There are 42 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

New Stadium - Where do you prefer?

New Stadium - Where do you prefer?

Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
Burlingame

That makes too much sense. Not Burlingame in particular, but somewhere North of San Mateo and South of the city. Off of 101 / the bay. I really like the Brisbane option (I think Pelosi offered up an an alternative years ago).

The problem being there is only one way to get there from the traffic point of view. You're still stuck to the 101 freeway. The infrastructure of the location is still to be desired vs. the Santa Clara proposal.

As a fan, I don’t want them to leave the City. From a business standpoint, Santa Clara makes too much sence for it to be ignored.

- 98
Originally posted by kidash:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
Burlingame

That makes too much sense. Not Burlingame in particular, but somewhere North of San Mateo and South of the city. Off of 101 / the bay. I really like the Brisbane option (I think Pelosi offered up an an alternative years ago).

The problem being there is only one way to get there from the traffic point of view. You're still stuck to the 101 freeway. The infrastructure of the location is still to be desired vs. the Santa Clara proposal.

As a fan, I don’t want them to leave the City. From a business standpoint, Santa Clara makes too much sence for it to be ignored.

- 98

I don't see the traffic issue being better at Santa Clara. All the freeways are at least a mile away and the traffic around there is horrible already, without an NFL game going on.

You're right, there infrastructure is not there, but the Baylands project plan includes the infrastructure and, since it's mostly just empty space right now, they could build it however they want and make it suitable for an NFL stadium.
Serramonte
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by kidash:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
Burlingame

That makes too much sense. Not Burlingame in particular, but somewhere North of San Mateo and South of the city. Off of 101 / the bay. I really like the Brisbane option (I think Pelosi offered up an an alternative years ago).

The problem being there is only one way to get there from the traffic point of view. You're still stuck to the 101 freeway. The infrastructure of the location is still to be desired vs. the Santa Clara proposal.

As a fan, I don’t want them to leave the City. From a business standpoint, Santa Clara makes too much sence for it to be ignored.

- 98

I don't see the traffic issue being better at Santa Clara. All the freeways are at least a mile away and the traffic around there is horrible already, without an NFL game going on.

You're right, there infrastructure is not there, but the Baylands project plan includes the infrastructure and, since it's mostly just empty space right now, they could build it however they want and make it suitable for an NFL stadium.

Santa Clara spot has two main freeways close to the proposed stadium vs. one (from the posted site).

- 98
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
Burlingame

That makes too much sense. Not Burlingame in particular, but somewhere North of San Mateo and South of the city. Off of 101 / the bay. I really like the Brisbane option (I think Pelosi offered up an an alternative years ago).

Realistically, however, the Niners and Raiders need to get together and find a location for a new stadium that they can share....and the most likely place for it to happen is the parking lot of the Oakland Coliseum. It is right next to a major freeway and BART so folks from all over the Bay Area can attend games. The NFL would be thrilled to help finance a stadium there and I would bet that it would get a lot of corporate money as well.....a win/win for both teams and the Bay Area.
Originally posted by nw9erfan:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
Burlingame

That makes too much sense. Not Burlingame in particular, but somewhere North of San Mateo and South of the city. Off of 101 / the bay. I really like the Brisbane option (I think Pelosi offered up an an alternative years ago).

Realistically, however, the Niners and Raiders need to get together and find a location for a new stadium that they can share....and the most likely place for it to happen is the parking lot of the Oakland Coliseum. It is right next to a major freeway and BART so folks from all over the Bay Area can attend games. The NFL would be thrilled to help finance a stadium there and I would bet that it would get a lot of corporate money as well.....a win/win for both teams and the Bay Area.

A win win... Dude I know your on drugs. Why the hell would we want to share a stadium with Oakland, give me a break. We are the 49ers we are the greatest Dynasty in football history. That being said we deserve need and should get our OWN stadium
funny how after over 500 votes, more people would rather see the Niners stay in SF and play on a toxic waste dump in the ghetto, than see them move down the road to a nice area.

The 49ers HQ is in Santa Clara, they practice there, they hold camp there, most of them LIVE there. they literally do EVERYTHING in Santa Clara but play the games. and people act like theyre moving to LA by building a stadium in the south bay.

Candlestick Park is the only reason they even go to the city, and Candlestick's life is almost up. SF had over a decade to come up with a stadium for them, and failed. all they have came up with is a naval shipyard landfill.

were extremely close to being able to break ground on a new stadium that will lock this franchise into staying in the bay area for a very long time. the dream of keeping them in SF was dead years ago.

