Open Letter to Feinstein

[The Vin]

Accidently posted this over in the wrong forum. Whoever the mods are, please delete the one on the NFL forum and keep this thread here. Thanks.

Perhaps this won't do anything but reach our Senator's spam box. Perhaps it'll just be glanced over by a secretary or reach some automated reply service. At this point I don't really care. I'm growing extremely tired of politicians telling me how to run my life, my business affairs, and now my sports team. So I took the liberty of just voicing my feelings on some of Feinstein's recent quotes. Some of you may disagree with these words. I respect that. But at the same time, to those who are throwing around mindless blame at John York I do ask that you look at the situation without any bias from the past. I, myself, have been against John York on a majority of his football decisions over the last 2 years. However, to pin the losses of the Olympics and this current stadium situation squarley on his situation when most are not willing to spend the tax money or the city's money to help those matters is absurd. This is not a matter of politics, except those in the political circle who are trying to save their faces. It's a matter of common sense and the right of our organization to act freely as we choose fit. So that's why I drafted this letter to Mrs. Feinstein.

Dear Mrs. Feinstein,

I am writing to you today on behalf of many 49er fans everywhere. It seems that you have taken an active role in deciding the team's location for the near future. While I am encouraged by your devotion to keep the 49ers in San Francisco, I cannot help but wonder why you would demonstrate this will now when the city that the 49ers represent has stood idley for nearly ten years regarding the fate of a 49er's stadium. In other words, I am urging you to stop mixing politics with American sports and let the team handle its own affairs as that is the right of a private organization.

Some of your quotes from the past few days have had me scratching my head quite a bit. The first is this:




"I think it is critical that we retain the 49ers, and it may be because I was there in the '80s, I was there in the glory days," Feinstein said after the hearing. "So much of the fabric of the city is the 49ers."




While I admit that I am unaware of your current commitment to the 49ers organization as a fan, when you say that you were here in the 80s (the team's glory days, as you put it), this angers me. In this tirade of yours, I question your real commitment to the team. It is easy for anyone to say that they were "here" during the 80s and the glory days. Everyone was a 49er fan then. The team won 5 championships. So, I wonder what you have accomplished by admitting that you followed a team during a time period in which the team enjoyed a great deal of success? A better question is if you have followed the team ever since, especially during the recent years when the team has been on a down period. Can you honestly name ten starters on the current roster off of the top of your head or the team's current philosophy and direction? Can you name the offensive scheme we have used and its ties to Don Coryell, an innovator of offense during the golden age of football? Do you spend countless hours debating whether we should select an offensive or defensive player in next year's draft? Do you follow the draft for two straight days ( although I understand that politicians have little time on their hands)?

If the answer to a majority of the questions above is a resounding "no," and somehow I suspect that is the case, then what gives you the right to step up and act as if you are the only voice that can be heard during this ordeal? I hope you realize that 90% of the 49ers' season ticket holders reside outside of the city (49ers Marketing Department) and that while Santa Clara is not San Francisco, it is not in such a location that would deprive fans around the Bay Area of their team. With improved transportation and a better football experience attributed to the new location of the stadium, perhaps the very same fans (and you claim to be one based on your words) that are engulfed in the tradition of San Francisco can enjoy the team in the proper way. That cannot be done in the 49ers' current stadium, and since it has been ten years since the fans have heard any serious negotiations to build another stadium in the current location, then you should realize that the 49er fans are better off if the team moved to Santa Clara and gave its fanbase a real home to celebrate games and victories.

Here is another phrase of yours that does not sit well with the fanbase:




"You're in San Francisco, you're a San Francisco 49er," said Feinstein, a former San Francisco mayor. "You're outside of San Francisco, you're not a San Francisco 49er."




Excuse me for being intrusive but, once again, who gave you the authority to decide who can and cannot be a 49er? Perhaps you were speaking of the literal definition of the term "San Francisco 49er" and referring to the miners during 1849 gold rush who used San Francisco as a base city. However, the term San Francisco 49er is synonymous with the team for every fan. And because of that, neither a city, you, or myself can deem who is a 49er and who is not. You did not build the teams of the glory years to make that kind of an allegation. Presently, you do not run the team, coach the team, nor do you select the players that can make the final roster. The only way to decide who is a 49er and who is not resides within the measuring stick of history. Because the 49ers of the past set the mark of excellence in football so high, the only way to deem whether a player or the current organization is worthy of the 49er name correlates directly with how those entities measure to and respect the past. For you to attribute so much of the team's tradition and excellence towards a city is absurd. San Francisco did not make the 49ers. When a young and ambitious man by the name of Eddie Debartolo bought the team and hired an upcoming and shrewd offensive pioneer named Bill Walsh, that is what made the 49ers. Prior to that, the 49ers were made by the likes of coaches such as **** Nolan, whose son coaches the team today. And thus, for you to judge who can and cannot be a 49er demonstrates nothing but your ability to throw around your political weight into a matter you are far from capable of understanding or grasping.

As a politician, your public image hinges on the views of the community. In holding down the 49ers organization and tying its hands with your power, you are doing nothing but proving that you are not a true fan or supporter of the team. Because if you were such a fan, then you would understand that a move to Santa Clara benefits the fans and the team. The city has nothing to lose. The 49ers have shown a commitment to carrying the tradition of the city and the team's name with them wherever they go. They are moving to Santa Clara, an area that is not out of the way of most people that live in the Bay Area. Yet, they will represent your city. That means that all the advertising and all of the success attributed to the 49ers will still shine upon San Francisco.

So please, at the urging of loyal fans, do not bring your political material into a field that you have little knowledge about. For the community and the millions of 49er fans, we just want a successful team. A stadium procures this success. Since the city has shown very little commitment over the years towards getting a stadium project done, do not tie our team down while we continue to put the city on the sporting map. Afterall, which other San Francisco franchise can say that they have brought home 5 World Championships for their city? Whether they play in Santa Clara or elsewhere around the Bay Area, that will not change. Let the 49ers do what the 49ers need to do and make yourself useful in your expertise. There is a war in Iraq, tax money, and tons of other and more pressing issues in Washington for you to tackle. And I am sure you have a better grasp on those matters.

Sincerely,

Vin

[The Vin]

If Feinstein was a real fan of the team, she'd have used her leverage to get a stadium deal done years ago. Fact is, the team has put pressure on the city finally to get something done after 10 years of casual talk. The 49ers brand is not San Francisco. San Francisco alone did not make this team what it is today. Many fans of the team currently do not reside near the city itself, but rather the many neighboring cities. The 49ers brand is the organization and its history of excellence on the football field. And its commitment to winning with class.

And if you think that the Santa Clara proposal is hot air I think you're mistaken. It's a very viable resolution...moreso than the current location. But regardless of whether it's leverage or not, it is time to get something done for our team. Feinstein's proposal will only tie the team's hands down while we're forced to continue the casual talk for years on end. That's why she's not doing any favors to the organization. You can distrust John York all you want. I don't care much for the guy personally. But when the government begins to pass laws that wouldn't allow the team to do what it feels it needs to do to support itself and its fanbase, are you really willing to take the gamble and restrict the team?

York has made it as clear as day: The Olympics + 49er venue would have been a logistical and infrastructural nightmare that would have plagued the fan's experience on gameday without resolving many of the current problems with the location near Hunter's Point. The Santa Clara sight is easier to build. So that is the main priority. San Francisco and the politicians can ***** and moan all they want and point the fingers (about losing the Olympics that is), but it is all water under the bridge at this point. How a city can let this proposal linger for so long and then blame 1 man and 1 organization for the inability to secure an Olympics game that should have had backup plans makes me question the competency of those running the show.

As for Los Angeles, if that were a viable option you would have heard about it. York has already risked his reputation by suggesting a move away from San Francisco. And the Chargers are more likely to move to L.A. before the 49ers.

[J77Niner4Life]

I'd rather have Fienstien on the side of the Fans, rather than side with snakes like the Yorks. People think that Santa Clara is a slam dunk deal. I think is just a leverage ploy. The picture of the mock Staduim in the Santa Clara site is the half-assed mock up that they used for Candlestick Point, with the open ended side for the " View of the City " . There is no real plan yet. Just hot air from York.


They mentioned Santa Clara and other sites around the bay as alternative plans but they gave San Francisco their word that they would'nt seriously pursue another site until the feasability study had concluded at Candlestick point. As implied by York's letter to the city about not relying on the new stadium for their olympic bid, I think York felt pressured by they city to force this plan into action without considering what fans and players would have to endure for the next 30 years.

So seeing as they've had a whole week to throw something together for the new site I can understand why there's no "real plan" in place. If you watched the press conference you would've heard that they will keep the same basic interior design but make changes to the exterior to accomodate the new surroundings.

Besides, the Santa Clara site is far from a done deal, they've said there's over 20 sites throughout the bay area that they've considered. San Francisco's proposal failed, Santa Clara is next at bat. That means SF has to step up and show that they really want to keep the team.

Instead of offering the team and it's fans a better experience their only answer is to threaten to take the team's name. And you call the Yorks snakes? Did you even see the Candlestick plan? The roadwork and world's largest 10,000 space parking garage alone would cost as much as the stadium and mixed use development deal. All at no cost to the city. I assume you enjoy tailgating in a parking garage and breathing carbon monoxide for an hour before exiting the game?

While I don't think the Yorks are directly using Santa Clara as a leverage ploy I think it gives San Francisco motivation to give us fans a better experience than what they're currently offering. Competition is better for the consumer, a monopoly lowers the quality of the final product.

