I do not think the Oakland threat will have any effect in Santa Clara, because the people who would be worried about such a move are already on board with a new stadium here. The threatened Oakland move isn't going to make people here who think we can't afford a stadium change their votes.

Oakland is a much better site. There is direct freeway access-the Coliseum is right next to the freeway, and residential neighborhoods won't be disturbed by construction noise/pollution and game day noise/traffic.

I think a more accurate statement would be "only poor neighborhoods will be disturbed by game day noise/traffic", as that's where most of the overflow parking for Raiders games goes for highly attended games. Take that for what it's worth.

This is just another pipe dream out of Oakland city hall to make it look like they're doing something to prevent this mass exodus of teams they have on their hands. With no funding mechanism in place that contains a substantial influx of public funds this stadium would never happen.

If the 49ers and Oakland did share a place in Oakland the NFL would put some funds into the project. Plus you would have two clubs working any deal which makes them stronger as well.

The Bay Area needs to get this done. Having the two teams play in the dumps they play in makes the Bay Area look like a third rate area. Look at the other Cities that have built places for their teams.

For obvious reasons, the Raiders are a tough sell here in Santa Clara.

But, for some reason, Stadium Boobs still really love the idea - never mind the the fact that Al Davis has sued every "partner" he's ever had.

Unless signing the Raiders COMPLETELY eliminates the public subsidy for the stadium the 49ers are already demanding out of Santa Clarans - it's DOA.

Frankly, after what I and my fellow Santa Clarans have had to endure for nearly three years out of the 49ers: I really like the idea of both teams playing in Oakland.

Regards,
Bill Bailey, Treasurer
Santa Clara Plays Fair

-=0=-

I have to agree with the man above. Why not have both teams play in Oakland? Mount Davis is already right there and you can build the rest. It'd probably be cheaper than the Santa Clara move. But watch, they'll somehow buy this stadium in Santa Clara so both the 49ers and Raiders move to that stadium.

The mention of Al Davis's litigious nature reminded me, as a soccer fan, of the battle going in Munich over the share of Allianz Arena. Bayern Munich is one the richest and financially prudent soccer teams in the world and they still lose millions on their stadium rent. Now, imagine a more loosely run, poorer soccer team also sharing the rent at the stadium--that is the case with TSV 1860 Munich.

It is a long and complicated story but basically 1860 could not afford to be equal owners of the Allianz Arena and had to sell their share to make money and become renters from Bayern Munich in 2006. However, now they cannot really afford to pay the rent and their has been a nasty court fight over the rent (it does not help that the fans of the respective teams hate each other).

It is a dispute in which Bayern is technically right, TSV 1860 signed an agreement that fixed a lot of the payment at half for "variable" expenses but is also "unfair" (the dispute is over "catering" bills to luxury boxes which TSV 1860 cannot sell). TSV 1860 has refused to pay for half of the luxury box cost and wants to pay a pro-rated amount based on sales. It has been in the courts for several months and the Bayern side refused arbitration.

Anyway, stadium shares assume all parties are adults and can get along. That is not always true in sports and less true if Al Davis is involved.

Floormaster-thank you for the international perspective. My greatest fear leading up to the stadium vote is an October Surprise that the Raiders are somehow signing onto the deal and the city contribution is somehow lessened because of this. I think there could be a lot of litigation between the 49ers, Raiders, and city is this ever came to fruition. Why residents would ever want to go into this territory is beyond me.

I agree entirely with Bill RE the desirability of the Niners sharing at the Oakland Coliseum. Really, we have had to endure three years of this nonsense in the city and it's a bit wearing. It feels like a state of suspended animation we're existing in and I want it be done with in June instead of November-although it's obviously absurd to have a citizen vote before the DDA "real terms" are finalized.

I just don't see the Raiders working with anyone on anything, at least not of their potential partners have half a brain. Al Davis has turned on everyone he's ever worked with. His original co-owners, the NFL, the city of Oakland (twice), the city of LA, most of his head coaches, etc... He's left a trail of victims littering the floor over his 40 years of ownership. Anyone who voluntarily gets involved with him at this point, be it the Niners, Santa Clara, or Oakland again, is just begging to get burned. And frankly will deserve it when he screws them.

The way the Term Sheet between the city of Santa Clara and the 49ers is written, the 49ers alone get to decide whether or not the Raiders can join them at a stadium in Santa Clara. We will not get a vote on the Raiders, and residents near the stadium will have another 8-10 home games per year to endure.

The telephone poll last week conducted by Mountain West Research out of Idaho, which had to have been paid for by the 49ers (or city doesn't conduct polls), asked the question, "Would you be more or less likely to vote for the stadium if you knew the Raiders would also play their home games there?" So the 49ers are looking at whether or not to play up that issue to voters.

