[william]

This from today's Chron...

49ers may be looking to team with Raiders on a joint stadium
- Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Monday, January 29, 2007

Here's the latest twist to the Bay Area's topsy-turvy stadium politics: Word is the San Francisco 49ers have informally approached the Oakland Raiders about building a new home -- together.

The stadium, which would be shared by the two rivals, very well could be in Santa Clara, where the Niners are pursuing new digs next to Great America.

Niners executive Jed York, the son of team owners John and Denise York, said that while a joint stadium idea has merit, there has been no contact with the Raiders on the subject.

"I think it's a good idea, but we haven't gone down that road yet,'' he said. "First we need to work on Santa Clara, and make sure we can actually get a stadium down there.''

That's not what we are hearing from inside the Raiders organization, and from others in the know who have contacts with the Niners.

Those sources tell us John and Jed York approached the Raiders management in a casual setting in the latter half of the football season about the possibility of teaming up.

Raiders chief executive Amy Trask said only, "We are enthusiastically focused on the 2007 football season, and don't believe this is an appropriate time to discuss stadium opportunities. ...We are playing in a nice stadium, which our teams and fans enjoy.''

Wild as it may sound, the economics for a Forty-Raider stadium just could make sense for both teams.

For starters, the 49ers -- after nearly 10 years of trying -- still haven't found a stadium plan that pencils out financially given that football is only played about 10 times a year.

Hooking up with the Raiders for a stadium would instantly double the usage and could make financial sense.

Plus, the teams could get a big boost from the National Football League, which this past season agreed to kick in $300 million to the New York Giants and Jets to build a joint stadium at New Jersey's Meadowlands.

The thinking goes that if the Niners and Raiders could get a similar handout from the NFL -- and that's still a big if -- it would go a long way to helping them get over the stadium money hump.

As for the Raiders, their current 16-year-lease at the remodeled Oakland Coliseum is set to expire in four years -- or about the time the Niners hope to have a new stadium built.

The Raiders, despite upgraded football digs, are still unhappy about playing in Oakland -- but currently have few real prospects for moving out of the area again.

What's more, owner Al Davis -- who only recently was forced to spend a bundle to buy out the unhappy heirs of a silent partner -- doesn't have the cash to build a stadium on his own, sources say. And given his past battles with the NFL, he doesn't appear to have many friends in the league looking to do him any big favors.

"It really may be the one option for the Raiders that makes sense,'' says one NFL insider, who asked not to be named.
Hmmmmmmmm.....

[San Frangelino]

I think that would be kind of a cool idea, that is if it were to open up the Oakland Collusieum area to a huge mixed use development, or at least kept the A's from locating between two "close but too far" rail stations. The latter is a thought probably not likely anymore though.

[rs913]

So if all this happens, and the Warriors decide to relocate to the HP Pavilion, we'd have every Bay Area team except the Giants playing in the South Bay.

That would be quite a shift, and would make some people very happy, and others very sad...

[pdxstreetcar]

makes sense to get more use out of a stadium that would otherwise be used only 12 or so times a year.

i agree this could really suck for oakland though, too bad oakland for a little bit more money in the 1990s could have built nice new facilities for the teams (like downtown) and kept the teams long term in oakland, instead they spent 3/4 of the cost of a new stadium/arena to renovate which seems to have only bought the teams another 10-15 years in oakland.

[BTinSF]

Dumbest idea I've heard on this subject. The Santa Clara site is not accessible to either Oakland or San Francisco by public transit as the Oakland Colliseum is (but Candlestick was/is not either). The Raiders would be really stupid to go for this. They ought to encourage the 49ers to go south because they would inherit a lot of the SF fan base where they are--but not if they too go south. They would be giving up the opportunity to be THE San Francisco team--with the business and private money for luxury suites and season tickets and all the rest that that implies.

[plinko]

San JoJersey!

[foxmtbr]

If the Raiders wanted to move to a city where they could attract more new fans, there's always another certain city... ;)

I think that these teams moving to Santa Clara is a ridiculous concept, it takes the point out of having the teams named after their rightful cities.

[ltsmotorsport]

Hence the A's naming dilemma----hence this video. ;)

clicky (http://youtube.com/watch?v=SlTvSUCCqPo)

[BTinSF]

^^^Suburban white kids acting "urban" is almost always embarrassing. I agree with their position on the issue, though.

[BigKidD]

"Fremont is basically a parking lot with a mayor," funny video.