[Venom]

As a politician, your public image hinges on the views of the community. In holding down the 49ers organization and tying its hands with your power, you are doing nothing but proving that you are not a true fan or supporter of the team. Because if you were such a fan, then you would understand that a move to Santa Clara benefits the fans and the team. The city has nothing to lose. The 49ers have shown a commitment to carrying the tradition of the city and the team's name with them wherever they go. They are moving to Santa Clara, an area that is not out of the way of most people that live in the Bay Area. Yet, they will represent your city. That means that all the advertising and all of the success attributed to the 49ers will still shine upon San Francisco.

So please, at the urging of loyal fans, do not bring your political material into a field that you have little knowledge about. For the community and the millions of 49er fans, we just want a successful team. A stadium procures this success. Since the city has shown very little commitment over the years towards getting a stadium project done, do not tie our team down while we continue to put the city on the sporting map. Afterall, which other San Francisco franchise can say that they have brought home 5 World Championships for their city? Whether they play in Santa Clara or elsewhere around the Bay Area, that will not change. Let the 49ers do what the 49ers need to do and make yourself useful in your expertise. There is a war in Iraq, tax money, and tons of other and more pressing issues in Washington for you to tackle. And I am sure you have a better grasp on those matters.

Sincerely,

Vin

Very well said. Nothing positive will come from Mrs. Feinstein's little power play. She's risking her image by trying to tie the hands of the organization and break the continuity of the team's history. The team's legacy is infinitely more important than the location of their stadium.
Mrs. Feinstein, tend to matters of national and statewide importance. The 49er Faithful do not want you meddling in the affairs of our team.

[fabie]

Nice letter VIN! But I highly doubt that FEINSTEIN will actually log in here to read it! :fishing:

But her cohorts and assistants could probably find out and email her this very letter you just wrote.

[fabie]

Accidently posted this over in the wrong forum. Whoever the mods are, please delete the one on the NFL forum and keep this thread here. Thanks.

Perhaps this won't do anything but reach our Senator's spam box. Perhaps it'll just be glanced over by a secretary or reach some automated reply service. At this point I don't really care. I'm growing extremely tired of politicians telling me how to run my life, my business affairs, and now my sports team. So I took the liberty of just voicing my feelings on some of Feinstein's recent quotes. Some of you may disagree with these words. I respect that. But at the same time, to those who are throwing around mindless blame at John York I do ask that you look at the situation without any bias from the past. I, myself, have been against John York on a majority of his football decisions over the last 2 years. However, to pin the losses of the Olympics and this current stadium situation squarley on his situation when most are not willing to spend the tax money or the city's money to help those matters is absurd. This is not a matter of politics, except those in the political circle who are trying to save their faces. It's a matter of common sense and the right of our organization to act freely as we choose fit. So that's why I drafted this letter to Mrs. Feinstein.

Dear Mrs. Feinstein,

I am writing to you today on behalf of many 49er fans everywhere. It seems that you have taken an active role in deciding the team's location for the near future. While I am encouraged by your devotion to keep the 49ers in San Francisco, I cannot help but wonder why you would demonstrate this will now when the city that the 49ers represent has stood idley for nearly ten years regarding the fate of a 49er's stadium. In other words, I am urging you to stop mixing politics with American sports and let the team handle its own affairs as that is the right of a private organization.

Some of your quotes from the past few days have had me scratching my head quite a bit. The first is this:








While I admit that I am unaware of your current commitment to the 49ers organization as a fan, when you say that you were here in the 80s (the team's glory days, as you put it), this angers me. In this tirade of yours, I question your real commitment to the team. It is easy for anyone to say that they were "here" during the 80s and the glory days. Everyone was a 49er fan then. The team won 5 championships. So, I wonder what you have accomplished by admitting that you followed a team during a time period in which the team enjoyed a great deal of success? A better question is if you have followed the team ever since, especially during the recent years when the team has been on a down period. Can you honestly name ten starters on the current roster off of the top of your head or the team's current philosophy and direction? Can you name the offensive scheme we have used and its ties to Don Coryell, an innovator of offense during the golden age of football? Do you spend countless hours debating whether we should select an offensive or defensive player in next year's draft? Do you follow the draft for two straight days ( although I understand that politicians have little time on their hands)?

If the answer to a majority of the questions above is a resounding "no," and somehow I suspect that is the case, then what gives you the right to step up and act as if you are the only voice that can be heard during this ordeal? I hope you realize that 90% of the 49ers' season ticket holders reside outside of the city (49ers Marketing Department) and that while Santa Clara is not San Francisco, it is not in such a location that would deprive fans around the Bay Area of their team. With improved transportation and a better football experience attributed to the new location of the stadium, perhaps the very same fans (and you claim to be one based on your words) that are engulfed in the tradition of San Francisco can enjoy the team in the proper way. That cannot be done in the 49ers' current stadium, and since it has been ten years since the fans have heard any serious negotiations to build another stadium in the current location, then you should realize that the 49er fans are better off if the team moved to Santa Clara and gave its fanbase a real home to celebrate games and victories.

Here is another phrase of yours that does not sit well with the fanbase:








Excuse me for being intrusive but, once again, who gave you the authority to decide who can and cannot be a 49er? Perhaps you were speaking of the literal definition of the term "San Francisco 49er" and referring to the miners during 1849 gold rush who used San Francisco as a base city. However, the term San Francisco 49er is synonymous with the team for every fan. And because of that, neither a city, you, or myself can deem who is a 49er and who is not. You did not build the teams of the glory years to make that kind of an allegation. Presently, you do not run the team, coach the team, nor do you select the players that can make the final roster. The only way to decide who is a 49er and who is not resides within the measuring stick of history. Because the 49ers of the past set the mark of excellence in football so high, the only way to deem whether a player or the current organization is worthy of the 49er name correlates directly with how those entities measure to and respect the past. For you to attribute so much of the team's tradition and excellence towards a city is absurd. San Francisco did not make the 49ers. When a young and ambitious man by the name of Eddie Debartolo bought the team and hired an upcoming and shrewd offensive pioneer named Bill Walsh, that is what made the 49ers. Prior to that, the 49ers were made by the likes of coaches such as **** Nolan, whose son coaches the team today. And thus, for you to judge who can and cannot be a 49er demonstrates nothing but your ability to throw around your political weight into a matter you are far from capable of understanding or grasping.

As a politician, your public image hinges on the views of the community. In holding down the 49ers organization and tying its hands with your power, you are doing nothing but proving that you are not a true fan or supporter of the team. Because if you were such a fan, then you would understand that a move to Santa Clara benefits the fans and the team. The city has nothing to lose. The 49ers have shown a commitment to carrying the tradition of the city and the team's name with them wherever they go. They are moving to Santa Clara, an area that is not out of the way of most people that live in the Bay Area. Yet, they will represent your city. That means that all the advertising and all of the success attributed to the 49ers will still shine upon San Francisco.

So please, at the urging of loyal fans, do not bring your political material into a field that you have little knowledge about. For the community and the millions of 49er fans, we just want a successful team. A stadium procures this success. Since the city has shown very little commitment over the years towards getting a stadium project done, do not tie our team down while we continue to put the city on the sporting map. Afterall, which other San Francisco franchise can say that they have brought home 5 World Championships for their city? Whether they play in Santa Clara or elsewhere around the Bay Area, that will not change. Let the 49ers do what the 49ers need to do and make yourself useful in your expertise. There is a war in Iraq, tax money, and tons of other and more pressing issues in Washington for you to tackle. And I am sure you have a better grasp on those matters.

Sincerely,

VinYou have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

[statniner]

The Vin, another 49er fan to step up, very nice.

[The Vin]

How long is "years ago"?

Was that around the time the old stadium referendum passed? When Eddie had Willie Brown in his pocket? Was it around the time when the 49ers had $100 million from the City, but Denise and John sat on their hands, not liking the numbers that were crunched? Are you saying Fienstien should have applied pressure on those two then?

In case you didn't know it, Newsome was applying pressure on the Yorks in his first year in office, before any news of SF bidding for the Olympics. The Yorks were the ones lagging on the Stadium project, and being half-hearted on any plan anywhere near or in the City ( see: Brisbane) . If you think the Yorks embody the committment to winning and have class, drink some more kool-aid.

I think it is you that should stop drinking the proverbial kool-aid that the politicians feed you. John York and Denise Debartolo have had 100 million for the city, but that same city has remained adamant about taking the issue to the ballots once again. You're sitting here and your whole ploy is to stand by and pin the delay of the projects on the Yorks. Gavin Newsome and the city have had much of the same hand in that delay and the pressure you claim they applied initially to the Yorks in the beginning of Newsome's term was nothing more than playful banter. Stadium projects take time to develop but the only negotiating ploy that the city used was the Olympics. York warned Gavin not to depend on the team to do that.

And if you think that the Yorks aren't justified in their disapproval of the current stadium site then you know absolutely nothing about business and should stop talking out of your heart and start thinking with your head.

Bob St. Clair, Leo Nomellini, and Joe Perry played a block from where " The Summer of Love" was born.

The 49ers are San Francisco.

Yeah and that was how long ago? The 49ers have since moved away from Kezar to the Hunter's Point Location. And now they will move to Santa Clara. When you consider the vicinity of the location and the fact that Santa Clara isn't exactly a state away from SF, then this move is smart and should still cater to the Bay Area 49er fans.



Wanna have some fun? Go and find the Giant fan who bought a St. Petersburg Giant jersey. They had some made you know. That goes to show you how much hot air can be blown up fan's butts when it comes to stadiums. Is Feinstien's proposed legislation a bunch of hot air? You bet it is, but the Yorks are now playing against the Political big boys ( and girls ), and Newsome is the Democratic Golden Boy of the future. Add Nancy Pelosi in the mix, and York is playing hardball with a whiffle bat.

