SkyscraperCity Forum banner
1 - 20 of 122 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
Taxpayers need to put in 300M. It should be an interesting negotiation since neither side really has any live alternatives. I still think that the Raiders have the least chance of leaving, but keeping the Warriors should be cheaper.

And after 300M for the Raiders what's left for the A's?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
Shame doesn't typically enter into business deals. If anything, its the first thing to go...
Or as they say, shame doesn't have a seat at the negotiating table.

I'm not sure shame is the right word. You feel shame for your sins or other shortcomings, for poverty, disease, addiction, street crime, poor education, decaying roads, etc.

But you can blame poor attendance on high ticket prices and a low quality product.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
Link to the study (pdf file):

http://www.coliseumauthority.org/archive/2013/31_130715_474.pdf

Is Mount Davis really that bad, I mean, is it worth renovating and redeveloping the other three sides of the stadium, rather than the need for a complete new stadium?
Much more PR for a new stadium plus you get union support since it basically transfers a few hundred mill to their members. This is critical in a city that is broke and basically has to justify taxing or borrowing to the electorate.

The map and comment that most of the wealth in the area is south of Oakland really sums up sports in the Bay Area: the Niners moved south and the Giants are desperate to keep the A's out of the south. But with the Niners already in Santa Clara, the current Oakland location is not bad for a second football team.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
Problem with Mt. Davis is its old now. It would have to be renovated so as all the top of the line amenities would be offered. The club section is nice, but not up to the new standard. Also, the bottom half of the stand is temporary. All the bleachers are wheeled in from outside of the stadium to accommodate baseball. A lot of money would have to be spent to rebuild the part of the stadium that is already in place for football.

The most important reason to build somewhere else is the location itself. Its one of the the worst possible locations in the city. Oakland isn't actually that bad of a town (I personally like the city). There are many beautiful neighborhoods, and business districts that are able to attract a lot of foot traffic and business. Unfortunately the coliseum complex is smack dab in the hood, with no local business or eateries for the public to enjoy before or after a game. You simply drive to the stadium, or take BART, and drive or ride back. The neighborhood get seriously sketchy when the sun sets, and to be honest, I wouldn't hang out there during the day either. Downtown, Jack London Square, North Oakland or another area would serve the team and fans much better. They say they are eying property near the coliseum, and I hope its on the western side of 880 (the current stadium is east of 880). That neighborhood is much better with many existing business fans can peruse before and after Raiders games. The new park would also probably spurn many more.
You then leave Oracle isolated and in weaker position to counter-offer the Warriors. Or do you assume that is a lost cause?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
May be time to let them all go and build midscale housing and office there. Grab the employed, tax-paying crowd who can't afford SF. They aren't going to be looking to be near a football stadium. Baseball park maybe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
We'll see how unwelcome they are when there is actual money on the table.
Definitely true. As they say, money doesn't talk, it screams.

I would guess that Pasadena is firm about no Raiders since the local voters don't need the money and will gladly vote out the current "available for a price" elected officials. SC and the Coliseum are probably willing to take them but are looking for a premium or other compensation.

Pat Haden has been quoted as saying that the Coliseum, as it stands, makes it easy for recruits to chose Oregon. They would like to change that in the worst way and some money for improvements plus introducing the recruit to Harbaugh or Woodson, etc., has to be a plus.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
Season tickets in Oakland are now on sale, exactly on the same schedule as previous seasons. Matier and Ross are idiots.
http://www.raiders.com/tickets/season-tickets.html
You're being too tough: it's very difficult to have everything you make up come true. :lol:

Did Oakland distribute a map of how the seating works at Dodger Stadium with their season ticket orders? :lol:

OK, enough hilarity for now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
Of course the Raiders are on schedule to sell season tickets after the League made it know that no team would be moving in 2015. So made up or not, this is not a surprise.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...-year-extension-to-stay-in-oakland-lower-rent
True, but the issue is a bit more subtle than that. The NFL and other sources indicate that the Rams and Raiders have been negotiating stadium deals in the LA market and would have already moved to LA if the NFL had not requested them to stop for a year so that more leverage could be applied to get better deals from their home cities and the LA stadium proponents.

This led to the statement from the NFL that no new teams would move for 2015, but that led to talk, and a specific comment from Jerry Jones (owner of the Cowboys), that owners decide when to move a team, not the NFL.

But there was little doubt the Raiders would not move this year since they are a likely second team, not a driver of how and when LA stadiums and other arrangements will be shaped. Apparently they are still negotiating with all three of the major stadium projects in LA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
http://www.insidebayarea.com/breaki...-city-frontman-tells-county-come-bloody-table

Some players in Oakland apparently starting to panic after the plans for a shared Raiders-Chargers venue hits the news.
Doesn't sound like panic. Sounds like a pointing out that within a few months the Raiders are going to irrevocably commit to moving to Carson or to sharing with Kroenke in Inglewood if the city and county don't do something.

