49ers may be looking to team with Raiders on a joint stadium
Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Monday, January 29, 2007
Here's the latest twist to the Bay Area's topsy-turvy stadium politics: Word is the San Francisco 49ers have informally approached the Oakland Raiders about building a new home -- together.
The stadium, which would be shared by the two rivals, very well could be in Santa Clara, where the Niners are pursuing new digs next to Great America.
Niners executive Jed York, the son of team owners John and Denise York, said that while a joint stadium idea has merit, there has been no contact with the Raiders on the subject.
"I think it's a good idea, but we haven't gone down that road yet,'' he said. "First we need to work on Santa Clara, and make sure we can actually get a stadium down there.''
That's not what we are hearing from inside the Raiders organization, and from others in the know who have contacts with the Niners.
Those sources tell us John and Jed York approached the Raiders management in a casual setting in the latter half of the football season about the possibility of teaming up.
Raiders chief executive Amy Trask said only, "We are enthusiastically focused on the 2007 football season, and don't believe this is an appropriate time to discuss stadium opportunities. ...We are playing in a nice stadium, which our teams and fans enjoy.''
Wild as it may sound, the economics for a Forty-Raider stadium just could make sense for both teams.
For starters, the 49ers -- after nearly 10 years of trying -- still haven't found a stadium plan that pencils out financially given that football is only played about 10 times a year.
Hooking up with the Raiders for a stadium would instantly double the usage and could make financial sense.
Plus, the teams could get a big boost from the National Football League, which this past season agreed to kick in $300 million to the New York Giants and Jets to build a joint stadium at New Jersey's Meadowlands.
The thinking goes that if the Niners and Raiders could get a similar handout from the NFL -- and that's still a big if -- it would go a long way to helping them get over the stadium money hump.
As for the Raiders, their current 16-year-lease at the remodeled Oakland Coliseum is set to expire in four years -- or about the time the Niners hope to have a new stadium built.
The Raiders, despite upgraded football digs, are still unhappy about playing in Oakland -- but currently have few real prospects for moving out of the area again.
What's more, owner Al Davis -- who only recently was forced to spend a bundle to buy out the unhappy heirs of a silent partner -- doesn't have the cash to build a stadium on his own, sources say. And given his past battles with the NFL, he doesn't appear to have many friends in the league looking to do him any big favors.
"It really may be the one option for the Raiders that makes sense,'' says one NFL insider, who asked not to be named.
Disparity dustup: Interesting and ironic play over at the ever-political BART board the other day involving a $448,439 contract to investigate whether minority contractors are getting their fair share of transportation work in the Bay Area.
The sticking point: The contract didn't go to a minority firm.
Under current law, agencies like BART that want to keep their affirmative action programs going now have to prove that minority companies aren't getting their share.
To make the "disparity" case, BART and seven other area transportation agencies went hunting for a company to do a study.
Ironically, the initial winner of the bid -- selected by a panel of seven judges -- was CRA International, a multinational firm based in Boston, with a local Oakland team.
One of the losers was Mason Tillman Associates, a local firm that has already done similar studies for both Oakland and Alameda County, and is owned by Eleanor Mason Ramsey - whose husband is retired Alameda County Superior Judge Henry Ramsey, who recently swore in new Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums.
Needless to say, the selection of a predominantly white outside firm over a local minority woman didn't go over well with the minority BART board members. Nonetheless, after a very vocal debate, the "disparity" study contract was handed to CRA by a 5-3 vote.
Thanks to a technical glitch, however, the vote had to be retaken -- a move that promised even more acrimony, as groups like the Oakland Black Caucus called for the contract to be tossed.
Not to worry.
When it came time for the second vote Thursday, BART staff -- apparently seeing the writing on the wall -- announced that the selection of CRA had been flawed (they had subbed in a subcontractor at the last minute) and recommended the bid be tossed.
Then, for good measure, General Manager Tom Margro -- apparently anticipating that the other transit agencies might lose patience with BART and strike out on their own -- recommended BART do their own separate study as well.
