There are 88 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 susweel:
Alcatraz

This
Originally posted by Goldrushknight:
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

First, dude.....I am not on drugs. I'm merely suggesting a realistic scenario in which both teams benefit from NFL and corporate money and have a nice stadium to play in for years to come.

Now, if you have been following the NFL at all recently, you know that the commissioner has often spoken of a stadium that both Bay Area teams can share. That is probably the only way the Niners and Raiders get significant money from the NFL to help build it. In addition, both teams would be putting in their own money thereby helping the financing even more. Because it will be an attractive venue, there will probably be significant corporate sponsorship involved which would also benefit the bottom lines of both teams.

If you want my preference for a location, then it would be SF, either in HP or near the airport. As things stand now however, that seems pretty unlikely given the city's politics, lack of infrastructure, lack of vision, and lack of funding. Therefore, realistically, the location that would actually make sense for both teams is in Oakland, where the location is excellent, infrastructure is in place, and political will is there to make something happen.

In the future, it might help to not react emotionally to these posts and to actually try to understand what the person posting is trying to convey. Just a gentle suggestion..

[ Edited by nw9erfan on Feb 9, 2011 at 17:24:09 ]
Originally posted by wailers15:
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.

Fienstein & 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

Both Feinstein and Pelosi have publicly expressed their dismay at the proposed move of the Niners to Santa Clara. I think both realize that it would look like a failure on the part of SF....and neither wants the lost revenue that would result. Needless to say, they both have considerable federal clout due to the length of time both have been in Congress and could probably help with infrastructure funding if the Niners asked for it.

So,,, regardless of what you may think of either politically, the reality is that both could and should be very helpful to the Niners if the team showed any interest in staying in SF.
Originally posted by nw9erfan:
Originally posted by wailers15:
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.

Fienstein & 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

Both Feinstein and Pelosi have publicly expressed their dismay at the proposed move of the Niners to Santa Clara. I think both realize that it would look like a failure on the part of SF....and neither wants the lost revenue that would result. Needless to say, they both have considerable federal clout due to the length of time both have been in Congress and could probably help with infrastructure funding if the Niners asked for it.

So,,, regardless of what you may think of either politically, the reality is that both could and should be very helpful to the Niners if the team showed any interest in staying in SF.

So those 2 are going to get SF the billion dollars they need to fix the candlestick point infrastructure from the Feds?


I think you're greatly overestimating their abilities and interests.
Originally posted by nw9erfan:
Originally posted by wailers15:
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.

Fienstein & 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

Both Feinstein and Pelosi have publicly expressed their dismay at the proposed move of the Niners to Santa Clara. I think both realize that it would look like a failure on the part of SF....and neither wants the lost revenue that would result. Needless to say, they both have considerable federal clout due to the length of time both have been in Congress and could probably help with infrastructure funding if the Niners asked for it.

So,,, regardless of what you may think of either politically, the reality is that both could and should be very helpful to the Niners if the team showed any interest in staying in SF.

Obama is not going to help them get funding for a stadium, he has a freeze on pay for federal government workers. How is he going to justify helping for a stadium. In Hawaii the elected governor said he can get funding for programs like education etc cause he is connected in Washington from serving as a congressman and senator and he is close to Obama cause Obama is from here, guess what, the funds ain't happening here, and you think they have clout for a stadium? Get real.
Originally posted by nw9erfan:
Originally posted by Goldrushknight:
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

First, dude.....I am not on drugs. I'm merely suggesting a realistic scenario in which both teams benefit from NFL and corporate money and have a nice stadium to play in for years to come.

Now, if you have been following the NFL at all recently, you know that the commissioner has often spoken of a stadium that both Bay Area teams can share. That is probably the only way the Niners and Raiders get significant money from the NFL to help build it. In addition, both teams would be putting in their own money thereby helping the financing even more. Because it will be an attractive venue, there will probably be significant corporate sponsorship involved which would also benefit the bottom lines of both teams.

