Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would it have been better for the A's to have stayed in Philadelphia in retrospect.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Would it have been better for the A's to have stayed in Philadelphia in retrospect.

    In retrospect after two moves to Kansas city and Oakland, and looking at the current state if the a's. While ofcourse keeping in mind there own history aswell as the success of the modern phillies and city of Philadelphia would it have worked out better if they struggled in and stayed im philly? Opions please!
    20
    Stayed in Philadelphia and ride out the storm.
    40.00%
    8
    They were right leaving just to a different city
    20.00%
    4
    Kansas city
    25.00%
    5
    Oakland
    15.00%
    3

  • #2
    Originally posted by marlonbrando View Post
    In retrospect after two moves to Kansas city and Oakland, and looking at the current state if the a's. While ofcourse keeping in mind there own history aswell as the success of the modern phillies and city of Philadelphia would it have worked out better if they struggled in and stayed im philly? Opions please!
    If they held out long enough, eventually the Phillies would probably move (it was going to be one or the other). The A's might have fared better without the crosstown competition, maybe had a few good runs like the Phillies had in the late '70s/early '80s, in the early '90s, and in the past few years.
    *** Submit your personal HOF as your ballot for the Single Ballot BBF Hall of Fame! *** Also: Buck the Fraves!

    Comment


    • #3
      The Athletics have one of the strangest histories of any MLB team. They've won nine World Series, the third-highest total, yet no one considers them a flagship franchise. I think there are two reasons: 1) The fact that they've played in three different cities, and 2) the fact that most of their championship success has come in dynastic bursts that were later dismantled by fire sales. If the A's had stayed in Philadelphia and had been able to experience the same success they've had in Oakland, they might very well be considered more highly as a franchise.
      Baseball Junk Drawer

      Comment


      • #4
        Imagine if they'd stayed and done well; and down the road, Philadelphia not being big enough for two teams, the Phillies might have moved to New York to fill the National League vacancy left by the Dodgers and the Giants! They would have moved into the new Shea Stadium in 1964! There would have been no Mets! So Thank You A's for leaving Philly, because I sure would not have wanted that scenario!

        Comment


        • #5
          A writer at Baseball Prospectus details the history of the Athletics, moving from Philadelphia to Kansas City and Oakland.
          https://baseballprospectus.com/artic...rticleid=15259

          Last year, I read a biography of Charlie Finley and read about his ownership of the Athletics. Had the Philadelphia Athletics developed a farm system like Branch Rickey's system, the A's could have had a pipeline of good, affordable players. This would attract more fans and raise revenue to retain talent instead of being sold to richer teams. I could see the Philadelphia Athletics staying in the city, perhaps with a new multipurpose stadium for additional revenue. But the Philadelphia market was a big market but probably couldn't support the Phillies and Athletics at the same time. Fans had decisively chosen the Phillies over the Athletics by 1954.

          Personally, I think the modern Oakland Athletics should move to Candlestick Point in San Francisco instead of San Jose but that's my opinion.
          The Mets have the best, smartest fans in baseball.

          Comment


          • #6
            They deff have had some great teams but they had that dryspell from 1934-1968 where they never finsihed better than 4th.

            Baseball in Philadelphia really hit some rough times in the mid 30's till the late 40's. I would think that there would be more Athletic fans in Philadelphia though who would keep them in town over the Phillies. I know money played a part in them leaving among other things.
            "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

            "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

            Comment


            • #7
              There was virtually no way the Athletics were going be allowed to stay in Philadelphia. They were a family run organization being run by a dysfuctional family and they couldn't find a local buyer to take over all or part of the team. The other AL clubs wanted the Athletics out of Philadephia because nearly every trip led to a financial loss. In their last 20 years in Philadelphia the Athletics had one pennant contender.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm not sure that it would have economically viable for them to stay in Philly, kinda like the Braves in Boston. Some cities are not conducive to having more than one team.
                unknown brooklyn cabbie " how are the brooks doin"
                unknown fan "good they got three men on base"
                unknown brooklyn cabbie "which one?"

                Comment


                • #9
                  What I dont understand is why wouldnt another owner buy em and get the Phillies out instead. I know the Phillies had started doing better but back in 1954 wouldn't you think that had to be a Athletic town with all the championships they won. I would think a rich guy even back then would do anything to keep the A's in town.

                  That 1950 Phillies team seems more loved than the 29 Athletics for Philadelphians. I guess alot of A's fans probaly lost interest after two major fire sales. I remember the Whitesox in 1997 lost alot of fans after the white flag trade and to me that wasnt a big deal but what A's fans went through had to be tough on em, so i'm sure they had alot of fans boycott em. But you would think that the A's would still be the Yankees of Philadelphia.