And the BART board agreed by a unanimous vote.
The contract will now be re-bid.
"We might have the same issue come up again, " said BART Board member Tom Radulovich. "But I wouldn't be surprised if other companies -- having seen what just happened -- think better about putting their names into the mix.''
On the other hand, Radulovich said, "for a lot of people, it was a happy ending."
Gavin's gold: In a bit of pre-election muscle flexing, Mayor Gavin Newsom this week is poised to report having raised more than $600,000 -- all in checks of $500 or less.
But even with the formidable bank account -- and no announced challengers -- Newsom campaign manager Eric Jaye says the mayor is under no illusion that he'll get a free pass this fall.
In fact, the professionally paranoid Jaye says the new public financing rules approved by the Board of Supervisors virtually assures that some of those same board members who voted for it -- most notably Ross Mirkarimi -- will mount a challenge, even though Mirkarimi has repeatedly denied any intention of running.
Under the rules, any candidate who raises $135,000 is eligible for $450,000 in matching taxpayer money, with a $7 million public kitty available on a dollar-for-dollar match after that.
burntonion01 Post #2: Jan 29, 2:00 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 1186 I think it would be a good idea and a win/win for each team. It would be easier to get sponsors for the stadium as well with 2 teams which covers both blue and white collar type of fans.
Would the names change?
Bay Area Raiders of Oakland
Oakland Raiders of the Bay Area
Santa Clara Raiders
Santa Clara 49ers
tdogg097 Post #3: Jan 29, 3:06 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 9 Why would the names change? The Jets and Giants play in New Jersey and they are still the New York Jets and Giants.
rai8ters5 Post #4: Jan 29, 3:39 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 1463 This would be great news for the raiders and their fans.
49ers may be looking to team with Raiders on a joint stadium
Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Monday, January 29, 2007
Here's the latest twist to the Bay Area's topsy-turvy stadium politics: Word is the San Francisco 49ers have informally approached the Oakland Raiders about building a new home -- together.
The stadium, which would be shared by the two rivals, very well could be in Santa Clara, where the Niners are pursuing new digs next to Great America.
Niners executive Jed York, the son of team owners John and Denise York, said that while a joint stadium idea has merit, there has been no contact with the Raiders on the subject.
"I think it's a good idea, but we haven't gone down that road yet,'' he said. "First we need to work on Santa Clara, and make sure we can actually get a stadium down there.''
That's not what we are hearing from inside the Raiders organization, and from others in the know who have contacts with the Niners.
Those sources tell us John and Jed York approached the Raiders management in a casual setting in the latter half of the football season about the possibility of teaming up.
Raiders chief executive Amy Trask said only, "We are enthusiastically focused on the 2007 football season, and don't believe this is an appropriate time to discuss stadium opportunities. ...We are playing in a nice stadium, which our teams and fans enjoy.''
Wild as it may sound, the economics for a Forty-Raider stadium just could make sense for both teams.
For starters, the 49ers -- after nearly 10 years of trying -- still haven't found a stadium plan that pencils out financially given that football is only played about 10 times a year.
Hooking up with the Raiders for a stadium would instantly double the usage and could make financial sense.
Plus, the teams could get a big boost from the National Football League, which this past season agreed to kick in $300 million to the New York Giants and Jets to build a joint stadium at New Jersey's Meadowlands.
The thinking goes that if the Niners and Raiders could get a similar handout from the NFL -- and that's still a big if -- it would go a long way to helping them get over the stadium money hump.
As for the Raiders, their current 16-year-lease at the remodeled Oakland Coliseum is set to expire in four years -- or about the time the Niners hope to have a new stadium built.
The Raiders, despite upgraded football digs, are still unhappy about playing in Oakland -- but currently have few real prospects for moving out of the area again.
