Rob Manfred Didn't Actually Say That

Earlier today, it was reported that Rob Manfred was no longer optimistic about the A's being able to stay in Oakland and that they'd likely be moving to Las Vegas. The audio from the interview in question has been released, and that isn't at all what he said.

When I wrote about Rob Manfred's latest "quote" earlier today, I also threw in a word of warning that the national reporter that this news was coming from isn't always accurate with what he's reporting. Thankfully he mischaracterized MLB's Commissioner's statements in his talk with Chris "Mad Dog" Russo, which I have transcribed below.

Manfred: "I do want to say this. I think the Mayor in Oakland has made a huge effort to try to get it done in Oakland. It just doesn't look--

Mad Dog: "You're not positive"

Manfred: "I'm not positive."

Mad Dog: "You're not optimistic."

Manfred: "I think the A's have proceeded prudently in terms of exploring the Las Vegas alternative, given the lack of pace in Oakland. I think they have to look for an alternative."

Mad Dog: "If Oakland does leave, when would that be?"

Manfred: "Look, Oakland, it's hard to say--"

Mad Dog: "Within five years?"

Manfred: "Oh yeah. Oh yeah. Something has to happen and we can't go five more years in the Coliseum."

Mad Dog: "So right now you think at the end of the day, I'm not trying to get a sound bite here, I'm just trying to--you think at the end of the day Oakland's going to Vegas."

Manfred: "I didn't say that. I think...what I said is I stand by it, given the lack of pace in Oakland--"

Mad Dog: "So far."

Manfred: "...the lack of certainty, they have to be looking at Las Vegas. They need an alternative. They can't continue to play in the facility they're in." 

That is the interview that caused such a hubbub earlier today. For those of us that have been paying attention to the City Council meetings and the general goings on of the Howard Terminal project, what Manfred actually said is nothing new. The A's have been exploring sites in Vegas for over a year now, and were actually supposed to announce a site for the Vegas ballpark and release some renderings after last year's World Series, and that never happened. 

As far as we know, there is no site picked out in Las Vegas, which means that the A's are much further along with the city of Oakland in this new ballpark process.

Manfred's statements could have been trying to signal to Las Vegas that there is an opening here, but Nevada will be electing a new Governor on November 8. Meanwhile, Oakland will be electing a new Mayor and some new members of the City Council. 

In the time that has passed since the first wave of Manfred headlines, he has also spoken with the LA Times' Bill Shaikin.

"...the A's moving to Las Vegas is neither imminent nor guaranteed. They have two options available. I think the time for the Oakland option is running out. It hasn't run out."

Mayor Libby Schaaf also released a statement following the erroneous report, saying, "I appreciate Commissioner Manfred's kind words about my role as champion of a new waterfront ballpark for our Oakland A's."

"I spoke with him today and assured him that I remain absolutely confident our deal will get done next year even with new leadership in place. The A's are continuing to invest tremendous resources into an Oakland deal. We are working together every day to realize our shared vision for a vibrant waterfront neighborhood with public parks, good jobs, affordable housing and an iconic home for our Oakland A's." 

One way or another, we should have some sort of a resolution on the A's seemingly never-ending ballpark saga within a year or so, with the A's lease at the Coliseum set to expire in 2024. Until there is a binding agreement in place with either Las Vegas or Oakland, anything is on the table.

Even with the reports that came out today, I'm personally still fairly optimistic that a deal with the City of Oakland gets done and the A's aren't going anywhere.