PDA

View Full Version : Niners to Santa clara picking up steam again.


SJ Bronco
06-02-2009, 06:35 PM
I know this is more of a local story, but the arguments are mounting and the SF mayor has come out and blasted the niners organization...

http://www.mercurynews.com/southbayfootball/ci_12499254?nclick_check=1

Purdy: Run for 49ers stadium ready to go

By Mark Purdy

Mercury News Columnist
Posted: 06/02/2009 06:34:04 AM PDT
Updated: 06/02/2009 09:21:16 AM PDT

Click photo to enlarge
San Francisco 49ers owner John York points to the proposed new 49ers... (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma)

*
* 1
*

Special Report

* Football in the South Bay

More 49ers

* News, stats and more
* Hot Read blog from beat writer Dan Brown
* Forum

Related Stories

* Jun 2:
* Great America calls for Santa Clara to halt 49ers stadium vote
* Jun 1:
* 49ers stadium opponents: No public subsidy
* Stanford economist: 49ers stadium plan 'better deal than just about any other city has received'

The 49ers began more off-season workouts Monday morning. And as players roamed practice fields at the team's Santa Clara facility, commuter trains lumbered past on tracks to the east. Just to the north, VTA light-rail trains rolled along Tasman Drive. Across the street sat the immense parking lots of Great America theme park.

Gee, I thought. What a great location for a football stadium. And wouldn't you know it? In an eerie coincidence, the Santa Clara City Council votes tonight on the next step toward making it happen.

The council almost surely will formalize a term sheet with the 49ers. It's all targeted to place a stadium ballot issue before voters in March.

Tonight's action is a significant step. But the stadium process will be a marathon, not a 40-yard dash. Before we start the marathon, though, can we at least agree on two important points?

# No matter what you think of the deal's financial details, it should now be abundantly clear that Santa Clara is and always was the best spot for a new 49ers stadium. The San Francisco "plan'' for a project at Hunters Point was a psychedelic daydream by Mayor Gavin Newsom. It would have been vastly inferior to the Santa Clara site in every aspect freeway access, public transit, weather, whatever.

# As numbers and dollar signs are thrown around by stadium proponents and opponents, keep in mind that this whole thing will still fundamentally come down to whether
Advertisement
Santa Clara residents really want an NFL stadium in their city. Or if they don't.

I know. That last point sounds completely obvious. But it's not. Here's why:

The stadium dollars are largely redevelopment money, which, if unspent on the 49ers, will not go back into taxpayers' pockets. The money instead would have to be spent by the city council on another redevelopment project. That's the true choice voters will make. It's the same choice San Jose voters made in 1988 when they voted to spend redevelopment dollars on a downtown arena instead of infrastructure for an industrial park. Smart choice? I think so.

Meanwhile, it is beyond hilarious to still hear people wail that the 49ers are going to be "leaving San Francisco" and "moving to the South Bay" by proceeding apace to Santa Clara. Have these folks studied geography? The 49ers have not been true San Francisco residents for two decades, ever since the 49ers built the Marie P. DeBartolo Centre on vacant Santa Clara property.

Since 1988, they have been San Francisco "residents" for 10 days a year. The 355 other days, they have worked at company headquarters in the South Bay. It's also where most of the players and coaches live. My hunch is that few of them could find San Francisco City Hall without a map or GPS device.

My other hunch is that if given a lie detector test, Newsom would admit he is hardly bummed about the latest Santa Clara developments. As I reported last week, the mayor has informed NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell that San Francisco is no longer focusing on a 49ers stadium as a top priority. You also will notice that paid (and eloquent) San Francisco mouthpiece Carmen Policy has backed off his glowing sermons about how the formerly glowing radioactive waste site at the shipyards would be a terrific Sunday tailgating location.

As things stand, San Francisco gets to keep its city name on the football team, while Santa Clara does all the heavy stadium lifting. But how much lifting is Santa Clara prepared to do?

We'll get a clue tonight. The 49ers deal seems to be a good one compared with other NFL deals in other cities, with no raise in Santa Clara household taxes and no money coming from the city's general fund. But there are always devils in the details. There is definite vocal opposition.