That's a lofty comparison if there ever was one. The 49ers are not moving cities or changing names. That's something that the politicians you vehemently support are trying to force the team into. They're not going to become the St. Petersburgh 49ers or even the Santa Clara 49ers. They will stay the San Francisco 49ers, despite playing in Santa Clara. It's not out of reason or as extreme of a move. And of course, you can commend Nancy Pelosi and Gavin Newsome's reputations all you want but it is they that have been forced into playing hardball with York. Because for 10 years the city has been very mum on the stadium ordeal. Now that York has made things serious and moved the preferred sight over to Santa Clara these so called "fans" are speaking up? And as strong as their political reputations maybe, they are trying to pass laws that restrict the rights of a private entity in the 49ers. They are going to fight a losing battle with the NFL as laws to try and change team names or even force a team to stay in a given location are usually not passed.

In other words, he is again out of his league, like he is when it comes down to running an NFL franchise.

Seems to me like you're just a bitter, DumpYork person who will jump blindly into any anti-York bit you can find. Running down an NFL Franchise? Where have you been lately? The 49ers are sitting at 4-5 and are on their way up. For all the personnel mistakes of the past, York has righted the ship, spent money, and is now on the verge of getting stadium talks serious once again regardless of whether Santa Clara is a leverage ploy or serious. That's more than can be said about what was happening 2-3 years ago.

And as I said in the very beginning, I'm not a big fan of York personally. I still think he has a lot to prove from the football standpoint. But your words just echo the same, harping trite of blaming York for everything and not other people that are seriously involved. Tell me, were you willing to spend some of your money (in the form of taxes) to build a 49er stadium? Better yet, were your heroes like Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, and Gavin Newsome willing to shell the kind of commitment and money into a stadium project for the Olympics and team that they are now crying about? Because if York is to blame for this whole ordeal then surely he should have brought the Olympics to SF, he should have single handedly tried to renovate a slum correct? That's typical, unresponsible activity that you preach and so it's easy for you to pass blame on a business decision when you're not the one spending 800 million dollars. But since this is Yorks' money and his team now, I think it'd be best to let him handle his own investments.

You're so quick to jump to the conclusion that York is a snake. You're supporting politicians: the slimiest and most poisonous snakes of them all.


Again see: my Brisbane post.

How do I know about the Brisbane deal? An Brisbane insider told me about it, and the site was thought of by Denise York, as per the Chronicle.

Your Brisbane proposal sounds absurd, among other things. And you sight the Giants as a glowing example yet you forget that they had to battle the same city many times to secure that stadium. But my question to you is that with all of these "insiders" (seems to me like everyone wants to profit from a 49er stadium) do you not think that York would properly do his own research when he's investing close to a billion into a project? I'm sorry. Maybe I am a kool aid drinker, but I'll trust the guy who is willing to put down his money. It sure as hell isn't the city of San Francisc or politicians like Feinstein.



http://www.logoserver.com/football/SF49ers.GIF

Do you remember this?

If you don't, this was the logo the Eddie presented years ago, to replace the SF on the helmet. The old afternoon edition of the Examiner had a picture of Eddie with the helmet and logo propped in front of him. Do you see SF anywhere in that logo? Nope. It didn't happen obviously, because the FANS voted against it. Now, without SF painted on the helmet, the team obviously had a new brand. My guees is that it was Eddie's first step towards moving the team if he had a better deal elsewhere. Guess what? Before the Stadium referendum win he celebrated late into the night with S&M hookers, both he and Policy hinted about thinking of moving to Los Angeles. Now you're tellimg me that there is no noise about LA and the NFL, but the LA Times didn't print the O'Malley subject until much later after O'Malley sold the Dodgers baseball club. Just because you don't hear about it, doesn't mean it isn't a possibilty. If the Yorks can make a move there, you betcha they will jump on it. Add a rift between the Yorks and the City of SF, an up and coming team that has more value because the roster isn't expensive long term and the numbers are finally crunched to the Yorks fiscal liking, and L.A. would welcome the franchise, with a solid deal. Add an Olympic bid, and presto, Mayflower vans are on the I-5 heading south.

The Chargers will still be in San Diego, because even though they are the only So-Cal team left, everybody is still sporting Raider gear in SD.

And again, times have changed. You sight a logo from back in the Eddie D days. Times have changed. Back then, the 49ers weren't being sanctioned by the city to keep "SF" out of their name. If you were smart enough to see the light and York gets his ways the logos won't change. We'll still be the San Francisco 49ers. But again, the same people you're supporting are the people that want to take that away from the 49ers and force them into staying in San Francisco. And if you say the city is the 49ers then I question your commitment to football or whether you're just in it to sport some jerseys and colors. The 49ers are what they are because of their level of FOOTBALL. And regardless, they'd still represent the city and you shouldn't have trouble driving down to or taking public transportation to Santa Clara (it's not far from SF at all).

So don't give me any of this traditionalist rah rah. You're speaking from your bleeding heart and not your head. Look around you. All the politicians are doing is standing around and depriving the team of doing what is necessary for its future. And in Santa Clara, the Bay Area fans will STILL be served. So I'm sorry. You can take your San Francisco and you can back off. If I wanted to celebrate the traditions of the city I'd go eat some sourdough bread and ride a cable car. But the team...and its legacy...that's worth more than a city.

[49erRyder]

Screw John York and his stadium deal. I don't know why they gotta make the Candlestick location sound so bad. They have plenty of space out there to make a tight stadium. Just now adays they want to make a whole god **** community with it which is what they propose in Santa Clara. With that much commitment to there city they need to change the name. Take off San Francisco and 49ers. Call them the Santa Clara Great Americans **** that.:sf49:

[CDavis]

San Jose is closer to Santa Clara. I guess the Sharks could have called themselves " The San Francisco Sharks " then, right?




Probably not i believe that the city of San Jose help Build the HP Pavilion where they play and probably had Clause in the lease stating that they have to have San Jose in the Name of the Team. Something the 49ers (TM by the NFL) Probably don't have in there lease with the city.

[The Vin]

The Yorks have had since 1999 to figure out the Staduim issue. Every time they were pressed with the issue, they just said " We will have an announcement on it next month". The next month, when pressed again, they said " We will have an announcement shortly within the next 3 months". When perssed 3 months later they said "We just put together a team to look further into the project, and we will announce our plan soon" . I think Gene Washington was even hired on one of thier teams. Fast foward to now, and count how many times since they had announcements regarding the Stadium, and how many firms they've hired.

The Yorks have had since 1999 and have pushed for a new stadium very seriously over the past few years. The problem is not just them delaying the project. It is a serious issue with the city. The only time the talks began to heat up was when the city found that it could have the 49ers stadium double as an Olympics side. Since then, the Yorks have concluded that would not be viable for a fan day experience. Now they will move forward with the Santa Clara sight because they don't have their hands tied in San Francisco...a city that was NOT serious about a stadium and still won't be if Feinstein gets her wish and restricts the 49ers to stay in San Francisco. Do you honestly think that after 10+ years of stadium negotiations that the city would all of a sudden strike a deal with the 49ers when the benefit to the city, the Olympics, is now off of the table?

Bottom line is, they were looking at thier bottom line. After they scrapped the first Stadium plan left over from Eddie. Newsome put the screws to them to finally come up with something before the Olympic bid.

No, Newsome and his politicians have tried to burden the team with building both a stadium for football AND the Olympic bid. Something that was not feasible. Hence why the city quickly dropped its bid for the Olympics.

Of course I will always have my heart in mind when it comes to the 49ers, because my head tells me not to trust these fools who have run the team into the ground, and now plan to run the team out of the City.

It's not business. It's personal.

The city has run the team out of San Francisco. Not the Yorks. If the city wanted their team THAT badly they would not put the organization in the position where a stadium deal is virtually unattainable without massive compromises that are unfair to the team.

It is business. And for you to make it personal is childish and short sighted.



San Jose is closer to Santa Clara. I guess the Sharks could have called themselves " The San Francisco Sharks " then, right?

BTW, there is no shovel in the dirt in Santa Clara, so there is no Stadium yet. And, Kezar staduim is now called " Bob St. Clair Field " .

Is your Kool-aid laced with GHB? You seem to forget history.

You seem to have a habit of throwing completely irrelevant factoids to mask your own hatred for York. The Sharks choose to represent the city of San Jose. That's their domain. The 49ers want to represent the city of San Francisco. Whether they play a mere 30 miles away or not, they would still represent that city and are committed to doing that. But your politician buddies are bitter over York putting the ball in the city's court and want to take away the team's right to do that.



Again, they plan to move to Santa Clara. You act like the City officials there have already genuflected at the altar of York. The Yorks have proved difficult with the City of SF. Santa Clara is more conservative than SF. Hell, John York was hardly at HQ during his first few years as Owner. He probably figures team cost into the issue, not having to ferry the team into the City. Money issues figured into play when it came to training camp.

Yes they PLAN to move to Santa Clara. However, something should get done there as the city is far more welcoming and supportive of a stadium than the city of San Francisco has been for the past 10 years.

As for money issues, give me a break. The guy is going to shell out close to a billion on this project anyways. To point the finger or criticize York for money shows that you're trying to defend the city and not the team.

Again, we both seem to agree that the proposed move is a leverage ploy. What would happen if the city of Santa Clara doesn't bite on the York apple? Where would the next point of leverage be?

The city of Santa Clara is open to the stadium proposal in their city. They have no reason not to have a stadium in their city as it would bode very well for that area. There is no question of biting. As long as the York's pursue the area seriously, and all indications are that they will, then the city is listening. They are cautious of being a pawn, but like I said, I believe that the Yorks are far more serious and committed to the move than to merely use it for leverage. The bottom line is that the finally something is happening with the stadium in a serious matter rather than casual talk.

Los Angeles.

Won't happen as long as the team is free to negotiate and carry over to other cities around the bay.


Your right about York being able to do anything he wants to with the team, because it's his money. Art Modell had the same right. Maybe we can research a famous Los Angeles writer to think of a new name for the team?

Newsome and Fienstien would probably help keep the 49er brand.