What's more, owner Al Davis -- who only recently was forced to spend a bundle to buy out the unhappy heirs of a silent partner -- doesn't have the cash to build a stadium on his own, sources say. And given his past battles with the NFL, he doesn't appear to have many friends in the league looking to do him any big favors.
"It really may be the one option for the Raiders that makes sense,'' says one NFL insider, who asked not to be named.
Disparity dustup: Interesting and ironic play over at the ever-political BART board the other day involving a $448,439 contract to investigate whether minority contractors are getting their fair share of transportation work in the Bay Area.
The sticking point: The contract didn't go to a minority firm.
Under current law, agencies like BART that want to keep their affirmative action programs going now have to prove that minority companies aren't getting their share.
To make the "disparity" case, BART and seven other area transportation agencies went hunting for a company to do a study.
Ironically, the initial winner of the bid -- selected by a panel of seven judges -- was CRA International, a multinational firm based in Boston, with a local Oakland team.
One of the losers was Mason Tillman Associates, a local firm that has already done similar studies for both Oakland and Alameda County, and is owned by Eleanor Mason Ramsey - whose husband is retired Alameda County Superior Judge Henry Ramsey, who recently swore in new Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums.
Needless to say, the selection of a predominantly white outside firm over a local minority woman didn't go over well with the minority BART board members. Nonetheless, after a very vocal debate, the "disparity" study contract was handed to CRA by a 5-3 vote.
Thanks to a technical glitch, however, the vote had to be retaken -- a move that promised even more acrimony, as groups like the Oakland Black Caucus called for the contract to be tossed.
Not to worry.
When it came time for the second vote Thursday, BART staff -- apparently seeing the writing on the wall -- announced that the selection of CRA had been flawed (they had subbed in a subcontractor at the last minute) and recommended the bid be tossed.
Then, for good measure, General Manager Tom Margro -- apparently anticipating that the other transit agencies might lose patience with BART and strike out on their own -- recommended BART do their own separate study as well.
And the BART board agreed by a unanimous vote.
The contract will now be re-bid.
"We might have the same issue come up again, " said BART Board member Tom Radulovich. "But I wouldn't be surprised if other companies -- having seen what just happened -- think better about putting their names into the mix.''
On the other hand, Radulovich said, "for a lot of people, it was a happy ending."
Gavin's gold: In a bit of pre-election muscle flexing, Mayor Gavin Newsom this week is poised to report having raised more than $600,000 -- all in checks of $500 or less.
But even with the formidable bank account -- and no announced challengers -- Newsom campaign manager Eric Jaye says the mayor is under no illusion that he'll get a free pass this fall.
In fact, the professionally paranoid Jaye says the new public financing rules approved by the Board of Supervisors virtually assures that some of those same board members who voted for it -- most notably Ross Mirkarimi -- will mount a challenge, even though Mirkarimi has repeatedly denied any intention of running.
Under the rules, any candidate who raises $135,000 is eligible for $450,000 in matching taxpayer money, with a $7 million public kitty available on a dollar-for-dollar match after that.
YabuInThe10th Post #5: Jan 29, 4:04 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 157 Santa Clara isn't particularly close to Oakland, and is die-hard 49er country. I don't see why the Raiders would want to move to a place where they'd be second-fiddle until the end of time. That's not AL's style.
SaintOakland Post #6: Jan 29, 4:13 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 60 I posed that question on my Blog on December 8th of last year.
http://www.silverandblackpride.com/story/2006/12/8/14411/8658
I know that Raider fans would NOT be for it.
Greer128 Post #7: Jan 29, 4:32 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 45 If i'm gonna fly to California to see the Raiders i expect to be somewhere its black and silver only, not another color at any other time"S". and somewhere that a Black Hole exists besides space WEG.
Forum Home NFL Football Oakland Raiders9ers want to share a new stadium
Add Reply New Topic
Page: [1] Replies: 6 Views: 266
Please let us know what you think about ESPN's message boards.
Read ESPN's message board rules here.