[ Edited by Niners99 on Feb 1, 2011 at 04:01:56 ]
Originally posted by kidash:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by kidash:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
Burlingame

That makes too much sense. Not Burlingame in particular, but somewhere North of San Mateo and South of the city. Off of 101 / the bay. I really like the Brisbane option (I think Pelosi offered up an an alternative years ago).

The problem being there is only one way to get there from the traffic point of view. You're still stuck to the 101 freeway. The infrastructure of the location is still to be desired vs. the Santa Clara proposal.

As a fan, I don’t want them to leave the City. From a business standpoint, Santa Clara makes too much sence for it to be ignored.

- 98

I don't see the traffic issue being better at Santa Clara. All the freeways are at least a mile away and the traffic around there is horrible already, without an NFL game going on.

You're right, there infrastructure is not there, but the Baylands project plan includes the infrastructure and, since it's mostly just empty space right now, they could build it however they want and make it suitable for an NFL stadium.

Santa Clara spot has two main freeways close to the proposed stadium vs. one (from the posted site).

- 98

While this is true of the Santa Clara site (there are actually 3) it makes no difference. The traffic around this area and on those freeways is totally F'd as it is, without an NFL game going on.
Hawaii
Originally posted by nw9erfan:
Originally posted by Niners99:
the Hunters Point site is a dead dream. its in a bad part of town, and is a toxic waste dump.

Santa Clara makes way more sense, and already is in the works. they would still be in the bay area. i dont know why people get so upset about the Niners leaving the city. the Giants and Jets dont even play in the same state. the Cowboys dont play in Dallas. it doesnt matter. theyd be right near their actual team HQ where they spend all their time, and right in the heart of the fanbase.

Well, AT&T Park was also in a bad part of town and built on a toxic waste dump...and it turned out pretty well.

The biggest problem with the Hunter's Point site is access. Not good as far as public transportation. Also, there is no direct freeway offramp and building one would cost a lot of money. Feinstein and Polosi might be able to help get some fed funds to help but it will still cost either the city, county, or team a lot of money. Is is worth it for the city? Based on what building the Giant's new park did, the answer is yes. I would certainly love to see that.

Now, if Al Davis were open to that site, he could contribute to the project, the NFL probably goes in on it and we happy... I'm cool with sharing a new stadium with dah Raidahs.

A more logical and realistic location however, would probably be in the parking lot of the Oakland Coliseum... Better public transportation, better access, and right off a major freeway. Would help the Oakland economy too... Still, I would much prefer SF.

Fienstien & Pelosi lol. Pelosi! That's the funniest thing I've heard. Thank you u just made my day. U can't count on Pelosi for s**t
I would love the 49ers to stay in SF forever but now instead of 2014 it will be 2015 the stadium will open because they also need help from NFL, w/o CBA, its hard. The 49ers will either do this, stay in Candlestick Forever because the Shipyard will take at least 4 to 5 years to clean up and fix the stadium. The only option is to have it in Santa Clara, share stadium in Santa Clara w/ Raiders or move. The best for the team is to stay but they just don't got enough room.
Originally posted by Bluefalcon61:
Serramonte

West Lake shopping center (In the voice of the old 80s commerical they use to run).
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Going to sound weird coming from a guy with the handle, "Oakland-Niner", but I would rather stay at Candlestick until the upper deck falls from beneath me.

[ Edited by Oakland-Niner on Feb 7, 2011 at 19:33:42 ]
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by kidash:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by kidash:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by RonMexico:
Burlingame

That makes too much sense. Not Burlingame in particular, but somewhere North of San Mateo and South of the city. Off of 101 / the bay. I really like the Brisbane option (I think Pelosi offered up an an alternative years ago).

The problem being there is only one way to get there from the traffic point of view. You're still stuck to the 101 freeway. The infrastructure of the location is still to be desired vs. the Santa Clara proposal.

As a fan, I don’t want them to leave the City. From a business standpoint, Santa Clara makes too much sence for it to be ignored.

- 98

I don't see the traffic issue being better at Santa Clara. All the freeways are at least a mile away and the traffic around there is horrible already, without an NFL game going on.

You're right, there infrastructure is not there, but the Baylands project plan includes the infrastructure and, since it's mostly just empty space right now, they could build it however they want and make it suitable for an NFL stadium.

Santa Clara spot has two main freeways close to the proposed stadium vs. one (from the posted site).

- 98

While this is true of the Santa Clara site (there are actually 3) it makes no difference. The traffic around this area and on those freeways is totally F'd as it is, without an NFL game going on.

Not on Sunday mornings.
Santa Clara...i love the area...also think it would be easy getting in and out of the area....use to work there and on the weekends it is totally dead there.

[ Edited by Hitman49 on Feb 9, 2011 at 12:35:06 ]