Again, Newsome and Feinstein are doing absolutely nothing to keep the 49er brand. The team wants to build a stadium in Santa Clara and represent the city that has long been its home. Currently, Newsome and Feinstein are fighting the team over that issue.


You know, the China Basin was a sewage hole before Phone Bell park was built, and now it's revitalized, and the hub of Bio-Tech and Stem-Cell research, a coup that Newsome pulled off, competing against other Global cities. Maybe that doens't mean a thing to you, but it means a lot more than an Olympic bid, which BTW, would also be a HUGE thing for the City.

Yes and all of that would be beautiful for the city. But to shoulder that burden on one entity is absurd. You act like the city has been open to assist the 49ers and spend its own money. That's simply not the case.

Polticians do things like that. Business people do things like move manufacturing to 3rd World countries, and outsource staffing. Politicians have a hand in that also, but mostly when they are in the pockets of Businessmen.

Now, you're merely turning this into a political jargon about big businesses vs community. Something that snake like politicians would love for small minded individuals to think. The fact of the matter is that snakes are still very smart creatures. You accuse York of being evil and what not, yet do you even realize the importance of a stadium for him on a purely business perspective? It's huge. The franchise's value would shoot up and he has to do that without the risk of losing the installed fanbase. So to sit here and blame York is dumb. As bad as the fans want a new stadium, York wants it equally as much even if it is for purely business reasons. But, because he has done his homework and hasn't compromised the fan experience for a quick fix that'd make a 3rd of the stadium useless for football and create all kinds of fan experience nightmares, York does have the fans in mind despite all of your allegations.


I've been a fan of the team since probably before you were born, if you are in your early 20's. Well, I've been a fan since 1977, so do the math. I became a fan of the team because my Uncle was a fan, and I grew up in So-Cal. Guess what? I've spawned another fan in my nephew, who roots for one of the worst teams in the NFL. I've stayed a fan since York took over. Plus, a friend of mine is actually 49er alumni. Ever tailgate in the Alumni parking lot? Best Oysters Rockefeller I've ever had there.

And I don't care how long you've been a fan or where you have tailgated. Because despite your cheering for the team for so many years, you're not siding with the team at all in this matter. You're being a traditionalist and stubborn and accusing the owner of being a snake. You want to turn an oppurtunity into a personal vendetta against the owners when they want to improve the team's standing. However many years you have cheered for the team, it seems to me like your political bias and hatred for a person are mixing with your ability to think.

I'd rather a bleeding heart than a sold soul to someone who doesn't give a rat's *** about you. I've poured my heart and soul into the City of SF too.

And the politicians you support really give a rat's *** about you right?

The City survived earthquakes, a modern plague, a reccession, an assasination, and the Dot Com Boom and Bust. It is a City rich with history, diversity, culture, and beauty. Joe DiMaggio, the Grateful Dead, Carlos Santana, and Clint Eastwood hail from there.

You can go eat a California Pizza Kitchen pie with the Yorks in Los Angeles.

And guess what? The city still never made the 49ers. Football minded people did that. The city might have supported the team, but in this stadium ordeal the city is restricting the team. So you can take your San Francisco tradition and go visit some art museums and get in touch with the 60s again on Haight Street. But if you're a football fan, people like you need to wake up, get in touch with the present, and start supporting the team rather than a city that looks out for its own self interest just as much as you criticize the Yorks for looking out for theirs.

[FODY]

And guess what? The city still never made the 49ers. Football minded people did that. The city might have supported the team, but in this stadium ordeal the city is restricting the team. So you can take your San Francisco tradition and go visit some art museums and get in touch with the 60s again on Haight Street. But if you're a football fan, people like you need to wake up, get in touch with the present, and start supporting the team rather than a city that looks out for its own self interest just as much as you criticize the Yorks for looking out for theirs.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to The Vin again.
:doubleup::doubleup::doubleup:

[The Vin]

I dunno how you can say there can't be a new Staduim built in the City, since there was a referendum passed, and the Giants built one Downtown.

If I'm getting a bit redundant with this, it's only because you fail to get it.

Again, I voted for the referendum.

From what I finally recognized in your long winded post, you didn't. Maybe you don't live in the City. That's why you are so adamant about them leaving it.

As far as the Yorks being serious : sure they are. That's why they've waffled on it for years.

Newsflash: 90% of the San Francisco 49ers season ticket base doesn't live IN San Francisco. :joker:

Again : Newsome pressured the Yorks into coming up with a plan before the Olympic bid. I guess you don't get the Chronicle where you live.

Again: The city was hinging on the 49ers stadium to ride them to the coatails of an Olympics Bid. York informed them that this wouldn't happen and wasn't feasible for the 49ers own fans. Prior to that, the city was very casual in their talks to build a stadium outside of the Olympics bid.

Add to the list of more things you don't get.



LOL @ the burden the team reference.

See above the quote. The Olympic bid was a shot at getting a Stadium built, since the Yorks can't get thier **** together on it.

Again, a blatant shot at York instead of blaming the city for its own inability. Yes the Olympic bid was a shot at getting a stadium built. It was also the only real one that the city supported because of the benefit of the Olympics. However, the city threw a hissy fit and blamed York for its inabiltity to secure the Olympics bid when it had no back up plan for the Olympics other than that. Other stadium talks have been passive at best, which is why nothing has been done in 10 years. The city's only real solution to an SF stadium was to pile on an Olympic bid that the 49ers would carry the burden of shouldering.


The team is still in SF dude. I'd call you stupid here for being blindsighted by reality, but I'm trying at civility here.

I'd tell you to get a clue. But it's obvious that won't happen.

Hell, I guess the Yorks haven't done enough to make you realize thier incompetence, a move outside of the Bay Area would probably force your head deeper in the sand.



I don't hate York. I just see him as worse the Bidwills. I don't have Politician buddies, and you are just melting here.

You're the one melting here throwing things like York is worst than the Bidwills and what not. Look around you. The team has done far more to improve over the last 2 years, and York is trying to get the stadium done. The problem is, idiots like you who constantly pin the blame on him when he's trying to improve the team's adequacy by securing a new stadium. You don't want to move to Santa Clara because it's against tradition, but my God, if your precious San Francisco is wrong about its treatment of the team then it's ALL Yorks fault for doing what needs to be done to improve the team's stadium situation. :joker:

Bob St. Clair field isn't an irrelevant factoid. Speak a little more respectful of one of our HOF players, who played his entire career, from High School and beyond, on that field. I've met the guy at one of those Alumni tailgates, and he is a solid person.

And again, do I care that you've met the guy at an Alumni Tailgate? Do you want a cookie?

Again, Santa Clara is closer to San Jose. Do yourself a favor, and read a map.

And again, the 49ers want to represent the city of San Francisco. Do yourself a favor and get a clue.

Money issues? Hell, do they have that kind of money? From what I've heard about the Forbes 500 list, only Eddie is on it, not any of those 2. Maybe the money saved for postage stamps could add one more urinal into the Stadium, I dunno.

You crunch those numbers.

And why don't you leave the number crunching to the people who are actually willing to get the stadium done. Are you going to put your dollars and help out the Yorks? No.


Well, there you said it. They're open to a proposal.

What part of there is no real plan in place did you not get?

Yes guy, there is no real plan in place. Because you've sat there in York's closet and know that he's lying about all the research and exchanges he's had to go ahead and move forward with Santa Clara as a priority. Because Gavin Newsome, after yesterday's meeting at City Hall, has admitted that the 49ers are far more committed to Santa Clara.


Come to think of it, you know who could block that? The other League owners, who wouldn't want those incompetent boobs having a team in that market.

Do you know who they support now?

EDDIE.

The same Eddie that would much rather take over the Debartolo's real estate firm, because there is more money there than in running the 49ers team?


The Yorks have done more damage to the 49er brand than any Politician could do.

On the football field they haven't been the most competent people in the past. That seems to be changing. However, in regards to the stadium, the only "boobs" are the city of San Francisco.



And a Staduim help revitalize that part of the City.

But feel free not to give Newsome some credit for the Stem Cell bid. Bitter much?

I forgot, you don't live there from what it seems.

Yes, a stadium helps revitalize that part of the city. It should still not be shouldered, at all, by the majority of the 49ers organization. And whoopie, a Stem Cell bid. Another matter for another discussion.


I side with the team because I've been a fan long before York has.

No, you side with the city and the politics.

And Denise didn't even want the team in the first place.

Maybe you are too stubborn to face reality, even if the snake bit you in the face of it.

No. Once again, in your whole spiel about how evil the Yorks are you have ignored my entire stance on the Yorks. As I said from the very beginning, I am not a big fan of the Yorks. I have not cared much for their football operations and constant shifting of the captain to run the shift, going through coaches like tissues on a cold day. However, in this circumstance regarding the stadium, they are absolutely right on. It's time SOMEONE played hardball with the city. And it's time the Yorks go ahead and do that and act like they are truly owners of the team. Not just appeasers of people like you that'd rather tank the team but keep your traditions.


We now live with the consequeces of what the Yorks did to the 49ers every Sunday.

At least the trains run on time.

And we can watch them wreck on Sundays too.

You can watch them wreck on Sundays. I look forward to watching them improve, which is something they've been doing for the past 2 seasons.

I am a football fan. That's why I don't trust what the Yorks present as football since they have been at the helm.

No. You come off more like a wine sipping...what's that word?...oh yes, Kool Aid drinker to me.

Tradition and Civic Pride mean something to me. You are probably too young and naive to understand what that means, slappy. I wanted a brand spanking new Football Stadium in the City of SF. That's why I voted for it.

You didn't, so that's why you care less about the team, and more for the mediocrity that is the Yorks. You know, those football minded people who you bend over willingly for, and give them the reacharound too.