Search: Oakland Raiders All Boards ESPN
Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Monday, January 29, 2007
Here's the latest twist to the Bay Area's topsy-turvy stadium politics: Word is the San Francisco 49ers have informally approached the Oakland Raiders about building a new home -- together.
The stadium, which would be shared by the two rivals, very well could be in Santa Clara, where the Niners are pursuing new digs next to Great America.
Niners executive Jed York, the son of team owners John and Denise York, said that while a joint stadium idea has merit, there has been no contact with the Raiders on the subject.
"I think it's a good idea, but we haven't gone down that road yet,'' he said. "First we need to work on Santa Clara, and make sure we can actually get a stadium down there.''
That's not what we are hearing from inside the Raiders organization, and from others in the know who have contacts with the Niners.
Those sources tell us John and Jed York approached the Raiders management in a casual setting in the latter half of the football season about the possibility of teaming up.
Raiders chief executive Amy Trask said only, "We are enthusiastically focused on the 2007 football season, and don't believe this is an appropriate time to discuss stadium opportunities. ...We are playing in a nice stadium, which our teams and fans enjoy.''
Wild as it may sound, the economics for a Forty-Raider stadium just could make sense for both teams.
For starters, the 49ers -- after nearly 10 years of trying -- still haven't found a stadium plan that pencils out financially given that football is only played about 10 times a year.
Hooking up with the Raiders for a stadium would instantly double the usage and could make financial sense.
Plus, the teams could get a big boost from the National Football League, which this past season agreed to kick in $300 million to the New York Giants and Jets to build a joint stadium at New Jersey's Meadowlands.
The thinking goes that if the Niners and Raiders could get a similar handout from the NFL -- and that's still a big if -- it would go a long way to helping them get over the stadium money hump.
As for the Raiders, their current 16-year-lease at the remodeled Oakland Coliseum is set to expire in four years -- or about the time the Niners hope to have a new stadium built.
The Raiders, despite upgraded football digs, are still unhappy about playing in Oakland -- but currently have few real prospects for moving out of the area again.
What's more, owner Al Davis -- who only recently was forced to spend a bundle to buy out the unhappy heirs of a silent partner -- doesn't have the cash to build a stadium on his own, sources say. And given his past battles with the NFL, he doesn't appear to have many friends in the league looking to do him any big favors.
"It really may be the one option for the Raiders that makes sense,'' says one NFL insider, who asked not to be named.
Disparity dustup: Interesting and ironic play over at the ever-political BART board the other day involving a $448,439 contract to investigate whether minority contractors are getting their fair share of transportation work in the Bay Area.
The sticking point: The contract didn't go to a minority firm.
Under current law, agencies like BART that want to keep their affirmative action programs going now have to prove that minority companies aren't getting their share.
To make the "disparity" case, BART and seven other area transportation agencies went hunting for a company to do a study.
Ironically, the initial winner of the bid -- selected by a panel of seven judges -- was CRA International, a multinational firm based in Boston, with a local Oakland team.
One of the losers was Mason Tillman Associates, a local firm that has already done similar studies for both Oakland and Alameda County, and is owned by Eleanor Mason Ramsey - whose husband is retired Alameda County Superior Judge Henry Ramsey, who recently swore in new Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums.
Needless to say, the selection of a predominantly white outside firm over a local minority woman didn't go over well with the minority BART board members. Nonetheless, after a very vocal debate, the "disparity" study contract was handed to CRA by a 5-3 vote.
Thanks to a technical glitch, however, the vote had to be retaken -- a move that promised even more acrimony, as groups like the Oakland Black Caucus called for the contract to be tossed.
Not to worry.
When it came time for the second vote Thursday, BART staff -- apparently seeing the writing on the wall -- announced that the selection of CRA had been flawed (they had subbed in a subcontractor at the last minute) and recommended the bid be tossed.
Then, for good measure, General Manager Tom Margro -- apparently anticipating that the other transit agencies might lose patience with BART and strike out on their own -- recommended BART do their own separate study as well.