[fflint]

The 49ers denied there is any such plan, according to KTVU 2 last night.

[william]

The 49ers denied there is any such plan, according to KTVU 2 last night.

Well of course they did. They did in the original story too. It means absolutely nothing. But the Bay Area is going to have to decide if it wants NFL football or not. If it does, it's going to have to pay the going rate and this may be the only way it's affordable and feasible. If you don't want to pay the freight, then you can start cheering for the Los Angeles 49ers and the Las Vegas Raiders.

[fflint]

Yeah, or it's just a baseless rumor.

[william]

Yeah, or it's just a baseless rumor.

Yeah, it could be. But Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross have been writing their column for a long time and, while they have their share of misses, they've been on the money countless times. Can't think of a reason they'd have to cite sources within the Niners' organization regarding a baseless rumor, but maybe they did. Credibility is pretty important to these guys and they enjoy a good deal of it (it's their credibility that sells papers), but maybe they've risked it all to print a baseless rumor. Could be...

[BTinSF]

If you don't want to pay the freight, then you can start cheering for the Los Angeles 49ers and the Las Vegas Raiders.

Or not. If we don't have an NFL team, does that mean we can be assured that "60 Minutes" will start on time every Sunday?

[william]

Or not. If we don't have an NFL team, does that mean we can be assured that "60 Minutes" will start on time every Sunday?

hmmmm.... sounds like part of the not pay the freight crowd.

[rs913]

First whistle tips (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nnzw_i4YmKk), then sydeshows (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADulq6smba8), now ghost-riding. I wonder how long it'll take before the state passes a law banning Oakland citizens from getting drivers licenses!

[Buckeye Native 001]

If the Niners and Raiders move down to Santa Clara, and the A's to Fremont, does this mean you guys will stop giving us shit for the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim? ;)

[Frisco_Zig]

Dumbest idea I've heard on this subject. The Santa Clara site is not accessible to either Oakland or San Francisco by public transit as the Oakland Colliseum is (but Candlestick was/is not either). The Raiders would be really stupid to go for this. They ought to encourage the 49ers to go south because they would inherit a lot of the SF fan base where they are--but not if they too go south. They would be giving up the opportunity to be THE San Francisco team--with the business and private money for luxury suites and season tickets and all the rest that that implies.

I seriously doubt the raiders would be inheriting any fan base. This does not jive with my experience with sports fans, especially football were you can go years without even going to a game. Its a TV sport if there ever was one

[Frisco_Zig]

If the Niners and Raiders move down to Santa Clara, and the A's to Fremont, does this mean you guys will stop giving us shit for the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim? ;)

Perhaps this is just the next step in the suburbanization of the US. LA would lead the way. In fact it is already happening. Many NFL teams and a few baseball teams that I am aware of have decamped from their namesake cities already. Just like corporate headquarters maybe this is the new wave. Closer to where the fans live, cheaper land, no unions to deal with, no unfriendly city councils, poor infastucture or crappy neighborhoods. Seems like a no brainer

personally I think it makes perfect sense for football but less so for baseball baseball teams that thrive in dense areas

[rs913]

They would be giving up the opportunity to be THE San Francisco team--with the business and private money for luxury suites and season tickets and all the rest that that implies.

On top of that, 49ers fans have always thought of the Raiders as "the enemy", so they're not going to switch loyalties just because the Raiders are accessible by BART rather than CalTrain or a little easier to get to by car.

One hitch about teams decamping to the suburbs is that it's not necessarily "closer to where the fans live". In your typical hypothetical city, moving to a suburb will be closer for some suburban fans but could place the team ridiculously far away from others. Often, the urban site ends up being the most central and within reasonable shouting distance of everyone. I would think this is what's keeping many city-located NFL and MLB teams where they are.

[BTinSF]

On top of that, 49ers fans have always thought of the Raiders as "the enemy", so they're not going to switch loyalties just because the Raiders are accessible by BART rather than CalTrain or a little easier to get to by car.



I don't think that's true. It may be true of older San Franciscans, but I see an awful lot of Raiders logo stuff being worn by young people in SF neighborhoods. It seems to be part of the "urban" look. I think there's plenty of San Franciscans that are becoming increasingly frustrated and would enjoy an excuse to switch loyalties. But if it's even just a few, the Raiders will do better remaining in the central Bay Area than sharing the Southbay with the 49ers. And it's not just because you can get to the Colliseum by BART. That fact and the fact that you can just about see it from Twin Peaks or a tall building makes it all "feel" like it's still part of the environs of the city. Ask a lot of San Franciscans the way to Santa Clara and they couldn't tell you. They'll switch--maybe not all at once but over time.