Ah yes, the "too young to understand" card. Well, let me repeat myself, since you old timers don't quite remember things that well and tell you once again to get with the present, quit crying about the traditions of your city, and learn to compromise.

"Boo hoo...they won't build a new stadium directly in SF. It's a few cities down. OH NO. The world is ending. I can't enjoy my team as much now. Death to York." Give me a break. People like you are the reason why we're dubbed the "Whiners."

It seems to me like all you care about is having a logo or a t-shirt you can wear that says "I know a team that plays in SF."


PS, what have you got against Art Museums? Even been to the MOMA?

:biggrin:

And you call yourself a football fan? :falldownlaugh:

[bsy]

Like it or not, York owns the team. The city doesn't. 'SF' is not copyrighted and does not belong to the city either. York is holding all the cards. Good or bad, that's hard to say but it's the business reality.

[The Vin]

LOL @ Drummer. And you say I'm going over the edge?

Your whole basis in this thread was to come on here and say that Diane Feinstein is fighting for the fans and trying to keep the 49ers in SF on good will. As common sense would rule, how can you honestly look yourself in the mirror and believe that? Diane Feinstein hasn't even touched anywhere near the 49ers until York finally had the guts to show it to the city. For years now, no stadium plan in San Francisco has seriously been considered aside from an Olympic hybrid that doesn't work for the 49ers. You say that's all York's fault because he is a snake, but I laugh at that rationale. Do you honestly think that regardless of what kind of owner York is, whether he's in it to win or to make cash, that a new stadium doesn't directly benefit him and that he'd want to get something done that increases the franchise's value?

But no, according to you, the city has no blame in this. They've been open to talks throughout and only the Yorks have stalled these talks? Is that why the only serious consideration that the city has given to this matter since the almighty bond measure vote (and yes for the billioneth time, we know, you voted, whoopie, you're a fan of the people now dude) has happened over the past few weeks?

You support a politician who wants to restrict the team's ability to do what is best for its own interest instead of finding compromises and solutions to keep the team in San Francisco. You act like Santa Clara is some epic journey away from San Francisco when it takes me 30 minutes to drive down there from San Francisco (but you're old, so you probably occupy the slow lane). And you dare she's defending the fans? The fans win when the team gets a new stadium. Considering the fact that the 49er fans are well dispersed over the Bay Area, and not just pigeoned up in the beloved city of San Francisco, perhaps you should embrace the idea of change and something that would directly benefit the team, not appease your staunch views on tradition. Like I said before, if you want to sit around and appreciate San Francisco go visit an art museum. Go eat sourdough bread. Go admire all the creative signs that the homeless people come out with in Union Square. But if you want to enjoy 49er football, then let the team do what it needs to do to secure its own future.

And finally, don't act like York doesn't want to uphold the traditions you clamor so strongly for. Otherwise, he would have no issue with moving to Santa Clara and dropping the entire SF 49er name altogether and calling them something else. But the 49ers wish to represent the city that they've called home. Heck, they've been courteous enough to leave the door open if the city steps up and offers new, legitimate proposals that mesh with the fan's expectations of a state of the art FOOTBALL (not Olympic) stadium. Unfortunately, that very same city has, up to this point, not been serious in upholding its end of the bargain and helping the team to stay in SF. Instead, they've piled on an Olympic bid and infrastructure improvements onto the backs of the 49ers. That's not fair to the team. And hence why the 49ers are considering Santa Clara, not San Francisco, as their top priority in getting a new stadium built. York, for all of his alleged incompetency, would not consider leaving the city if there wasn't a logistical reason to do so. And saying he's a snake doesn't qualify as one.

So again, quit trying to reach and act like the sky is falling when the team will still cater to the same fanbase, only shifted a few miles south. :stirthepot:

[The Vin]

I see Vin is furiously working on some more half baked rationale.

You are the king of half baked rationale Mr. "Let's Build it in Brisbane!" "York is a snake but politicians fight for the people." "The City has nothing to do with this." "Feinstein is fighting for the fans!" "I claim to be a football fan but I really spend my Sunday's looking at art museums." "I throw around useless information, like the names of old fields and the fact that I tailgated (something you wouldn't have been able to do if the 49ers had gone ahead and built the Olympic stadium btw)" :whistling:

[BY97]

If Feinstein was a real fan of the team, she'd have used her leverage to get a stadium deal done years ago.
Feinstein's 1st and only priority is and always has been furthering her own political career. She was a disaster as SF mayor, yet she still earned enough popularity to propel her into the senate. She does this by selecting issues of high public interest and taking the popular position. Regarding the 49ers, she only shows up when there is talk of them moving, then she takes credit for preventing it. For example:

In the early 90s, Eddie Debartolo had threatened to move the team when the Candlestick lease was due to expire (someone here has posted a pic of the 49ers logo that the team revealed at that time as an alternative to SF). Feinstein and the city offered up $90 mil in improvements to Candlestick to persuade Debartolo to stay. These improvements were not something that the average fan would notice. Conditions in the stadium were not improved at all. The money went toward the addition of luxury boxes, and some expanded seating in areas where seating was originally omitted - and for good reason. They were in poor viewing areas. These improvements were a temporary fix, and did not even upgrade the facility enough to qualify for a Superbowl.

Nevertheless, Eddie agreed to renew the lease, based on the premise that a plan for a new stadium would be revisited in the future. Since that time, Feinstein has been completely uninvolved in the team's efforts to build a new stadium, even though it has been an issue of contention for nearly a decade now. She even refused to step up to the plate during the internal problems of the 49ers in 98,99. Now that the team has announced plans to move, she sees an opportunity to make herself a hero, so she has decided to get involved again.

No Thanks Ms Feinstein. You have done nothing useful for 10 years. Please go away.

Feinstein is loyal alright... to herself.

[The Vin]

Feinstein's 1st and only priority is and always has been furthering her own political career. She was a disaster as SF mayor, yet she still earned enough popularity to propel her into the senate. She does this by selecting issues of high public interest and taking the popular position. Regarding the 49ers, she only shows up when there is talk of them moving, then she takes credit for preventing it. For example:

In the early 90s, Eddie Debartolo had threatened to move the team when the Candlestick lease was due to expire (someone here has posted a pic of the 49ers logo that the team revealed at that time as an alternative to SF). Feinstein and the city offered up $90 mil in improvements to Candlestick to persuade Debartolo to stay. These improvements were not something that the average fan would notice. Conditions in the stadium were not improved at all. The money went toward the addition of luxury boxes, and some expanded seating in areas where seating was originally omitted - and for good reason. They were in poor viewing areas. These improvements were a temporary fix, and did not even upgrade the facility enough to qualify for a Superbowl.

Nevertheless, Eddie agreed to renew the lease, based on the premise that a plan for a new stadium would be revisited in the future. Since that time, Feinstein has been completely uninvolved in the team's efforts to build a new stadium, even though is has be an issue of contention for nearly a decade now. She even refused to step up to the plate during the internal problems of the 49ers in 98,99. Now that the team has announced plans to move, she sees an opportunity to make herself a hero again, so she has decoded to get involved now.

No Thanks Ms Feinstein. You have done nothing useful for 10 years. Please go away.

Feinstein is loyal alright... to herself.

Right on. But try explaining that to Drummer over there. Because apparently, she's fighting for the fans of a team she probably hasn't watched since the 80's.

She isn't a hero. She's a joke. I'm sick and tired of this sentiment that John York is the reason why we haven't had a stadium deal done. Eddie D (the almighty and beloved owner of the 49ers) had trouble getting something done with the city. Now York has run into 8 years of little talk except some half baked (to borrow from my best friend :wub: ) Olympics idea. Besides that, there has been nothing but a few casual exchanges otherwise something would have been done. Regardless of who or what York is, any business owner wants to see profit. A new stadium increases the value of the team and makes both York, the team, and the fans happy. For him to purposely deny that and solely be responsible for delaying something that's beneficial for the team from a financial standpoint is absurd. The fact of the matter is simple: The city has not been serious about the 49ers and has played hardball with its other sports franchise as well. And when that happens you can stand and appease tradition, or you can do something about it. Whether the consideration to Santa Clara leads to the city becoming serious about keeping the team or an outright move to Santa Clara, the team and the fans will win. For that, you cannot blame York. You can only commend him for getting things moving in this ordeal.

For what the team has given to the city of San Francisco, we should be playing in a stadium christened by gold that's been layed personally by politicians like Feinstein.

[BY97]

She is probably going to try to play on the same old "loyalty to the fans and the city of your legacy" BS that worked with Eddie, because Eddie was a pushover (hey, ask Carmen Policy). You could see in Eddie's face during the press conference in which Feinstein announced the renewal of the team's lease, that Eddie was not happy with the deal at all.

Eddie was a bad business man. John York is not. And he is not going to be pushed around by politicians. He is going to do what's best for the 49ers and their fans.

And even though many knee-jerk fans don't realize it yet, what's best for the fans is Santa Clara.

[The Vin]

She is probably going to try to play on the same old "loyalty to the fans and the city of your legacy" BS that worked with Eddie, because Eddie was a pushover (hey, ask Carmen Policy). You could see in Eddie's face during the press conference in which Feinstein announced the renewal of the team's lease, that Eddie was not happy with the deal at all.

Eddie was a bad business man. John York is not. And he is not going to be pushed around by politicians. He is going to do what's best for the 49ers and their fans.

And even though many knee-jerk fans don't realize it yet, what's best for the fans is Santa Clara.