It has been common knowledge for over a year in STL, SD and Oakland that the teams are looking at LA and yet the Oakland pols can't really do anything since they have no money.

The only good news for Oakland is that LA will only take two teams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
The bad news is that the Rams and Raiders were overwhelmingly voted in as the two teams Angelinos want in the LA Times poll. The Chargers came in 5th with 2% right behind the LA Kiss and indoor lacrosse
:lol: Well don't knock the Kiss until you've tried it.

For sure, I think the NFL would be nuts to reject the Rams, who had 2/3 of the popular vote. But I agree that the Raiders, who had over 30 percent and carry their own fans with them, are the second choice. I can easily see fans coming from the Bay Area, LV and SD to see them in Carson, or Inglewood for that matter.

But, as before, the difference maker is that neither Oakland or SD have shown any interest in contributing any money, and in such case, LA or even San Antonio could be a better choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
What I don't get is why not simply play in Hollypark with the Rams? What chance do the Raiders or Chargers have building this Carson project if they're the sole tenant? Cause no way all three teams move to LA...do they?
No way 3 teams.

I would think that being a tenant with Kroenke gives you more flexibility; you don't need money now and if you get some in a few years you build your own.

Whenever I can't figure things out I try to figure what I'm missing. Could Kroenke be refusing to take tenants? Maybe, but I thought he had become flexible on that issue.

Could this whole thing just be the NFL winking and nodding at their make-believe JV, knowing full-well that the Raiders are bunking with Kroenke and SD needs help to squeeze Oakland, STL and San Antone? Could be. Given the very weak effort by STL so far, I would think SA is becoming a real possibility.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
Plus, designing a new stadium that could be expanded on a temporary or permanent basis would be easy. I'll be very surprised if any new stadium in Oakland becomes a reality, though.
Yes. Likewise, it was mentioned early that the Inglewood stadium would hold 80k for major events but would normally be configured for something in the low 60's (please correct me if there has been an update on that).

But I don't read Davis (or Wolff) as likely to say anything positive about any proposal that doesn't talk about serious money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
I don't see why a public/private partnership with all three professional teams can't get done in Oakland...

The short answer is money. The slightly longer answer is the Warriors want to be in SF; the Raiders want to be in LA; the A's want to be in SJ.

The Warriors are actually leaving since the move is within their territory. The Raiders (per the NFL) would have already moved to LA if they had been allowed to; the A's still say that their plan A is SJ and are taking their case to the Supreme Ct. to be allowed to do so.

One or more of them may stay in Oakland, but unless a gigantic piggy bank breaks open, only against their will.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
Good question. Raider management says there are more Raider fans in SoCal, than in the Bay Area and even if you have to split in LA, you also split the Bay Area. While the LA market is not wealthier it is larger and there may be more interest in spending money on sports. Former PSL holders I know in Oakland are really burned out at this point and the newer Silicon Valley wealthy may not be into sports or going to Oakland

I would guess that the NFL can at least negotiate a reasonable price from Kroenke and minimize relocation fees as long as the Raiders get some additional capital or otherwise demonstrate financial stability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
http://www.insidebayarea.com/breaki...roughness-oakland-stadium-leader-takes-aim-at

Not sure if Kephart taking his sweet time is a good thing or bad thing, but the mayor having to distance herself from his comments over the NFL and Carson isn't ringing too well.

Meh, my hope of rooting for an Oakland Raiders in future years is slim to none anyways.
Kephart is right, of course: Grubman had written down his script before things even started, and part of it is to praise STL and Carson so as to get Oakland and SD panicked enough to raid the piggybank big time. Oakland is the worst offender, so they got most of the criticism.

This may be "good cop, bad cop" and intended to pressure the NFL to give some more time or face some political heat (Gov. Brown and Obama each have large power bases in the East Bay). But mostly it's aimed at the fans and local politicos and tells them you can't fight a war without bullets and this is a war. The NFL isn't dropping by because they like us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,535 Posts
http://www.mercurynews.com/athletics/ci_28361806/oakland-not-releasing-raiders-stadium-plan

City of Oakland has received the initial report by Coliseum City developer, but public will not get to see for some time.
Seems like both teams are ready to reject it, so oddly who stays mostly depends on what happens in SD.

The problem is there's two openings in LA and one in SJ to provide stadiums but 4 teams looking for them. That forces Wolff and Davis to each hate the plan worse than the other or the NFL or MLB might force them to stay in Oakland, where funding is lean.

The NFL has long backed Davis in not wanting the A's around, but now from Manfred's comments it sounds like MLB is taking the same view re the Raiders, which means allowing the SJ move if the Raiders get any kind of priority treatment in Oakland.

So the key is SD: if they get an extension of time and can negotiate a deal that passes voter muster, then LA frees up for the Raiders and Rams, and the A's will be stuck in Oakland. If the Chargers can't cut a deal in SD and beat out the Raiders for LA, then Wolff may have a real chance to get to SJ.
 
1 - 20 of 122 Posts
Top