[HurricaneHugo]

What's worse than a stadium with a crappy team?

A stadium with two craptacular teams.

[Buckeye Native 001]

I agree that football stadiums make more sense in suburbia. Hell, tailgating is part of the experience of going to a football game.

[Frisco_Zig]

I don't think that's true. It may be true of older San Franciscans, but I see an awful lot of Raiders logo stuff being worn by young people in SF neighborhoods. It seems to be part of the "urban" look. I think there's plenty of San Franciscans that are becoming increasingly frustrated and would enjoy an excuse to switch loyalties. But if it's even just a few, the Raiders will do better remaining in the central Bay Area than sharing the Southbay with the 49ers. And it's not just because you can get to the Colliseum by BART. That fact and the fact that you can just about see it from Twin Peaks or a tall building makes it all "feel" like it's still part of the environs of the city. Ask a lot of San Franciscans the way to Santa Clara and they couldn't tell you. They'll switch--maybe not all at once but over time.


You realize that it is highly likley that more 49ers fans who can afford to go to games actually live within 10 miles of the site in Santa Clara than do in SF. Half of SF is transplants these days

[rs913]

I agree that football stadiums make more sense in suburbia. Hell, tailgating is part of the experience of going to a football game.

I'm in the minority here...I think tailgating kind of sucks. I realize NFL stadiums probably belong in the suburbs because it's too much land to use in a city for 8 games a year, but if it weren't for that, I'd be all for urban football stadiums. I'll take having a neighborhood full of sports bars, game-day crowds, carnival atmosphere, etc. over the lame, high-school-party like experience of standing around next to your car in a big parking lot with a cooler and red plastic cups.

I think it's hilarious just how many people complain about Cal's Memorial Stadium just because it doesn't have a big parking lot.

[BTinSF]

:haha: :whip: :haha: :whip: :haha: :whip: :haha: :whip: :haha: :whip: :haha: :whip:

Trouble's in the pipeline for 49ers' move
S.F. owns land over water conduit at Santa Clara site

Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Monday, February 26, 2007

A big hurdle has popped up in the path of the 49ers' plans to move down to Santa Clara -- a portion of the land where the team hopes to build its $800 million stadium turns out to be owned by the city of San Francisco.

The revelation raises the possibility that officials in San Francisco, who fumed when the Niners abruptly announced their intention in November to move to the South Bay, could have some unexpected muscle to flex in dealing with team owner John York.

San Francisco's land is just 80 feet wide, but it runs across the entire 20-acre parcel east of Highway 101 where the 49ers want to build, and not far from where the stadium's southern end zone would be located.

The 4-acre ribbon of territory, on the site's southern edge just opposite the Great America amusement park, is where a pipeline carrying water from the Sierra to 2.4 million Bay Area customers is buried. The pipe, part of the Hetch Hetchy system, is owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission.

The significance of the pipeline went largely unnoticed until The Chronicle started asking questions at San Francisco City Hall, where officials then pulled up maps showing the pipe's pathway across the stadium site.

The land is now used for parking for Great America, which hopes to partner with the 49ers to build the stadium. The amusement park's owners had a five-year lease for the PUC land but allowed it to expire in 2004. Now they have a month-to-month deal, meaning San Francisco could terminate the agreement at any time.

Great America pays $100,000 a year for the property, and any long-term lease renewal could require approval from San Francisco's Board of Supervisors. Given the 49ers' interest in the site, the price tag could certainly be much higher.

The PUC pipe could cause other headaches for the team. Susan Leal, the agency's general manager, said the pipes are scheduled to be dug up and replaced starting in 2009 or 2010 as part of the Hetch Hetchy system overhaul -- with the work stretching two or three years. That would mean running up against the Niners' self-imposed 2012 deadline for the stadium's first kickoff.

Asked whether the pipeline presents problems for the team's stadium plans, Leal said, "I think that's a question for them.''

Niners spokeswoman Lisa Lang downplayed the importance of the disclosure, saying team executives are "well aware of the Hetch Hetchy right-of-way issues, and it's on a list of all the issues that need to be addressed."

"But it's way down at the bottom of the list and isn't something we will be exploring for quite some time,'' she said.