That's what I'm saying. With no respect to Eddie D, he was a man of heart. His passion was the game and he would spend everything to do ensure that. I loved that. It worked back in the 80s. But today's NFL is so much more complicated and business oriented. I'm glad that York has taken a clue from Eddie D and started to spend more, but the team desperately needs a stadium and cannot be tied down to threats of the city on the basis of tradition alone. If San Francisco cannot compromise and help the 49ers out, then they are not deserving of having the team play in that city. And it isn't even about the money. York has already said that he'd shell out most of the cost. But the city insists on milking the team for useless things that don't serve to benefit the fans or the team. For example, despite the fact that a bond measure was passed in 1997, the city still insists on taking that measure back to the ballots and forcing the team to spend millions on a campaign. Then when you throw in all of this Olympic business, that's just unfair when the team won't directly use a 3rd of what it is forced to build.

Now, I have no faith that a city that hasn't show a commitment to the team for 10 years will all of a sudden bend over backwards when the main bait for them (the Olympics) has been taken away. Even worst, instead of helping the situation people like Feinstein and Newsome are only making matters worst by threatening to take away the team name and passing laws that would not allow the 49ers to move from the city willingly. That, to me, shows more of a childish "Let's get even" mentality rather than a "Maybe we need to all take a deep breathe, sit down, and reconsider things." You cannot blame John York for turning his attention towards Santa Clara when, for 10 years, nothing viable has opened up in San Francisco without serious compromise to the fans and doubling the cost o the facility.

[BY97]

Do you remember the last when York made a rash decision about the team? He fired a coach. Who did he have in mind to replace him?
Where exactly was Steve Mariucci taking the team? The Superbowl? HC's don't get a lot of chances to fail in the NFL. Replacing him was Terry Donahue's job. Not York's.
You see, he doesn't know WTF he is doing.
Neither did Eddie Debartolo. Eddie Hired Bill Walsh to make all the football decisions. He was fortunate that Walsh turned out to be a football genius. There was no reason to believe so when he hired him. Eddie's first hire, Joe Thomas, wasn't such a wise choice.

York has followed much the same path. A non-football guy trying to find the right people to make his team win. His first attempt (brining back Bill Walsh) was a smart idea, but it was the wrong time for Walsh, and Walsh's decisions led to far more problems to overcome - especially his recommendation of Donahue to succeed him as GM.

All the faults of York can also be found in Debartolo - and more.

[bsy]

And spare me this sanctimonious crap about being a fan. I've seen more 49er football than you have been alive, boy. It's fans like you that suck because you have no balls and heart. You are a Man without a Country. You are willing to bend over and sellout to these IODOTS. You're willing to give them a pass because you see flashes of NFL football on this team, which is rare. You easily forget what 49er football was, just because you have an itch to scratch with a politician. You think they finally came around because they hired Nolan, yet you dismiss everything his Father did.

In other words, you are the most egregious example of a 49er fan I've ever come across.

You have lowered expectations, and that's on you Butchie. Don't expect real fans to follow your crusade out of SF. If you accept what you see on the field and off, then you don't have a thing to say on this matter. Real 49er fans deserve better, and the City deserves better than what the Yorks have offered since they took over, with furious apathy.

You don't matter. Because you don't know crap about tradition.


If you're a 'real' fan you'd realize that the team is over it's nadir and we're reaching some respectability. If you were a real fan of football, you'd realize it's impossible to maintain the level of our halycon days when we were a dynasty. Every empire falls and has to rebuild itself. WTF does the city have to do with it. It's the fans and apparently there aren't that many fans left in the city. York is far from a perfect owner and he has his share of responsibility in the donahue/erickson fiasco. But, he's made strides to put that behind him. Fact of the matter is, the city is the one that needs to make a proposal to York. Not the other way around.

If you're a 'real' fan, why did you suddenly only appear on this MB when the stadium issue and battle with the city has come up?

I think someone works for the city or has family who does.

[BY97]

If Feinstein can get some control over this situation, then that's saving this team from knee-jerks who ran this team into the ground.
Feinstein would probably have the 49ers remain in Candlestick, to the detriment of the team and their fans. Feinstein is a complete and total political tool.

You don't seem to know what the definition of "knee-jerk" is. It means...

...ah nevermind. Look it up yourself. You have the ability.

[The Vin]

You see, he doesn't know WTF he is doing. Santa Clara was just as surprised at the decision as Newsome was. Why? Because York didn't let them know about it.

Actually that is not true. When York announced the 49ers pursuit of a new stadium, he always considered Santa Clara as Plan B if the SF proposal did not go down. It hasn't, and thus he's doing exactly what he planned on.

Just wait until York brings in his proposals. Santa Clara will have thier chained pulled just like SF is now. Once numbers start crunching, York will be scared out of his butt, realizing that he is in over his head once again, just like his coaching fiasco.

Actually, Santa Clara seems very excited and opened to getting the stadium deal done. Also, York has since found the appropriate coach and the team has seen a much more improved product on the field. So if he was in over his head then, then I expect good results on the stadium given the fact that the hiring of Nolan and McCloughan has actually worked out fairly nicely as of late.

You whole premise to this thread was to lash out at the Politicians, without seeing the horrible picture of the Yorks.

Nope. Like I said when I made the post...I've given the Yorks their lashing on the football side of things. You just automatically assume that because you have a vendetta against the guy and can't see past your hatred for him and the fact that on the business end of this, York is doing the correct thing.

What is evident is that you're really reaching here. The picture is clear. They suck at ownership. They are not to be trusted in the least. They have thier own agenda in mind, not the Fan's.

The Yorks aren't to be trusted, but the politicians that run the city are to be trusted? Quotes like these, once again, make me wonder exactly where your head is. You dislike the Yorks because of their past mistakes. In case you've been living under a rock the last few years, maybe you should wake up and see that the ownership has made a much better effort in improving the team over the last 2 years. But again, you continue to enact your bias and pray that you're right.

Let me just ask you a question. Would you like to see the Yorks fail? Will that make you feel better about yourself? Because, coming from your perspective, I get the vibe that you'd rather see the Yorks fail than the team enjoy success. That's not somehting to admire from someone who claims to be such an astute fan.

And spare me this sanctimonious crap about being a fan. I've seen more 49er football than you have been alive, boy.

And spare me the high road of "I'm older, bow down to me." Because, your maturity isn't shining much at all here, old timer.

It's fans like you that suck because you have no balls and heart.

Yes, I have no balls and no heart. But you're Mr. Daring because you can't even accept the idea of the team playing in Santa Clara.

You are a Man without a Country. You are willing to bend over and sellout to these IODOTS. You're willing to give them a pass because you see flashes of NFL football on this team, which is rare. You easily forget what 49er football was, just because you have an itch to scratch with a politician. You think they finally came around because they hired Nolan, yet you dismiss everything his Father did.

No. I'm merely looking at the business side of things and seeing how logical York is in dealing with the stadium ordeal. I'm not letting my bleeding heart get in the way of level headed rationale, unlike yourself. If you look at my track record, I criticize the team and the ownership just as much if not more than I defend it. But in this matter, York is right and your own bias, because you have an itch to scratch with York, is showing.

You have lowered expectations, and that's on you Butchie. Don't expect real fans to follow your crusade out of SF.

I only expect the smart fans to follow my crusade. Considering that some of the most reputable fans on this board support my beliefs, I'll go with that. If you wish to say that people like BY97, bsy, and many others who have sent me kudos for my thoughts aren't real fans than that's on you.

If you accept what you see on the field and off, then you don't have a thing to say on this matter. Real 49er fans deserve better, and the City deserves better than what the Yorks have offered since they took over, with furious apathy.

Now you just sound like a disgruntled fan who has given up any and all reason to support the team. I don't, for a second, doubt that we deserve more success on the field. I also understand that we're in the process of attaining that success. Like I said, I've criticized the team as much if not more than I've commended it. But in regards to the city, the city doesn't deserve it. It's the fans and the organization itself that deserves success. And part of that success comes with a stadium that your precious city isn't serious about building and hasn't been for over 10 years. John York, even by his sharpest criticis, has tried to build that stadium.

You don't matter. Because you don't know crap about tradition.

Or, for that matter, Culture, obviously.

Oh boy, here is the culture retort. Seriously dude, everytime you come out with these stereotypical "culture and tradition" tirades, you present yourself as more laughable to myself. I suppose you'd like to have an overhang and a personal masseause and some cheese in a luxury box in this new stadium as well? You're a limousine fan. And you know nothing about football. Because the city of San Francisco and its lack of commitment to the team does not breed a culture of football. But when you get a new stadium in Santa Clara (or even SF) maybe I ought to personally invite you to view a game with me? I assure you that the experience will be very "cultural" to say the least.

[BY97]

Santa Clara was just as surprised at the decision as Newsome was.
Perhaps, but their surprise is a happy one. Santa Clara has been trying to lure the Giants, A's, 49ers, Raiders, or just about any team that is willing to move there. They have the money to make it happen. The same applies to San Jose and Sacramento. All those cities have been chomping at the bit to get professional sports franchises for years. York chose Santa Clara because it's the closest possible location to SF.

[The Vin]

York lashed out and fired Mooch mostly from advice from Donahue, yet he didn't have or know anyone who was a viable replacement. His next hire was worse. Mooch just got the team to the playoffs. Hell, he almost got a real good team to the Super Bowl. Spare me the "he inherited a good team" that always follows in these types of discussions on Mooch. He brought in Garrison Hearst. Siefert barely got over the hump with with a better team than that one. Mooch got the team into the playoffs with Garcia.

Mooch kneeled down at half time of a playoff game. As for Garcia, where is that guy now? Exactly.

York's fault was allowing Donahue to manipulate him into making a brash decision without a better replacement available. However, he then fired that entire administration and coach realizing his mistake.



I somehow doubt York has any of the good qualities Eddie had. York was hardly around the first few years. York already had a solid coach. Eddie had a rough start, but that was quickly fixed. York seems apathetic, and it is good that he at least stays out of Nolan's way.