And the BART board agreed by a unanimous vote.
The contract will now be re-bid.
"We might have the same issue come up again, " said BART Board member Tom Radulovich. "But I wouldn't be surprised if other companies -- having seen what just happened -- think better about putting their names into the mix.''
On the other hand, Radulovich said, "for a lot of people, it was a happy ending."
Gavin's gold: In a bit of pre-election muscle flexing, Mayor Gavin Newsom this week is poised to report having raised more than $600,000 -- all in checks of $500 or less.
But even with the formidable bank account -- and no announced challengers -- Newsom campaign manager Eric Jaye says the mayor is under no illusion that he'll get a free pass this fall.
In fact, the professionally paranoid Jaye says the new public financing rules approved by the Board of Supervisors virtually assures that some of those same board members who voted for it -- most notably Ross Mirkarimi -- will mount a challenge, even though Mirkarimi has repeatedly denied any intention of running.
Under the rules, any candidate who raises $135,000 is eligible for $450,000 in matching taxpayer money, with a $7 million public kitty available on a dollar-for-dollar match after that.
burntonion01 Post #2: Jan 29, 2:00 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 1186 I think it would be a good idea and a win/win for each team. It would be easier to get sponsors for the stadium as well with 2 teams which covers both blue and white collar type of fans.
Would the names change?
Bay Area Raiders of Oakland
Oakland Raiders of the Bay Area
Santa Clara Raiders
Santa Clara 49ers
tdogg097 Post #3: Jan 29, 3:06 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 9 Why would the names change? The Jets and Giants play in New Jersey and they are still the New York Jets and Giants.
rai8ters5 Post #4: Jan 29, 3:39 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 1463 This would be great news for the raiders and their fans.
49ers may be looking to team with Raiders on a joint stadium
Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
Monday, January 29, 2007
Here's the latest twist to the Bay Area's topsy-turvy stadium politics: Word is the San Francisco 49ers have informally approached the Oakland Raiders about building a new home -- together.
The stadium, which would be shared by the two rivals, very well could be in Santa Clara, where the Niners are pursuing new digs next to Great America.
Niners executive Jed York, the son of team owners John and Denise York, said that while a joint stadium idea has merit, there has been no contact with the Raiders on the subject.
"I think it's a good idea, but we haven't gone down that road yet,'' he said. "First we need to work on Santa Clara, and make sure we can actually get a stadium down there.''
That's not what we are hearing from inside the Raiders organization, and from others in the know who have contacts with the Niners.
Those sources tell us John and Jed York approached the Raiders management in a casual setting in the latter half of the football season about the possibility of teaming up.
Raiders chief executive Amy Trask said only, "We are enthusiastically focused on the 2007 football season, and don't believe this is an appropriate time to discuss stadium opportunities. ...We are playing in a nice stadium, which our teams and fans enjoy.''
Wild as it may sound, the economics for a Forty-Raider stadium just could make sense for both teams.
For starters, the 49ers -- after nearly 10 years of trying -- still haven't found a stadium plan that pencils out financially given that football is only played about 10 times a year.
Hooking up with the Raiders for a stadium would instantly double the usage and could make financial sense.
Plus, the teams could get a big boost from the National Football League, which this past season agreed to kick in $300 million to the New York Giants and Jets to build a joint stadium at New Jersey's Meadowlands.
The thinking goes that if the Niners and Raiders could get a similar handout from the NFL -- and that's still a big if -- it would go a long way to helping them get over the stadium money hump.
As for the Raiders, their current 16-year-lease at the remodeled Oakland Coliseum is set to expire in four years -- or about the time the Niners hope to have a new stadium built.
The Raiders, despite upgraded football digs, are still unhappy about playing in Oakland -- but currently have few real prospects for moving out of the area again.
What's more, owner Al Davis -- who only recently was forced to spend a bundle to buy out the unhappy heirs of a silent partner -- doesn't have the cash to build a stadium on his own, sources say. And given his past battles with the NFL, he doesn't appear to have many friends in the league looking to do him any big favors.