If you want my preference for a location, then it would be SF, either in HP or near the airport. As things stand now however, that seems pretty unlikely given the city's politics, lack of infrastructure, lack of vision, and lack of funding. Therefore, realistically, the location that would actually make sense for both teams is in Oakland, where the location is excellent, infrastructure is in place, and political will is there to make something happen.

In the future, it might help to not react emotionally to these posts and to actually try to understand what the person posting is trying to convey. Just a gentle suggestion..

cooperate sponsorship would have to be divided and the team would get less if divided in this case. Oakland would reap the benefits and not the city of SF, so what would be the difference if the team moved to SC?
Originally posted by WildBill:
Originally posted by nw9erfan:
Originally posted by Goldrushknight:
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

First, dude.....I am not on drugs. I'm merely suggesting a realistic scenario in which both teams benefit from NFL and corporate money and have a nice stadium to play in for years to come.

Now, if you have been following the NFL at all recently, you know that the commissioner has often spoken of a stadium that both Bay Area teams can share. That is probably the only way the Niners and Raiders get significant money from the NFL to help build it. In addition, both teams would be putting in their own money thereby helping the financing even more. Because it will be an attractive venue, there will probably be significant corporate sponsorship involved which would also benefit the bottom lines of both teams.

If you want my preference for a location, then it would be SF, either in HP or near the airport. As things stand now however, that seems pretty unlikely given the city's politics, lack of infrastructure, lack of vision, and lack of funding. Therefore, realistically, the location that would actually make sense for both teams is in Oakland, where the location is excellent, infrastructure is in place, and political will is there to make something happen.

In the future, it might help to not react emotionally to these posts and to actually try to understand what the person posting is trying to convey. Just a gentle suggestion..

cooperate sponsorship would have to be divided and the team would get less if divided in this case. Oakland would reap the benefits and not the city of SF, so what would be the difference if the team moved to SC?

....if you actually read my entire post, you would have seen this...

"Now, if you have been following the NFL at all recently, you know that the commissioner has often spoken of a stadium that both Bay Area teams can share. That is probably the only way the Niners and Raiders get significant money from the NFL to help build it."

Unless the Niners end up sharing the SC stadium with the Raiduhs (can't see Davis doing that), the NFL is unlikely to put up much money, if any, for the Santa Clara project.

Plus, my feeling is that the Santa Clara stadium will not attract the level of corporate sponsorship the Niners would get if the stadium was built in SF or in Oakland...although admittedly, I'm not certain about that. It just seems the Niners have a long way to go in terms of financing that SC park. If they can secure financing for a park in that location, more power to them. I will be the first to congratulate them.

The overall point of this post is this.....stadiums are extremely expensive....and Bay Area land is worth its space in gold. It would be very tough to build two separate stadiums for these two teams in this area....and the NFL knows this and that is why it is pushing for a shared stadium. Therefore, it makes much more realistic sense to plan for sharing a stadium (for the reasons mentioned above).....now the question is.....where?

[ Edited by nw9erfan on Mar 22, 2011 at 18:56:23 ]
Originally posted by StOnEy333:
Originally posted by nw9erfan:
Originally posted by wailers15:
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.

Fienstein & 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

Both Feinstein and Pelosi have publicly expressed their dismay at the proposed move of the Niners to Santa Clara. I think both realize that it would look like a failure on the part of SF....and neither wants the lost revenue that would result. Needless to say, they both have considerable federal clout due to the length of time both have been in Congress and could probably help with infrastructure funding if the Niners asked for it.

So,,, regardless of what you may think of either politically, the reality is that both could and should be very helpful to the Niners if the team showed any interest in staying in SF.

So those 2 are going to get SF the billion dollars they need to fix the candlestick point infrastructure from the Feds?


I think you're greatly overestimating their abilities and interests.

In this economic climate, I agree with you...it would be tough to get significant funding... However, both Feinstein and Pelosi have expressed their firm desire to keep the team in SF, and both have served in Congress for a couple of decades. Therefore, if anybody can secure any federal money for an infrastructure project like this it would be them. Just saying.

Now, the reality is that the Santa Clara project would have to fail for them to jump into the mix. Some think that this is a distinct possibility.