That's good. The stadium arguments, pro and con, deserve a hearing. I just hope the opponents are honest and admit that what they really hate is not public subsidies for a major city project. What they hate is pro football.

One anti-stadium Santa Clara citizen, Bill Bailey, inadvertently made my point for me in a Sunday Mercury News story. Noting that a new stadium would increase the 49ers' franchise value for owner John York's family, Bailey said: "It's not my job as a Santa Claran to increase John York's assets."

You are correct, Mr. Bailey. It also wasn't your job as a Santa Claran to increase the assets of all those high-tech companies (and their owners) by paying for all the street and industrial infrastructure that benefit their companies. And it wasn't your job as a Santa Claran to increase the assets of homebuilders with a program that has helped subsidize housing in your city. But you and your elected officials decided that making all these people more wealthy would also make the community better.

The stadium issue should be debated on the same merits. Would becoming an NFL city (and a potential Super Bowl site) make Santa Clara a better or worse place? The starting gun for the marathon sounds tonight.

Houshyamama
06-02-2009, 07:57 PM
SF is turning into a pretty ****ty sports town

BroncoMan4ever
06-02-2009, 08:52 PM
so will they still be the San Francisco 49ers even in Santa Clara like the Giants claim to be new york even though they play in New Jersey, or will they be the Santa Clara 49ers.

SJ Bronco
06-02-2009, 09:29 PM
santa clara niners, a few miles from the san jose A's proposed location

Los Broncos
06-02-2009, 10:11 PM
The Santa Clara 49ers of San Francisco.

Popps
06-02-2009, 10:15 PM
The 9ers have had a practice facility in Santa Clara forever, as I recall. There's always been a relationship. It would suck for SF, but they need a new stadium. I actually voted on an initiative to build a new NFL stadium in SF over 10 year ago when I lived there and I thought it passed. But, I have no idea whatever happened to it.

Sacked by Croel
06-03-2009, 12:59 AM
The physical location of the team doesn't matter as long as the club stays in it's home market.

Like Popps alluded to, they already are the Santa Clara 49ers. Their team offices and practice facilities are located there.

They are only are in San Francisco 10 times a year. And most of their fanbase doesn't live in San Francisco so they already commute to watch them play.

Tombstone RJ
06-03-2009, 09:55 AM
so will they still be the San Francisco 49ers even in Santa Clara like the Giants claim to be new york even though they play in New Jersey, or will they be the Santa Clara 49ers.

Yes, the article states that the team keeps their name SF name.

Face it, San Francisco is not a sports friendly city. Sure, they built the Giants a great new park right in the city and that is pretty cool. But other than the Giants, the city of San Fran just does not seem interested enough in the other franchises to help them stay in San Fran.

You've got the Warriors (NBA team) not in San Francisco
You've got the Sharks (NHL team) not in San Francisco
Your gonna have the 49ers (NFL) not in San Francisco
You've already got the faiders, across the bay from San Francisco

San Fran is a great town, but it's not a town built on professional sports identity.

Sacked by Croel
06-03-2009, 03:58 PM
Yes, the article states that the team keeps their name SF name.

Face it, San Francisco is not a sports friendly city. Sure, they built the Giants a great new park right in the city and that is pretty cool. But other than the Giants, the city of San Fran just does not seem interested enough in the other franchises to help them stay in San Fran.

You've got the Warriors (NBA team) not in San Francisco
You've got the Sharks (NHL team) not in San Francisco
Your gonna have the 49ers (NFL) not in San Francisco
You've already got the faiders, across the bay from San Francisco

San Fran is a great town, but it's not a town built on professional sports identity.

It's also a small city with little land space to develop on and expensive real estate. There's no real good spot there to build a football stadium. That's the bottom line.

What's the point of taking out 25 acres of urban development (likely going through eminent domain to seize the land) and sticking an arena or football stadium in the middle of a metropolis? It's way too pricey, inefficient and too much of a hassle when there's plenty of other open areas to build on.

I don't see the importance of keeping a team in SF. It's an old charming city where most Bay Area residents take a day trip to visit and then they drive back home. It's not even the most populated city in the Greater Bay Area.