Americans deserve better sports franchises

Last week, the Oakland Athletics announced that it had formally begun the process of relocating to Las Vegas and will end their history in California. This announcement makes them the third team in the last ten years to leave Oakland for greener pastures and the fifth major American sports team to move in the same time period. To some, this is a worrying trend — if established teams like the Athletics can relocate with impunity, then no team is safe. Comparatively speaking, however, this is by far the most stable era for American sports franchises with far fewer teams having moved in recent years than in past decades. For this reason (among others), I’m not personally worried about a surge in relocations. I do think, however, that the Athletics’ move to Las Vegas is symptomatic of deeper issues in American sports culture.

The primary reason for the Athletics’ departure is not up for debate: the team’s owner, John Fisher, has neglected both the on-field and off-field aspects of the franchise, trading the team’s best players, letting their stadium decay and generally cutting costs wherever possible. This has led to the Athletics’ current situation: 17 games under .500 and playing in a possum-infested stadium. The team’s fanbase is, understandably, fed up to the point of boycotting games and staging widespread protests in the stands. But their complaints have largely fallen on deaf ears — Fisher has remained dedicated to squeezing every last dollar out of the team. This cycle of underinvestment, decay and betrayal has thus been decades in the making and is now reaching its peak with the proposed move to Las Vegas.

This begs the question: why is this cycle allowed to happen? Why can the actions of one man lead to the death of such a cherished cultural establishment?

To me, the answer lies in the structure of American sports teams and leagues. These entities operate the same as any property of a single person has had disastrous effects on countless teams in the past, has created the Athletics’ current problems, and will continue to cause harm in the future. other business (often with far fewer regulations and much greater power) and are thus seen as opportunities for investment by their billionaire owners. Attitudes like Fisher’s are far from exceptional among this group.

While he may have taken cost-cutting further than anyone else, the practice is widespread, and it affects more than just player spending. Just look at the Pittsburgh Pirates’ stadium employees, who recently announced their intention to strike over low wages.

Underinvestment also affects fans, who deserve a competitive team and a positive pillar of their community. Unfortunately, this isn’t a guarantee — in Oakland or anywhere else — due to the American model of sports leagues being not only susceptible to owner abuse, but also designed to facilitate it. The idea that a community’s team can be private

So if the structure of American professional sports is flawed, where can we look for answers? In my opinion, the phrase itself holds the answers — look at non-American or non-professional sports. Fans of European teams hold much greater sway over their team’s decisions financially and politically as much as culturally. Supporters’ groups and community trusts allow for tangible fan power, with owners traditionally taking more of a custodial role. Another alternative example is right here on campus: college sports teams in the U.S. are held accountable by their fan bases through things like alumni funding. A third, more radical solution practiced especially in Germany is complete or partial fan ownership; in this method, the public buys shares and elects a board to make decisions. Obviously, these solutions aren’t perfect and would be hard to introduce to professional teams. However, one thing is clear: the structure of American sports leaves fans vulnerable and must be changed for the good of communities across the country.

Friday, April 21, Andrews Hall was alight with laughter, music, chatter and general elation as the queer community at the College of William and Mary gathered in celebration of its annual Queer Prom. As a part of a larger week-long program, the event was hosted collaboratively by two of the College’s prominent LGBTQ+ student organizations: Rainbow Coalition and Lambda Alliance.

Before the Queer Prom took place, this year’s Pride Week featured Sunday Night Trivia on April 16, a morning hike and a Swem Special Collections Research Center open house on April 17, more oral histories on top of a film screening on April 18, a Puppy Pride Party and Queer Sex Education workshop on April 19 and a paint night on April 20. Pride Week subsequently culminated in a Pride Fest followed by a drag showcase on Saturday. Each activity had its unique attributes to cater to a variety of student interests, with Queer Prom offering students a space to express themselves freely.

One such avenue of self-expression came from fashion, as described by Queer People of Color member TJ Manfuso ’26.

“I just wanted to show off, if I’m being honest,” Manfuso said. “And also, I love seeing the various levels of formality that people have taken into account. You see some people in skater dresses and some people in a vest.”

Certainly, a glance around the room revealed a diverse array of wardrobe choices, with each added dress, suit coat and skirt shining just as stylishly as the next. Rainbow Coalition Co-President Vincent SheaBerry ’23 connected the flexibility of the dress code to the prom’s larger intended purpose of fostering a community dedicated to inclusion and acceptance.

“We really want to try and make a space where new students on campus especially can start to develop that community in a queer space and also just really embody self-expression in whatever way they like,” SheaBerry said. “Traditionally, we say it’s semi-formal but wear whatever makes you feel most comfortable. So giving that space to students to just dance and be themselves without fear of judgment is something that we really strive for.”

This sense of community was evident to any passersby, with the Andrews floor being filled with twirling dancers and merry minglers as well as a large circle of students seated together on one side of the foyer. In light of this convivial atmosphere, attendee Alex Mekailian ’24 shared his exciting experience with encountering fresh faces.

“I think that it’s had a positive impact so far,” Mekailian said. “I’ve gotten to meet a good couple of people that I never met before. So it just feels good to bond with other queer people.”

Pride Committee member Cassie Szumigala ’23 emphasized the importance of creating this joyous and festive sense of community, especially following the isolating outbreak of COVID-19.

“I feel like pre-COVID and after COVID, there’s been a big change in how much community means to people because of everything being virtual and distanced and not being able to hang out with people,” Szumigala said. “I feel like community has such a stronger meaning