[ Edited by nw9erfan on Mar 22, 2011 at 18:57:42 ]
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.

Its a Friggin parking lot getting in or out of the Oakland coliseum. That crap hole is no better than the stick except for Bart
Originally posted by kezar49er:
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.

Its a Friggin parking lot getting in or out of the Oakland Coliseum. That crap hole is no better than the stick except for Bart

BART makes a huge difference because fans from SF and the South Bay can get to the games easily.

Next,.......to quote Richard Dreyfuss in "Jaws"........You got any better suggestions?

Santa Clara may not work because of financing and the chance that the NFL won't go in on any Bay Area stadium project that doesn't include the Raiduhs but if the stadium is built in SF or Oakland, the NFL will definitely help finance it....and as stated, the chance of corporate sponsorship goes up.

Again, I personally would like to see the stadium built somewhere in SF (near the airport would be my preference because it would be more easily accessible to Highway 101) but Oakland is cool with me because of all the stated reasons.

I'm trying to face reality here. There are no perfect locations. Each one has its pros and cons. I just happen to think that if the two teams are going to share a stadium, the most likely location is the parking lot of the Oakland Coliseum.
With this economic climate if you think the Bay Area is building two new state-of-the-art $1 billion stadiums, you are wrong.

With local economies in such disarray much of the funding for new NFL stadiums will come from the league. Goodell has publicly stated many times that the Raiders and Niners should look into sharing a stadium. This would result in a better product for the fans, as the teams could pool funds. The Niners/Raiders rivalry is great but is keeping the Raiders separate from our stadium really worth $1 billion? I don't think so.

I find it irritating that ownership has made no efforts to work with the Raiders.
  • Envy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 2,382
I would prefer the 9ers stay in the SF or the the greater area. I'm not against the SC move because it does make sense economically but I'd much rather they stay in the City.

The current climate is not to make any commitment to redevelopment but I'm hopeful of the future. With a resurgent team (fingers crossed) the impact of moving the franchise out of the city might actually spur some investors into action.
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
With this economic climate if you think the Bay Area is building two new state-of-the-art $1 billion stadiums, you are wrong.

With local economies in such disarray much of the funding for new NFL stadiums will come from the league. Goodell has publicly stated many times that the Raiders and Niners should look into sharing a stadium. This would result in a better product for the fans, as the teams could pool funds. The Niners/Raiders rivalry is great but is keeping the Raiders separate from our stadium really worth $1 billion? I don't think so.

I find it irritating that ownership has made no efforts to work with the Raiders.


I wouldn't assume that they haven't talked with the Raiders about this already. I don't think either fan base would be thrilled with the idea and therefore I doubt either franchise would like any discussions made public . . . yet.

I do agree with your main point though, there's no way the NFL will help fund two new stadiums in the same metro area. My guess is that Goodell will make any NFL financing assitance contingent upon a shared stadium . . . and I do think it will be in Santa Clara.
Santa Clara stadium moving forward

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/Santa-Clara-Moving-on-49ers-Stadium-While-Money-Is-Still-There-117960519.html
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
With this economic climate if you think the Bay Area is building two new state-of-the-art $1 billion stadiums, you are wrong.

With local economies in such disarray much of the funding for new NFL stadiums will come from the league. Goodell has publicly stated many times that the Raiders and Niners should look into sharing a stadium. This would result in a better product for the fans, as the teams could pool funds. The Niners/Raiders rivalry is great but is keeping the Raiders separate from our stadium really worth $1 billion? I don't think so.

I find it irritating that ownership has made no efforts to work with the Raiders.

The problem is that the stadium would have to be on a neutral site. Most teams that share stadiums also share a city: Clippers/Lakers, Giants/Jets. Theoretically, the Raiders and 49ers do not have this in common.

Further, it is not unlikely that either the Raiders or the 49ers would want the stadium to be nearer their respective training facilities. So, where would that middle ground be? Oakland? SF? Both are unlikely, though they are in the middle of Napa and Santa Clara.
Scott