Can John Fisher save his legacy?
An interview with Joe Lacob came out today where he mentions an open offer to purchase the A's franchise from John Fisher. I had posted a plea to Fisher to take Lacob up on his offer and received one reply that struck me as odd. The reply basically said that as long as the A's don't leave Oakland, he'll be the greatest sports owner in Oakland history.
Finley would probably have something to say about that since he brought the A's to the bay area and gave the bay area their first bona fide dynasty team. The commenter doubled down, though, and insisted that Fisher would be the GOAT if only he gets a stadium built.
Do you agree with this sentiment? Is it possible for Fisher to save his legacy with this one huge accomplishment?
For me, I don't think it works that way. For starters, he's spent every day of his tenure as owner with one foot out the door. First it was Fremont, then San Jose, now Vegas (which I don't think will happen but the intent is important). Sure, the team has never been closer to a new stadium in Oakland but they've simultaneously never been closer to leaving for good. How does that not irreparably tarnish Fisher's legacy no matter how the stadium pans out?
To make the argument that Fisher could ever possibly be in the discussion of "best team owner in Oakland history" in a season that may go down as Oakland's worst...and the franchises' worst...and baseball's worst with an attendance that rivals a third tier high school football game just seems crazy to me.
There is no scenario where I will ever call him the best at anything. I'll be thrilled if he gets Howard Terminal built and I'll give him all the accolades he wants for that singular achievement but he's screwed up far too much to give him a pass.