York isn't Eddie D. Nobody made that comparison. He's not the football guy that Eddie D was. However, obtaining the right football minds can greatly assist in that ordeal. Bob Kraft, the owner of the Patriots, isn't exactly a wizard of football either. But he has Bellicheck in front of him and the Patriots win because Kraft signs the checks and Bellicheck makes the personnel decisions. As the 49ers continue to grow on the football side of things, as Nolan gains more experience, and as the team continues to hire guys like Scott McCloughan (who has been a solid drafter), then York will be relegated to doing what it is he should do: Handle the business side of things, sign the checks, and yes...get a new stadium.


I'm not even going to compare Nolan to Walsh.

Nobody asked you to. Nolan isn't Walsh. However, we can still be a successful team, continue to build, and get into position to where we can determine whether Nolan is the guy or if there is someone better equipped to handle the situation down the road.

[BY97]

York lashed out and fired Mooch mostly from advice from Donahue, yet he didn't have or know anyone who was a viable replacement.
If Donahue advised York to fire Mariucci, shouldn't Donahue have been the one with a replacement in mind? Debartolo needed advice from people like Al Davis to hire Walsh. Why shouldn't York also need advise from football people.

Besides, I think Bill Walsh was pushing for Mariucci's replacement as early as 1999.

And Garcia was a Walsh guy.

[Fez]

I see Vin is furiously working on some more half baked rationale.

Like this piece of yours?

You are a Man without a Country. You are willing to bend over and sellout to these IODOTS. You're willing to give them a pass because you see flashes of NFL football on this team, which is rare. You easily forget what 49er football was, just because you have an itch to scratch with a politician. You think they finally came around because they hired Nolan, yet you dismiss everything his Father did.

So, just for the sole fact that his father was not successful, Nolan is doomed and won't ever be a respectable coach in the league. :laugh:

Who's making the half baked rationale, again?

[Fez]

I support the team. I don't support York.

Well, too bad, because the team is a private entity owned by John York, and as long as he's the owner, anytime you support the team, you're supporting with York, whether you like it or not.

Half baked rationale again, uh? :tease:

[The Vin]

Like this piece of yours?



So, just for the sole fact that his father was not successful, Nolan is doomed and won't ever be a respectable coach in the league. :laugh:

Who's making the half baked rationale, again?


:jay:

The funny thing is, he makes me out like I'm some York *** kisser. I've always been skeptical of the Nolan hiring and haven't put him on the pedastal of "The Next Walsh" like some fans. However, I do recognize and see a much more concentrated effort from the team to improve the product on the field even when I don't agree with some of the personnel decisions.

The irony is this: 2-3 years ago, people were clamoring for York because he was a passive owner. He didn't attend games apparently and it seemed like he didn't care about the team. Now, in a 2 year span, he shelled God knows how much money to fire an entire administration and then goes out and tries to appease the fans by getting back to football. He shows more improvement on team matters with weight room improvements, practice field improvements, opening up training camp to the fans, and shelling out money on a top QB. Now, he becomes aggressive as hell and basically plays hardball with the city of SF to get a new stadium deal done but yet he's still the devil and a snake? I'm starting to wonder what some some people want out of the guy.

Honestly. I've never been a big York supporter. I still wish he was more into football and I think that he's given Nolan more power than he deserves. But at the same time, separating all of those things, this stadium ordeal is another issue entirely. And I'm glad to see that York has broken out of his passive cycle and has started to get the ball rolling on the stadium. That's the aggressiveness I want to see out of him more often. And if he's doing his part and the city is still whining and moaning instead of compromising on their end, who is to blame? Really.

[The Vin]

What you dom't realize was that York made an irrational decision because he really didn't know what was going on @ HQ.

He didn't make an irrational decision. He made a brash decision. Mariucci had been a coach since 1997 on this team, hired that very season to get the 49ers over the hump when playing the Packers. In 1997, he still managed to lose with a team that possessed the #1 D in the NFL to the Packers. He then stayed on as coach until 2002, and despite four chances to get something done in the playoffs, Mooch was unsuccessful. Mariucci was never going to be the kind of coach to get the team to the Super Bowl. It wasn't in him and even players complained of this. Where Donahue and York were wrong was in firing Mariucci and having no one better to replace him. It was brash. But irrational? I don't think so. When a coach doesn't get it done for 6 years but then demands more power you usually stray on the side of caution.

BTW, Marathe was the primary when it came to the recent coaching hire.


And Marathe's current role with the team has been severely diminished. They've even hired a better contract negotiator that presides over deals moreso than Paraag.

[49ers1]

I supported the team for years.

Anklebite much?
When ever someones makes you look foolish you call them an anklebiter, it's a little old.

[Fez]

I supported the team for years.

Anklebite much?

And I'm sure Eddie and York's pockets appreciate that. :laugh:

This guy...

[BY97]

He didn't have to fire Mooch right then and there.
When should he have fired him, a month after the season? Two months? After the draft? After mini-camps?

No, if you know you're going toreplace your head coach, you need to do so immediately after the end of the season. You don't want a guy working on building the team for next year who's not even going to be there, and you want to give the new guy as much time as possible.

And I believe that the 49ers FO had some better coaching candidates in mind than Erickson, but some refused to interview at all, and others accepted jobs with other teams.

[The Vin]

My guess is, the 49ers will still be in SF.


And my guess is that even if that occurred, they'd be playing in a brand new stadium. Because in order to retain the 49ers, the city will have to compromise and get that done. The 49ers cannot sustain themselves and continue to play at Monster Park in its current form. If the city plays hardball, and by the recent words of Newsome himself things aren't looking good, then the 49ers will get the stadium in Santa Clara.

[The Vin]

Yeah well you don't go out and settle for an Erickson.

That was stupid. Hell they kept Mooch's coaching staff after firing Mooch.

What does that tell you?

It tells me that the team (mostly Donahue) felt that they needed a change at the head coaching position for philosophical reasons and felt that the assistant coaches were viable to get it done. That as one aspect that was unfair to Dennis Erickson because as incompetent as he was, he did not have the ability to preside over his own coaching staff during his first year.

Nolna had to throw some wieght around to get thier "negotiator", but Marathe is still York's lap dog.

Marathe maybe York's lap dog, but he's contained to the den for now. From the football aspect of the team, Nolan is the guy who is calling the shots. That can be either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on just how good Nolan turns out to be. Something we'll see in the future.

[Fez]

No they didn't. I payed close attention the morning it broke on KNBR, and they really didn't know where they were going with a HC in mind.

Firing Mooch over the phone was cheap and gutless too.

Again, they kept Mooch's coaching staff.

And this has to do with the stadium negotiations.... how, exactly?

To steal DraconisRex's famous line: you're grasping at straws. :laugh:

[BY97]

No they didn't. I payed close attention the morning it broke on KNBR, and they really didn't know where they were going with a HC in mind.

Firing Mooch over the phone was cheap and gutless too.

Again, they kept Mooch's coaching staff.
You heard the same news that the rest of us heard. The fact is, the organisation could not reveal any interest in any specific person before conducting interviews, or they would be in violation of the NFL's rule to interview minorities. What you heard on KNBR was lip service. It happens all the time.

[Fez]

You don't pay much attention, do you?

Ritalin much?

LOL I can see where you're going... he made a mistake in the past (even I admit it was a mistake), so he HAS to be the guy to blame on this situation. :laugh: Typical "dog not a cat" logic right there guy.

I may take your word on Ritalin, but I'm sorry I have no knowledge of medications for severe cases of denial and blindfolding hatred like the ones you're suffering of. :welcome2: So you'll have to deal with both without any help.

[49ers1]

Memo to Vin : You do realize this team has sunken lower statistically than a whole lot of other 49er teams of the past, right? Do you see lights out football?

Almost as bad as the 49er teams under Eddie D in the late 70s.

[BY97]

How long did it take to get a new HC, wait, settle for Erickson?
They didn't have much choice, after all the better candidates declined. That's also why it took so long. Erickson was probably their last option (besides Dennis Green, that is).

[The Vin]

They didn't have much choice, after all the better candidates declined. That's also why it took so long. Erickson was probably their last option (besides Dennis Green, that is).

That's the key. For a time, it seemed that the team was set on hiring Monty Kiffin as their new HC. That was probably the plan and Donahue had drafted in such a way (albeit unsucessfully) to incorporate a Cover 2 style to the team's defense, with faster LBs.

However, the Buccaneers, knowing that Kiffin was key to their Super Bowl victory that year and defensive success overall, locked him up with a very lucrative contract.

[BY97]

Ty Willingham was also high on their list, but he also declined to interview.

[Niner Jan]

York went knee-jerk yet again due to his incompetence and temper.

Actually, Dr. York is a very mild-mannered person, which goes to show you don't know what you are talking about. I know him pretty well, so I speak from first-hand knowledge. He has come a long way from the man who fired my beloved coach. It took me a while to get over it, but I finally did. My head won over my emotions eventually when I saw the change in Dr. York and how much he has done to improve conditions at the 49ers Facility.

With your long winded drafts, you sound like a dictator, so I'm not interested in all the hot air you are blowing. I thought I was long-winded sometimes, but you've got me beat 10-fold!

Incidentally, Santa Clara is not a suburb of San Jose, for your information. It's less than 30 miles south of Candlestick, which by highway doesn't take long to get there. Since it is in the SOUTH BAY (where I live), it is part of the San Francisco BAY Area. To be precise, Santa Clara is between Sunnyvale and San Jose. And most of the 49ers fanbase is from the South Bay--not from San Francisco.

I hail the choice of Santa Clara as the site of the new stadium. After all, the 49ers Practice Facility and Headquarters is in Santa Clara, so why not have the new stadium near to where the business of the team is run. Nobody had a tantrum when the Organization built their Corporate Headquarters and Sports Center in Santa Clara some 20 years ago! Why the fuss NOW?

Everything is so much better for a stadium to be built in Santa Clara where public transportation is already in place and where there are more large thoroughfares to feed into the stadium from many sources.