                  It doesnt make sense to me what happened in Philadelphia. In 1946 after the war most teams attendance doubled or was pretty close. The Athletics didnt come close averaging 6000 fans in 1945 and 8000 in 1946. Meanwhile the Phillies who were just as bad as the A's averaged 3701 fans in 1945 and 13,401 in 1946. There had to be factors like parking or bad neighborhood but you would think the Athletics would have a stronger fan base than the Phillies in 1946.
                  "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

                  "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by chicagowhitesox1173 View Post
                    It doesnt make sense to me what happened in Philadelphia. In 1946 after the war most teams attendance doubled or was pretty close. The Athletics didnt come close averaging 6000 fans in 1945 and 8000 in 1946. Meanwhile the Phillies who were just as bad as the A's averaged 3701 fans in 1945 and 13,401 in 1946. There had to be factors like parking or bad neighborhood but you would think the Athletics would have a stronger fan base than the Phillies in 1946.
                    Both teams played in Shibe Park. The Yankees essentially scumbagged the Athletics out of Philly. The Kansas City A's were a Yankee farm club in the American League.

                    I'm glad there is a Connie Mack statue and an Athletics timeline at Citizens Bank Park too. They deserve that much. Even if they did steal Nap Lajoie.
                    Last edited by bluesky5; 03-20-2012, 08:34 AM.
                    "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post
                      Both teams played in Shibe Park. The Yankees essentially scumbagged the Athletics out of Philly. The Kansas City A's were a Yankee farm club in the American League.

                      I'm glad there is a Connie Mack statue and an Athletics timeline at Citizens Bank Park too. They deserve that much. Even if they did steal Nap Lajoie.
                      But in 1946 I wouldnt think the A's were a farm club of the Yankees and why did the Phillies attendance triple while the A's attendance go up only 2000. I didnt know they both played in Shibe Park which makes it even more confusing. Both teams were horrible in the 1945-1946 seasons yet the Phillies killed em in attendance. After all the losing the Phillies did for all those years I would think the A's would have a much better fan base.
                      "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

                      "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by chicagowhitesox1173 View Post
                        But in 1946 I wouldnt think the A's were a farm club of the Yankees and why did the Phillies attendance triple while the A's attendance go up only 2000. I didnt know they both played in Shibe Park which makes it even more confusing. Both teams were horrible in the 1945-1946 seasons yet the Phillies killed em in attendance. After all the losing the Phillies did for all those years I would think the A's would have a much better fan base.
                        I have no clue about the attendance rise in 46'. The buyer of the Athletics (whom I can't recall) from the Mack's was backed largely by Yankee money. I think if the Yankees were in the NL the Phillies would have gone.

                        Here ya go.

                        http://www.baseball-almanac.com/corner/c042001b.shtml

                        Many people call the 1961 Yankees the greatest team of all time. Ten of their players came directly from the Athletics. In return, the A's were left so decimated that their 1961 team finished tied for the cellar of the American League, behind the Los Angeles Angels expansion team and tied with the expansion Washington Senators.
                        Last edited by bluesky5; 03-20-2012, 09:07 AM. Reason: Link
                        "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post
                          I have no clue about the attendance rise in 46'. The buyer of the Athletics (whom I can't recall) from the Mack's was backed largely by Yankee money. I think if the Yankees were in the NL the Phillies would have gone.

                          Here ya go.

                          http://www.baseball-almanac.com/corner/c042001b.shtml
                          Arnold Johnson bought the Athletics. I think he owned either Yankee Stadium or the land that Yankee Stadium stood on.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by chicagowhitesox1173 View Post
                            But in 1946 I wouldnt think the A's were a farm club of the Yankees and why did the Phillies attendance triple while the A's attendance go up only 2000. I didnt know they both played in Shibe Park which makes it even more confusing. Both teams were horrible in the 1945-1946 seasons yet the Phillies killed em in attendance. After all the losing the Phillies did for all those years I would think the A's would have a much better fan base.
                            In 1946 the Phillies had relatively new ownership that was building a farm system and put a fifth place team on the field. The Athletics most notable figure was a dinosaur who had been born during the Civil War and who headed a family that was doing a lot of squabbling over the future of the team (Connie Mack and his second wife actually seperated during this period because of how he divided his shares among his sons). The fact that the Athletics won only 49 games in 1946 probably didn't help matters much.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The A's weren't drawing flies in Philadelphia. By 1954, they were averaging 4,000 spectators per game. In 1955, they drew 1.3 million in Kansas City.
                              They call me Mr. Baseball. Not because of my love for the game; because of all the stitches in my head.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X