IF IT COMES DOWN TO IT, WOULD YOU SHARE THE NEW STADIUM W/ THE RAIDERS ?

http://www.mercurynews.com/49ersheadlines/southbayfootball/ci_18710199?nclick_check=1

What makes me extremely doubtful about the Santa Clara deal is this part:

----------------------

First quarter: Can it happen?
SANTA CLARA: There are two big remaining hurdles. The 49ers will need to beat out several other teams to be among the first to secure a league loan -- by the end of 2012 -- to open the field in 2015. Second, the 49ers and city must meet lofty goals to secure sponsorships and loans, and sell season tickets.

----------------------

It's no secret that the Yorks are...well...incompetent. In the bottom tier of owners. So the fact that they're going to have to "beat out several other teams" makes me instantly think that they'll fail, thus bringing the attempt to build a Santa Clara stadium to an end.

Thoughts? (Notice that I didn't say anything about LA. I'm just stating my doubts about Santa Clara.)

They could just rebuild Candlestick then and play at Berkeley during the rebuilding process

I've doubted Santa Clara since this whole s**t started. I still think they will stay in SF. Financially the deal is way better, if that deal is still on the table.

Originally posted by area49:
http://www.mercurynews.com/49ersheadlines/southbayfootball/ci_18710199?nclick_check=1

What makes me extremely doubtful about the Santa Clara deal is this part:

----------------------

First quarter: Can it happen?
SANTA CLARA: There are two big remaining hurdles. The 49ers will need to beat out several other teams to be among the first to secure a league loan -- by the end of 2012 -- to open the field in 2015. Second, the 49ers and city must meet lofty goals to secure sponsorships and loans, and sell season tickets.

----------------------

It's no secret that the Yorks are...well...incompetent. In the bottom tier of owners. So the fact that they're going to have to "beat out several other teams" makes me instantly think that they'll fail, thus bringing the attempt to build a Santa Clara stadium to an end.

Thoughts? (Notice that I didn't say anything about LA. I'm just stating my doubts about Santa Clara.)

Well the language is actually written into teh CBA than California teams would get more money than other teams for stadium financing and there is a provision for a "Bay Area Stadium" so the only team they have to beat out is the Raiders...who at this point have ZERO plan.

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
I've doubted Santa Clara since this whole s**t started. I still think they will stay in SF. Financially the deal is way better, if that deal is still on the table.

Um, Huh?

How is the deal way better? If you are referring to the one from a decade ago, that's gone the way of the Dodo. Any stadium on Hunters Point will be MUCH more expensive because of the necessary infrastructure needed to GET to the stadium. The site is surounded on three sides by water and has ZERO freeway and rail access. It dousn't even have large surface streets.

Its all good if you want it in SF (as given the choice, so would I), but to say its a better deal financially is ludicrous.

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
I've doubted Santa Clara since this whole s**t started. I still think they will stay in SF. Financially the deal is way better, if that deal is still on the table.

That deal with San Francisco is "still" on the table, and will be until 2017.

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by area49:
http://www.mercurynews.com/49ersheadlines/southbayfootball/ci_18710199?nclick_check=1

What makes me extremely doubtful about the Santa Clara deal is this part:

----------------------

First quarter: Can it happen?
SANTA CLARA: There are two big remaining hurdles. The 49ers will need to beat out several other teams to be among the first to secure a league loan -- by the end of 2012 -- to open the field in 2015. Second, the 49ers and city must meet lofty goals to secure sponsorships and loans, and sell season tickets.

----------------------

It's no secret that the Yorks are...well...incompetent. In the bottom tier of owners. So the fact that they're going to have to "beat out several other teams" makes me instantly think that they'll fail, thus bringing the attempt to build a Santa Clara stadium to an end.

Thoughts? (Notice that I didn't say anything about LA. I'm just stating my doubts about Santa Clara.)

Well the language is actually written into teh CBA than California teams would get more money than other teams for stadium financing and there is a provision for a "Bay Area Stadium" so the only team they have to beat out is the Raiders...who at this point have ZERO plan.

wow area49 just got owned.