Publicly, San Francisco officials are going out of their way not to antagonize the team, hoping the 49ers can still be persuaded to buy into a stadium site at the old Hunters Point Naval Shipyard near Candlestick Point.

"We are not focused on the situation surrounding the Santa Clara site at all," said Peter Ragone, spokesman for Mayor Gavin Newsom. "We have a strong working relationship with Dr. York and believe we've got a great plan for San Francisco, and that is all we are focused on.''

But one official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the negotiations with the team, called the pipeline revelation "unbelievable leverage for us. It's quite remarkable.''

Lang says the 49ers' more immediate concern is figuring out how to pay for the 68,000-seat stadium, including determining whether concerts and other off-season events could be held there. The Niners are also trying to determine the cost of providing security and cleaning services for all the private parking they hope to secure around the stadium.

The pipeline isn't the only problem for the 49ers. Last week, it was revealed that the team might have to spend a bundle to move a $30 million electrical substation owned by the city to make way for a park greenbelt leading to the stadium.

Santa Clara Assistant City Manager Ron Garratt, who is overseeing the stadium negotiations, said every project has its challenges -- and the Hetch Hetchy pipeline and the substation are just two more issues to be overcome.

"I'm sure more issues will pop up," Garratt said. "It's a big construction project.''

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/26/MNG8FOB6S41.DTL

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/26/mn_giants.jpg

[fflint]

Hahaha!

San Francisco controls.

[Reminiscence]

Newsom and the boys are probably having a good laugh about this right now.

The revelation raises the possibility that officials in San Francisco, who fumed when the Niners abruptly announced their intention in November to move to the South Bay, could have some unexpected muscle to flex in dealing with team owner John York.


"It begins ... " *sinister laugh, light grows very dim*
"Errr ... negotiations ... thats whats begining."

- Sideshow Bob The Simpsons

[rs913]

This presents an awesome opportunity for Santa Clara and the Niners to revolutionize stadium design by building the first NFL stadium with a long, empty swath of land running across the site, with pedestrian bridges (or, if that's not allowed, a hovercraft service) carrying fans over it to the parking lots.
:eviltongue:

[Damien]

Sounds like a great idea. Too bad its in Santa Clara. Why not just create a new stadium closer to the city (and close to mass transit) and use the land to create both the football stadium and baseball stadium for the As.

[BTinSF]

Sounds like a great idea. Too bad its in Santa Clara. Why not just create a new stadium closer to the city (and close to mass transit) and use the land to create both the football stadium and baseball stadium for the As.

Many reasons. You can't just find a giant chunck of land big enough for even just a football stadium anywhere. And the team doesn't want to have to BUY it. They want some local government that thinks having a team would be prestigious or even commercially beneficial to donate it and, preferably, to donate a chunk of tax money to help with construction costs along with it.

So we need a very special piece of land here: It's gotta be big, it's gotta be free and it's gotta come with a dowery.

There probably isn't any town between the central Bay (SF and Oakland) and the heart of the South Bay (Santa Clara/San Jose) with land that meets those criteria.

The A's have more flexibility because they have indicated a willingness to follow the Giants' lead and pay for their own stadium. But the 49'ers are still looking for massive handouts, I think.

[Frisco_Zig]

:haha: :whip: :haha: :whip: :haha: :whip: :haha: :whip: :haha: :whip: :haha: :whip:



http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/26/mn_giants.jpg


I hope this doesn't portend the LA 49ers.

[Frisco_Zig]

Many reasons. You can't just find a giant chunck of land big enough for even just a football stadium anywhere. And the team doesn't want to have to BUY it. They want some local government that thinks having a team would be prestigious or even commercially beneficial to donate it and, preferably, to donate a chunk of tax money to help with construction costs along with it.

So we need a very special piece of land here: It's gotta be big, it's gotta be free and it's gotta come with a dowery.

There probably isn't any town between the central Bay (SF and Oakland) and the heart of the South Bay (Santa Clara/San Jose) with land that meets those criteria.

The A's have more flexibility because they have indicated a willingness to follow the Giants' lead and pay for their own stadium. But the 49'ers are still looking for massive handouts, I think.

even with all things being equal (and they aren't as you mention) a stadium in Santa Clara would likley be cheaper to build and more profitable. Most of the fans live closer to Santa Clara, the weather is better, access is better, transit isn't good in Hunters point and Bay View either, infastucture is lacking, policitcal enviroment is unfriendly and Byzantium and its below sea level thereby flooding and making it a damp nasty area, oh and its in a poor black neighborhood