intimate setting” idea that all of these parks are trying to encapsulate.
Total: 22
What optimistic people were saying: In only a few years, the Oakland Athletics expect to be doing business in a far different way than, as a low-revenue team, they have had to do it.
“If we can get a ballpark the way we’re trying to do it, with the management talent we have,” Lew Wolff said, “we can have a consistent cash flow that would allow us to have a shot at being a little more like a dynasty like they used to have, at least a semidynasty.” (NY Times — 2007)
4. Las Vegas
Before I start criticizing what seem to be renderings that resulted from an AI request for “A’s ballpark with a retractable roof on the Vegas strip,” I have to note that I was out with friends the other day and one said, “The park does look pretty cool, though,” and another agreed. So there’s certainly an audience for a stadium like this, especially among people who like to visit Las Vegas.
That being said, I have questions. Why is there so much foul territory? How expensive will the few available seats in the lowest deck be? Will a natural grass playing surface survive in Las Vegas? Why is the scoreboard behind home plate so much bigger than the one in the outfield that would face most of the crowd? How will the folks at Harry Reid International Airport feel about a giant arch so close to where planes take off and land?
The retractable roof element is interesting, though. It appears to be made of Ethylene tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE), a translucent material that’s used at the Vikings’ stadium in Minnesota. Based on these renderings, it appears that the retractable roof would run on tracks that sit above the outfield bleachers (which can be seen in the image below if you zoom in). So when it closes, it’ll run on those tracks from behind home plate to enclose the stadium around the outfield. And the roof will almost always be closed, though, because the average temperatures in Las Vegas are at least 90 degrees from May through September (the average in July: a scorching 107).
Location: 7 Ignoring the fact that Las Vegas would be the smallest media market in the majors, there’s a mix of good and bad here. Most people would be able to walk to the park from any hotel on the strip, except baseball is played during the summer and not many people are fond of walking more than 100 feet or so outside when it’s over 100 degrees.
Features: 6 The roof will be closed for most games so it’s not all that much of a benefit for fans. Neither is the enormous fourth deck, which, due to the amount of foul territory, won’t be as close to the action as you’d expect for a park with only 30,000 seats. There just isn’t much that’s special about the design from a fan perspective, other than that it’s a park on the Strip that would take up a very small parcel of land — nine acres.
Aesthetic appeal: 7 As you can probably tell, a retractable roof that would eventually be surrounded by Bally Corp.-owned hotels and casinos isn’t my cup of tea. But I’m willing to admit that some people probably looked at this and thought it looked fantastic. The arch, which is similar to the one at Wembley Stadium, is the signature feature.
Total: 20
What optimistic people are saying: While the A’s are currently on pace to set a record for futility, the team has been highly competitive in recent years, making the playoffs 11 times between 2000 and 2020. The organization — which started as the Philadelphia A’s — has a long and storied history as one of the founding members of the American League in 1901. The A’s have played in 14 World Series and won nine championships. A move to Las Vegas would jump-start their revival and provide a family-friendly, affordable entertainment alternative for local residents six months a year. (Las Vegas Review-Journal — June 8, 2023)
(Top image of the proposed Las Vegas stadium with the roof closed: Oakland A’s)