Just Jack Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 Isn't Orchard Park a suburb of Buffalo. What are you saying, that NJ is a suburb of NYC? New Jersey and Connecticut are both suburbs of NYC.
Roger Goodell Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 Mr. Goodell, would you care to explain both of these comments? How do you think we get the first one built? Isn't Orchard Park a suburb of Buffalo. What are you saying, that NJ is a suburb of NYC? Never been to the NYC area, have you son?
SF Bills Fan Posted July 9, 2014 Author Posted July 9, 2014 The Raiders can't get a new stadium in Oakland, but they can make one materialize in LA? That would be some trick. There is talk of a stadium in LA. the owner of the Rams bought a bunch of land recently and the speculation is that he will build there. That could be an option for both the Rams and the Raiders
Mark Vader Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 why on earth would the A's sign another lease let alone for 10 years at that dump? Because nobody else wants them.
Heitz Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 My favorite quote from that article: "We still owe about $180 million on the stadium," Miley noted, thanks to the mid-1990s makeover that city and county taxpayers paid for to bring the Raiders back from Los Angeles. "This is either smoke and mirrors," Miley said, "or they are on crack." Love when people throw out the "on crack" line!
Mark Vader Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 How do you think we get the first one built? Could you explain your explanation more thoroughly?
Chef Jim Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 Getting to Levi would be a burden for Oakland fans. It's already going to be tough enough for Niner fans in San Francisco. A stadium near the current site of Candlestick would have been feasIble to share. Not at all. It's actually not a bad drive from the East Bay at all. Just shoot down the 880. And the Raiders have fans all up and down the East Bay.
Badasss Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 why on earth would the A's sign another lease let alone for 10 years at that dump? The A's had to do some fast talking!! -Woody Boyd
SF Bills Fan Posted July 10, 2014 Author Posted July 10, 2014 My favorite quote from that article: "We still owe about $180 million on the stadium," Miley noted, thanks to the mid-1990s makeover that city and county taxpayers paid for to bring the Raiders back from Los Angeles. "This is either smoke and mirrors," Miley said, "or they are on crack." Love when people throw out the "on crack" line! If you know Oakland then you realize that this is one case where this could actually be true
bowery4 Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 If you know Oakland then you realize that this is one case where this could actually be true I'd guess it would make sense talking about the mayor of TO as well.
Mr. WEO Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 There is talk of a stadium in LA. the owner of the Rams bought a bunch of land recently and the speculation is that he will build there. That could be an option for both the Rams and the Raiders Yes, there is always talk of an LA NFL stadium... But if the Raiders refused to be secondary tenant at the new Levi field in the Bay area, why would they agree to be secondary tenant in LA? ANd why wouldn't Stan Kroenke demand the Raiders owner chip in to the construction of a stadium (which the Raiders obviously won't do)?
Mark Vader Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 Not at all. It's actually not a bad drive from the East Bay at all. Just shoot down the 880. And the Raiders have fans all up and down the East Bay. Exactly. The same goes for Niners fans. Take 101 or 280, and your there quickly. Although 101 is more of a hassle. There are lots of Niners fans in the South Bay, and they used travel to Candlestick all the time. Exiting Candlestick Park was a pain in the butt.
PromoTheRobot Posted July 11, 2014 Posted July 11, 2014 If you know Oakland then you realize that this is one case where this could actually be true It's true in Toronto. OHHHHHHH!
SF Bills Fan Posted July 11, 2014 Author Posted July 11, 2014 Yes, there is always talk of an LA NFL stadium... But if the Raiders refused to be secondary tenant at the new Levi field in the Bay area, why would they agree to be secondary tenant in LA? ANd why wouldn't Stan Kroenke demand the Raiders owner chip in to the construction of a stadium (which the Raiders obviously won't do)? They may not get that status there. And who is to say they don't chip in for a stadium? Their value will double if they go south and they will be able to get far more revenue than in Oakland
Mark Vader Posted July 11, 2014 Posted July 11, 2014 They may not get that status there. And who is to say they don't chip in for a stadium? Their value will double if they go south and they will be able to get far more revenue than in Oakland That's possible. The Raiders would probably be more popular than the Rams.
SF Bills Fan Posted July 11, 2014 Author Posted July 11, 2014 Yep- I think they still have a huge fan base there. The Raiders still technically claim LA as their turf.
machine gun kelly Posted July 11, 2014 Posted July 11, 2014 Yeah, but year after year after year, the city of San Francisco could never get anything together to work that out. Finally Santa Clara stepped up and did something about it. There is so much money in Santa Clara / Sunnyvale as it SI silicon valley for those who haven't been there. My last two home offices were there so I would fly out to San Jose 6 times a year so several years. That stadium looks awesome. It makes no sense for Davis not to close the deal with the 49ers and share the stadium. They split the private money expended to build it, and keep thei own profits. Too logical eh? I still don't see LA, or CA coming up with money for a new stadium in LA. They are always broke due to too many programs. I doubt Mark Davis is footing the bill for a billion dollar stadium in LA. It's simply a threat to the Bay area. Who knows.
devldog131 Posted July 11, 2014 Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) Because nobody else wants them. You're not quite right on this one, Mark. The city of San Jose has been pushing the league very hard to get the A's to move to a new Stadium in SJ. Unfortunately, the Giants somehow claim that they have territorial rights to San Jose (even though the A's current home is 10 miles closer to San Jose) that they refuse to give up. The city of San Jose has even gone as far as filing a lawsuit against the Giants and Major League Baseball to enable the Athletics to make the move. As long as the A's continue to play the way they are playing, the pressure from MLB on the Giants to relinquish their ridiculous claim will continue to mount. It is hugely embarassing for a sports league on the level of Major League Baseball to have one of (if not THE) best team in their ranks playing in the worst stadium currently used for professional baseball. When an ALCS or World Series game is postponed or delayed by a sewage problem, power outage, or whatever else can and will go wrong at that stadium, MLB will be wearing some serious egg on their face for not enabling the team to acquire a brand new stadium in a city that is desperate to have them. I am as big an an A's fan as I am a Bills fan, and have been my entire life, so I am somewhat in tune to the developments around this situation. Edited July 11, 2014 by devldog131
PromoTheRobot Posted July 11, 2014 Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) Has anyone floated the idea of Las Vegas for the NFL? UNLV is building a stadium that would make Jerruh Jones green with envy. Edited July 11, 2014 by PromoTheRobot
BuffaloBill Posted July 11, 2014 Posted July 11, 2014 Dublin would also be a headache to get to and I'm trying to envision where in Dublin a stadium would go. Next to the Guinness brewery
Recommended Posts