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by area49:
http://www.mercurynews.com/49ersheadlines/southbayfootball/ci_18710199?nclick_check=1

What makes me extremely doubtful about the Santa Clara deal is this part:

----------------------

First quarter: Can it happen?
SANTA CLARA: There are two big remaining hurdles. The 49ers will need to beat out several other teams to be among the first to secure a league loan -- by the end of 2012 -- to open the field in 2015. Second, the 49ers and city must meet lofty goals to secure sponsorships and loans, and sell season tickets.

----------------------

It's no secret that the Yorks are...well...incompetent. In the bottom tier of owners. So the fact that they're going to have to "beat out several other teams" makes me instantly think that they'll fail, thus bringing the attempt to build a Santa Clara stadium to an end.

Thoughts? (Notice that I didn't say anything about LA. I'm just stating my doubts about Santa Clara.)

Well the language is actually written into teh CBA than California teams would get more money than other teams for stadium financing and there is a provision for a "Bay Area Stadium" so the only team they have to beat out is the Raiders...who at this point have ZERO plan.

What a surprise. area49 is taking something out of context again about the team/ownership/organization. Of course he's reading it with he most negative possible slant.

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/New-NFL-Contract-Could-Help-Fund-New-49ers-Stadium-125887423.html

Originally posted by PTulini:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/New-NFL-Contract-Could-Help-Fund-New-49ers-Stadium-125887423.html

Shhhhhhh...don't mess up his story with facts.

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Um, Huh? How is the deal way better? If you are referring to the one from a decade ago, that's gone the way of the Dodo. Any stadium on Hunters Point will be MUCH more expensive because of the necessary infrastructure needed to GET to the stadium. The site is surounded on three sides by water and has ZERO freeway and rail access. It dousn't even have large surface streets. Its all good if you want it in SF (as given the choice, so would I), but to say its a better deal financially is ludicrous.

I read an article a year or two ago that stated the Naval Shipyard site would be cleaned up at the Fed's expense, the city would come to own it for pennies on the dollar, and then virtually hand the land over to the 49ers. Lennar Corp. would put up a sizable portion of the stadium cost, for the rights to re-gentrify the surrounding area, including infrastructure. A voter approved bond measure would put up an additional 100 mil. However this was talked about before the economy took a s**t. At the time it sounded better then what they're facing in Santa Clara now.

And it's not about what I want, it's simply what I think will happen. Personally I think they should completely revamp Candlestick, getting rid of the pullout section and adding more luxury boxes. Earthquake retrofitting, complete makeover. That would cost a little more than half of what a new stadium would cost, and much less red tape.

Don't care if it's santa clara or what, I just hope the raiders don't move in... It's not like they'll even sell out their games anyway. Not to mention their trashy fans would raise the crime rate in whatever city they move to.

Originally posted by WillistheWall:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by area49:
http://www.mercurynews.com/49ersheadlines/southbayfootball/ci_18710199?nclick_check=1

What makes me extremely doubtful about the Santa Clara deal is this part:

----------------------

First quarter: Can it happen?
SANTA CLARA: There are two big remaining hurdles. The 49ers will need to beat out several other teams to be among the first to secure a league loan -- by the end of 2012 -- to open the field in 2015. Second, the 49ers and city must meet lofty goals to secure sponsorships and loans, and sell season tickets.

----------------------

It's no secret that the Yorks are...well...incompetent. In the bottom tier of owners. So the fact that they're going to have to "beat out several other teams" makes me instantly think that they'll fail, thus bringing the attempt to build a Santa Clara stadium to an end.

Thoughts? (Notice that I didn't say anything about LA. I'm just stating my doubts about Santa Clara.)

Well the language is actually written into teh CBA than California teams would get more money than other teams for stadium financing and there is a provision for a "Bay Area Stadium" so the only team they have to beat out is the Raiders...who at this point have ZERO plan.

wow area49 just got owned.

LOL, he will now go into hibernation for another 3 months

Originally posted by smithgdwg: