Skip to main content

Making The Case For A Shared Stadium

Raiders and 49ers fans will forever be locked into a location rivalry. The clean-cut fans from San Francisco and the rough edged fans from Oakland.

Most people greet any shared stadium idea with very negative sentiment. I am not sure why, because Raiders fans really have one of four options:

Relocate to a new city with a new stadium?
Become a bottom 5 team year after year playing in the old Oakland Coliseum?
Be second class citizens playing in the 49ers new stadium?
Share a stadium with the 49ers in a 50/50 split?

I'll outline below why these are the only options.






I'll ask this question: What about the Giants and Jets? Do they share less hatred for the other team than that brewed in Northern California?

That doesn't seem as likely. Jets fans and Giants fan share equal disgust for each other. In fact, the Jets have long been second class citizens at Giants Stadium because the Jets are were only minority partners.

With the new stadium comes a 50/50 partnership and the ability to customize the stadium for each team.

Gone are cheap banners and in are High Definition screens and other lighting. This lighting will change colors, blue for the Giants and green for the Jets, which will reflect each team’s desire to individualize the look of the stadium.

The cost is well above $1 billion, for an 82,000 seat stadium in New Jersey.

In today's economic climate, especially that of California, it will be near impossible for the 49ers or Raiders to secure the $950+ million required to build a state-of-the-art stadium. If one team does manage to secure a new stadium deal, it will set the stage for the other team to relocate. I'd be surprised if one city is foolish enough to use tax-payer dollars during a budget crisis to build a stadium used just 8 days out of 365 for football. Do you think a second city would do it also?

The way these things are made economically feasible to cities is a promise of an increased traffic to local businesses and therefore increased tax revenue. Will 80 days of games over the next ten years be enough to cover the cost the city? Not likely.

Double 80 games to 160 games over the next 10 years and add in a few concerts per year and you might have a shot. You can't just have the stadium in a location that doesn't support the local city's economy.

A good example of how a stadium should support the local economy is that of AT&T park. China Basin has been built up around the park and now dozens upon dozens of local bars and restaurants are filled to the max during the summer months and the city has benefited.
The disgust for a shared stadium is understandable, but also not wise. The NFL is headed into a new era with the upcoming CBA, and the salary cap years could be gone. The owners with economic power to pressure the commissioner don't care much for smaller market teams and the fans behind them. Oakland is just such a market. Roger Goodell recently said the NFL would have a hard time supporting NFL teams that didn't have attendance of at least 40,000 fans.

Did you know the Raiders ranked dead last in 2009 in average attendance, total attendance and percentage of capacity? The average attendance was 44, 284 with is just 70.3% of capacity. In 2008, the Raiders were second to only Detroit. I'd be willing to bet the actual door attendance was much lower these past few years as well.

The Raiders losing certainly has a lot to do with the attendance figures, but the Raiders have struggled to sell tickets since they moved back to Oakland in 1995. I believe the average ticket price to attend a Raiders game is also a league low, although I am still searching for that information.

The Raiders are at the bottom of the NFL pecking order and the NFL is likely to adopt rule changes that no longer require the teams at the top to share.

This makes it so much more important that the Raiders focus on building a new stadium, with more luxury boxes. Corporate dollars and creating a place fans want to go, even when the team may be struggling, are a top concerns.

The image of the Raiders is not overly favorable in America these days. The Raiders are the team America loves to hate. That isn't an image that corporations are always willing to partner with, but a new stadium and cateringmore to families could change that.

The whole point is the NFL is a business and the Raiders are currently the worst one in the league. See the Forbes list of NFL team values. Raiders also dead last.

The two things the Raiders could do to change their status as the NFL door mat is to partner with the 49ers and build a new stadium, the second is take some PR lessons and start to use the mystique more as a promotional tool and less as an organizational philosophy.

While one of these two things might be impossible with Al Davis at the helm, the Raiders can partner with the 49ers to build a new stadium even with Davis around.

With careful planning not a single 49ers logo or red and gold could be seen at the stadium during a Raiders game. Vice-versa for the Silver and Black at the 49ers games.

The best possible scenarios are either a new location where the stadium could be built along with plenty of commercial development or the current Oakland site with good access to Bart, AmTrak and the Freeway. The Oakland idea has recently been tossed around as 49ers President Jed York's plan B and Amy Trask seemed open to the idea as well.

The NFL has also secretly been pushing for the two teams to share a stadium. It only makes sense for two teams in the same region to a nuetral party.

One idea for a non-Oakland stadium project that could sell a city on a stadium would be to make the stadium itself with a roof that closes, not because it is needed in Northern California, but because it would enable the stadium to host concerts year-round.

If Santa Clara approves the 49ers stadium bid, the Raiders will either be on their way to a new location, stuck in the dregs of the NFL in regards to stadium and also in revenue, or will end up in the future moving in the with 49ers after the fact and be like the Jets from 1984-2009 until 2040.

So I asked this question Raiders fans:

Relocate to a new city with a new stadium?
Become a bottom 5 team year after year playing in the old Oakland Coliseum?
Be second class citizens playing in the 49ers new stadium painted red and gold?
Share a stadium with the 49ers in a 50/50?

Because folks, it will be one of those four options.

I'd much prefer a 50/50 split to the other three options.

If you want to bet that the bay area will approve to build two $1 billion stadiums in the next five years, I'll give you 1000:1 odds.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Oakland Raiders Swing for the Fences in 2016 NFL Draft

[embed align="center"]http://gty.im/153039819[/embed]
These aren't your daddy's Oakland Raiders or even your younger self's Raiders. If anything, these are your newborn's Raiders or your puppy's Raiders. These are the Raiders we've never seen before.

Indicative of the freshness of the franchise was their 2016 NFL Draft. No longer slave to a high draft pick and desperate needs, the theme of the draft for the Raiders was upside.

It's as if general manager Reggie McKenzie got so used to hitting his draft picks out of the park that he started swinging for the fences. We'll have to wait a couple of years before we know if he struck out or if he'll continue his Ruthian ways.

First, McKenzie boldly went with a safety at No. 14 overall. Kyle Joseph is coming off a torn ACL and fills a major need, but safety isn't a premium position. Only a handful of safeties have been drafted in the first 14 picks in the last 15 years and include names like Earl …

Final 53-Man Roster Prediction

The Oakland Raiders will trim their roster to 53 players today. Expect them to make at least two waiver claims Sunday to address needs at defensive back and on the offensive line. As such, there are a couple guys on this final roster who could be waived on Sunday and could subsequently find their way onto the team's practice squad.

As is, I've included a list of players who are candidates for the practice squad. There is some positional imbalance on the 53-man roster as I expect the Raiders to balance it out with a few waiver claims.

[table id=8 /]

The Raiders aren't who we thought they were....they're better

The Oakland Raiders are tired of being the team that will be good in a year or two. The team expects to win now and it is winning now.

We thought the Raiders needed more talent. We thought that being in the playoff hunt was a year away for this team, but we were wrong. This isn't the team we thought they were, they're better.

On Sunday, they moved to 3-3 on Sunday with a 37-29 win over the San Diego Chargers that wasn't close until the final minute. It was also the Raiders second road win of the season. The last time the Raiders had two road wins by their sixth game was 2011. Before that, a five-year streak from 1998-2002.

The Raiders went 8-8 in 1998, 1999 and 2011 and narrowly missed the playoffs each year.  They made the playoffs in 2000, 2001 and 2002. They didn't have a losing record in any of those seasons because teams that can win on the road are usually pretty good.

As the season matures, there is more and more evidence that some of the "best-case scenarios&q…