Originally posted by rodbeezy:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by WildBill:
Originally posted by ChazBoner:
last i heard, we might even lose the "49ers" from the name. Like when the Oilers moved to Baltimore.
Why? a 49er is not synonomous with only San Francisco.
I heard San Francisco wants to keep the name so it can get another franchise like Cleveland did.
All talk at this proposal. Last momentum it had was back in 2006. SF is too knee deep in their own political s**tstorm (Hello Mirkarimi!) to even think about things like this.
And even if they were successful in doing so, I give it about 10-15 yrs before they even field an expansion team. No way you get the expansion "San Francisco 49ers" to play at the 'Stick.
The NFL would have to agree to that , which they won't. The two situations are completely different. The Browns were moving to Baltimore, not 45 miles south of Cleveland. Due to this and the history in Cleveland the NFL wanted to restore football to the town. If we were moving to L.A. this move might make sense, but that is obviously not the case. There is no need for it here. Feinstein (sp?) and SFare just mad that the Niners chose Santa Clara over them, but hey, they tried for years to build a stadium in the city, but the city was uncooperative at every turn.