"It really may be the one option for the Raiders that makes sense,'' says one NFL insider, who asked not to be named.
Disparity dustup: Interesting and ironic play over at the ever-political BART board the other day involving a $448,439 contract to investigate whether minority contractors are getting their fair share of transportation work in the Bay Area.
The sticking point: The contract didn't go to a minority firm.
Under current law, agencies like BART that want to keep their affirmative action programs going now have to prove that minority companies aren't getting their share.
To make the "disparity" case, BART and seven other area transportation agencies went hunting for a company to do a study.
Ironically, the initial winner of the bid -- selected by a panel of seven judges -- was CRA International, a multinational firm based in Boston, with a local Oakland team.
One of the losers was Mason Tillman Associates, a local firm that has already done similar studies for both Oakland and Alameda County, and is owned by Eleanor Mason Ramsey - whose husband is retired Alameda County Superior Judge Henry Ramsey, who recently swore in new Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums.
Needless to say, the selection of a predominantly white outside firm over a local minority woman didn't go over well with the minority BART board members. Nonetheless, after a very vocal debate, the "disparity" study contract was handed to CRA by a 5-3 vote.
Thanks to a technical glitch, however, the vote had to be retaken -- a move that promised even more acrimony, as groups like the Oakland Black Caucus called for the contract to be tossed.
Not to worry.
When it came time for the second vote Thursday, BART staff -- apparently seeing the writing on the wall -- announced that the selection of CRA had been flawed (they had subbed in a subcontractor at the last minute) and recommended the bid be tossed.
Then, for good measure, General Manager Tom Margro -- apparently anticipating that the other transit agencies might lose patience with BART and strike out on their own -- recommended BART do their own separate study as well.
And the BART board agreed by a unanimous vote.
The contract will now be re-bid.
"We might have the same issue come up again, " said BART Board member Tom Radulovich. "But I wouldn't be surprised if other companies -- having seen what just happened -- think better about putting their names into the mix.''
On the other hand, Radulovich said, "for a lot of people, it was a happy ending."
Gavin's gold: In a bit of pre-election muscle flexing, Mayor Gavin Newsom this week is poised to report having raised more than $600,000 -- all in checks of $500 or less.
But even with the formidable bank account -- and no announced challengers -- Newsom campaign manager Eric Jaye says the mayor is under no illusion that he'll get a free pass this fall.
In fact, the professionally paranoid Jaye says the new public financing rules approved by the Board of Supervisors virtually assures that some of those same board members who voted for it -- most notably Ross Mirkarimi -- will mount a challenge, even though Mirkarimi has repeatedly denied any intention of running.
Under the rules, any candidate who raises $135,000 is eligible for $450,000 in matching taxpayer money, with a $7 million public kitty available on a dollar-for-dollar match after that.
YabuInThe10th Post #5: Jan 29, 4:04 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 157 Santa Clara isn't particularly close to Oakland, and is die-hard 49er country. I don't see why the Raiders would want to move to a place where they'd be second-fiddle until the end of time. That's not AL's style.
SaintOakland Post #6: Jan 29, 4:13 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 60 I posed that question on my Blog on December 8th of last year.
http://www.silverandblackpride.com/story/2006/12/8/14411/8658
I know that Raider fans would NOT be for it.
Greer128 Post #7: Jan 29, 4:32 pm Quote | Report Violation
Total Posts: 45 If i'm gonna fly to California to see the Raiders i expect to be somewhere its black and silver only, not another color at any other time"S". and somewhere that a Black Hole exists besides space WEG.
Forum Home NFL Football Oakland Raiders9ers want to share a new stadium
Add Reply New Topic
Page: [1] Replies: 6 Views: 266
Please let us know what you think about ESPN's message boards.
Read ESPN's message board rules here.
Search: Oakland Raiders All Boards ESPN