Well hopefully the citizens of Santa Clara have a clue and voted "No" in that poll.

I really enjoyed Floormaster's treatment of the stadium situation in Munich! I recall just FC Bayern using the old Olympic Stadium. How times change.

But what did surprise me: After a lot of cost overruns, the cost of Allianz ballooned to over �340 million = USD 462M. I won't even ask what ticket prices are.

Having 1860 subleasing from FC? That's just what the ridiculous Term Sheet calls for here in Santa Clara: The so-called "second team" - complete vaporware in my view - is expected to sublease from the 49ers and NOT from the Santa Clara Stadium Authority.

Which of our City's leaders agreed to that ripoff? (And just imagine Al Davis ever agreeing to be John York's tenant.)

Allianz in Munich is sure slick, though: The entire exterior of the stadium can be lit in red, blue or white for FC, 1860 or the German National team, respectively.

That's rather like the Jumbotrons at Meadowlands in NJ, which have one flash display for the NY Giants and another for the Jets.

Unlike Allianz, though, Meadowlands was built entirely with private dough.

Which is the way it should have been.

Rgds,
Bill Bailey, Treasurer
Santa Clara Plays Fair

-=0=-

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/02/24/BAND1C6522.DTL

Matier and Ross at the Chron have a different take on how this Oakland stadium plan will impact Santa Clara. As do the Oakland and Alameda Co leaders. They see an admittedly viable Oakland plan as something that will help derail Santa Clara, particularly when/if the Raiders are brought on board with the Santa Clara stadium. They see the Raiders being involved as a deal breaker in Santa Clara as the residents won't put up with 2x the games they're already having trouble dealing with.

Whether that would turn out to be the case I'm not sure. But that's their angle. And as someone who used to work near the SC stadium site and lived in SC I can definitely say I'd think twice about voting for the stadium with just the Niners. The Raiders would be a deal breaker.

The Oakland site also has what the Hunters Point site doesn't:

The Niners get to shove the money-losing stadium operations onto the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority, and keep all of that lovely NFL game-day money for themselves.

Reason why the Niners turned down the latest HP offer out of Lennar Development: Even though Lennar was all set to give the Niners the $100,000,000 in subsidies that S.F. couldn't, the Niners balked because Lennar told them to operate the stadium themselves...

====================================
...and even though Lennar told them that they'd lease them back the land for an astronomical ONE DOLLAR PER YEAR, the San Francisco 49ers STILL told them to get lost!
====================================

In Santa Clara, we're learning month-by-month how NFL Stadium Poker is really played - and we're getting cheated at the table by the greed and graspiness of the 49ers.

If Oakland is really willing to settle for that, we'll be overjoyed.

Regards,
Bill Bailey, Treasurer
Santa Clara Plays Fair

-=0=-

The Santa Clara site has almost no parking, so the cars for NFL games will be shoved onto city streets and into private parking lots willing to put up with the tons of tailgating garbage that is now seen in the Oakland Coliseum parking lot at Raiders games.
Do we want that much trash blowing around on our streets? Plus all of the drinking? Plus people with open bbq grills in private parking lots and on the streets? This is a much bigger headache than our city council is willing to admit.

And then once we open the door to Al Davis, we open the door to the lawsuits he files.

Plus, the Raiders won't have paid for the stadium construction. That's just really unfair to Santa Clara.

The 49ers have played this extremely well and this stadium is going to pass and the Oakland Raiders more than likely will play in it as well as you will see by the reasoning below.

1. The 49ers are going to get this done because they are donating each year millions of dollars to the Santa Clara school system. That alone will get this done as the education system is broke state wide and we know how important the kids are to all of us.

2. The Raiders re-signed a new lease until 2013 to stay in Oakland as they are looking for stadium options in the East Bay.

3. The 2013 is the key here as if they cannot find something by then for themselves they will jump in with the 49ers for the 2014 season. Or they may find something and play temporarily in Santa Clara.

4. Al Davis maybe a prick to most people but he has always shares the stadium his team plays in. Oakland A's and USC Trojans are the prime examples. He is more open than you think to this possibility.

49ers go in alone on this and bring the Raiders in at the last second.

Only problem with Santa Clara is the parking for Monday night or Thursday night games as the massive parking from the local businesses will not be available for a 6pm kick off as a lot of people will still be at work.

But Sunday's are no issue as parking is plentiful.

At the end of the day the Santa Clara site is right in between San Francisco and Oakland allowing fans to get there. Both teams would get sell outs for years to come but the 49ers have to bring this one home and the Raiders will "piggy back" when the time is right.

Only New York has 2 NFL teams in one market and we as Bay Area residents from all over should be proud to have both teams play together in one central location to the betterment of our local pride.

Even though I have no love lost for the Raiders being a long time 49ers fan having two teams is a privilege.