Santa Clara makes a lot of sense to me as the COMPLETE home of the 49ers!

Niner Mom :boxing: :go: :towel:

I emailed Senator Feinstein on the internet. I posted my email on one of the other threads about the hullabaloo that Feinstein made. Check it out and do likewise, if you feel the way I do about the proposed legislation she promised to initiate.

[Fromthe3rdRow]

Nice post Jan.

And I think I understand the problem here. I read something similar in the Merc the other day. It seems there are still a few old school residents of "Babylon by the Bay" who suffer from a superiority complex. They still seem to think the entire Universe revolves around their beloved beautiful city. While no one can deny the beauty of San Francisco, it is still a shame some residents are blinded to the fact that their fair city is no longer the center of the San Francisco Bay Area.

Silicon Valley has arrived and deserves it's due. But of course, those residents will still turn up their noses and refer to us as "The South Bay". Their city's leaders suffer from advanced stages of the disease. Newsome and his croonies seemed to think John York would willingly fund a complete redevelopment of Candlestick Point. They figured the allure of their cities name was so great, the Niners would happily double the cost of the project by paying for new roads, bridges, sewers, water and power required to supply a housing/shopping/entertainment/sports complex. They simply assume the Niners would be honored to reach even deeper into their pockets to remodel the Niner stadium plans to include track and field options that might possibly be put to Olympic use for a grand total of three weeks and then discarded.

SF leadership is so arrogant, they seemed to think they could convince the California legislature to change state laws to allow the Niners to build on land currently designated as a State Park. They need to understand the balance of power in the San Francisco Bay Area has shifted southward, along with the population shift, the technology shift, the economic shift and a political shift.

Old school SF residents need to wake up and understand the new world we live in here in the San Francisco Bay Area. Lew Wolfe - owner of the Oakland A's has seen the light. And that light was bright enough for John York to see as well.

Trying to deny the existance of plans for Santa Clara is down right silly - or perhaps, those old school residents were blinded by that light - the light of truth can do that sometimes .....

[bsy]

Having never been to the Bay Area (my loss), I am not aware of the city's politics, relations between the Giants and 49'ers, city geography, etc.

I see pics of AT&T stadium owned by a subsidiary of the SF Giants and I wonder if the 49'ers missed a golden opportunity.

It took them 3yrs to bulld it at a cost of $357mil and was completed in 2000.

Makes sense to me if the Giants and Niners had formed a joint subsidiary to develop the stadium for both baseball and football as well as other events. Maybe the city could have also been involved. But it seems to that the Giants did this on their own with no investment from the city. Is there precedence here?

Was there a reason for this not happening? Looks like a very nice, modern facility to me.

[Giedi]

In an effort to convince the San Francisco 49ers not to leave San Francisco, Lennar Corp. and city officials will present a mixed-use development and stadium plan for Candlestick Point at 11 a.m. Sunday at Lennar corporate offices, Lennar spokesman Sam Singer reports.

According to Singer, the plan calls for "a landmark stadium" for the 49ers and 6,500 new housing units in the Bayview Hunters Point area.

Singer says the plan allows for the creation of a field that will open up the city's waterfront and diminish game-day tailgating.

Singer says on Sunday, Lennar will unveil architectural designs and drawings showing the public the "urban, transit-oriented design that will benefit Bayview and Hunters Point residents and create new housing." The unveiling will take place at 49 Stevenson Street on the sixth floor.

"We've had very positive feedback from community leaders, they are pleased that we are helping the community create parks jobs and access to the bay," said Singer, though redevelopment in the Bayview and Hunters Point areas of San Francisco have been issues of contention.



Link: http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_315202300.html

I think this particular data proves that the 49ers and the City of San Francisco are in *SERIOUS* negotiatons with regards to some really GOOD plans.

I think Hunters Point & Candlestick will be a GREAT match for the city. You can say that York is adamant about leaving San Francisco and that Santa Clara is the *best* place for a Stadium, but I think York is willing to listen to some San Francisco ideas.


A presentation detailing a mixed-use development and stadium plan for Candlestick Point scheduled to be presented Sunday at Lennar corporate offices was called off early Sunday morning, Lennar spokesman Sam Singer said.

Singer said Sunday that the planned briefing is canceled to “continue discussions to keep the 49ers in San Francisco.”

Singer said on Saturday that the would-be plan called for “a landmark stadium” for the 49ers and 6,500 new housing units in the Bayview Hunters Point area, as well a field that would open up the city’s waterfront.

Singer had said architectural designs and drawings showing the public the “urban, transit-oriented design that will benefit Bayview and Hunters Point residents and create new housing” were going to be presented


Most likely why it was cancelled was probably to address the 49ers concern about tailgating and the parking garage. But like I said previously, these are all in the design stages yet. Nothing is set in stone and things can change. For all I know, they will fill in a part of the bay to create those parking places. <shrug> *I* don't know - but it's been done before.

So the Soap Opra continues. At least the Santa Clara deal is not a done deal. York can still recover from this knee jerk decision he's done. We'll see. Things look good for San Francisco though despite all the hoopla surrounding Santa Clara - the fact that the 49ers are committed to Candlestick point for another 3+ years is a GREAT leverage for the city vs. Santa Clara.

Giedi

[Giedi]

Having never been to the Bay Area (my loss), I am not aware of the city's politics, relations between the Giants and 49'ers, city geography, etc.

I see pics of AT&T stadium owned by a subsidiary of the SF Giants and I wonder if the 49'ers missed a golden opportunity.

It took them 3yrs to bulld it at a cost of $357mil and was completed in 2000.

Makes sense to me if the Giants and Niners had formed a joint subsidiary to develop the stadium for both baseball and football as well as other events. Maybe the city could have also been involved. But it seems to that the Giants did this on their own with no investment from the city. Is there precedence here?

Was there a reason for this not happening? Looks like a very nice, modern facility to me.

Giants were able to do it. George Lucas was able to build his multi million dollar Movie Studio complex at the Presidio, and why cant York build his Stadium in the Hunters Point/Candlestick Point area too. The Presidio and Hunters Point are *ACHING* to be re developed. Both these areas are closed down military bases and are serving NO function at all but a money drain for the city. But George took over the Presido and I think York has the opportunity to take over Hunters Point - lets hope he's learned his lessons and take the opportunity and not give it away.

In using Google Earth to look at Hunters Point, I think Hunters point is almost TWICE as large as Candlestick point. Just by looking at it by raw eyes. And its a point and juts out into the bay, so it's surrounded by water. I can just imagine a Stadium located right at the bay where at the highest seats, overlook the whole bay area and is out over the water. I know Giant's Stadium is right by the bay too, and those foul balls can be caught by the guys rowing around outside the stadium.

Giedi

[Giedi]

Nice post Jan.

And I think I understand the problem here. I read something similar in the Merc the other day. It seems there are still a few old school residents of "Babylon by the Bay" who suffer from a superiority complex. They still seem to think the entire Universe revolves around their beloved beautiful city. While no one can deny the beauty of San Francisco, it is still a shame some residents are blinded to the fact that their fair city is no longer the center of the San Francisco Bay Area.

Silicon Valley has arrived and deserves it's due. But of course, those residents will still turn up their noses and refer to us as "The South Bay". Their city's leaders suffer from advanced stages of the disease. Newsome and his croonies seemed to think John York would willingly fund a complete redevelopment of Candlestick Point. They figured the allure of their cities name was so great, the Niners would happily double the cost of the project by paying for new roads, bridges, sewers, water and power required to supply a housing/shopping/entertainment/sports complex. They simply assume the Niners would be honored to reach even deeper into their pockets to remodel the Niner stadium plans to include track and field options that might possibly be put to Olympic use for a grand total of three weeks and then discarded.

SF leadership is so arrogant, they seemed to think they could convince the California legislature to change state laws to allow the Niners to build on land currently designated as a State Park. They need to understand the balance of power in the San Francisco Bay Area has shifted southward, along with the population shift, the technology shift, the economic shift and a political shift.

Old school SF residents need to wake up and understand the new world we live in here in the San Francisco Bay Area. Lew Wolfe - owner of the Oakland A's has seen the light. And that light was bright enough for John York to see as well.

Trying to deny the existance of plans for Santa Clara is down right silly - or perhaps, those old school residents were blinded by that light - the light of truth can do that sometimes .....

Personally I don't think it's arrogance. I think it's reality that San Francisco draws som many tourists and has a world wide presence. Sure there is Santa Clara - which used to be farmland - and they have the high tech centers and such, but San Francisco has the bay. San Francisco has the waterfront land to build on. Sure it will be expensive, but it will pay for itself with its ability to draw people to it. I remember malls being built in the middle of nowhere, and soon after the neighborhood began to surround them and after about a half a decade - the Malls were totally surrounded by business and residences.

If you look at Candlestick Point, Hunters Point, and the Brisbane area - that's all pretty much run down buildings and vacant land. It's ripe for a good idea.

I totally agree with anybody who says that it will be cheaper and eaiser to build in Santa Clara - no arguments from me there. But George Lucas could have built his movie studio in Santa Clara - yet chose the Presidio? Why is that? It's the draw of the city - that's why. Sony could have built the Metreon in Santa Clara yet chose San Francisco. Westfiedl Mall could have built another mall in Santa Clara yet chose to redevelop the Emporium and go through all the San Francisco red tape to build the Westfield Mall in San Francisco. York should do the same - its a GOOD buiness move.

Giedi

[Hopper15]

Where exactly was Steve Mariucci taking the team? The Superbowl? HC's don't get a lot of chances to fail in the NFL. Replacing him was Terry Donahue's job. Not York's.

Neither did Eddie Debartolo. Eddie Hired Bill Walsh to make all the football decisions. He was fortunate that Walsh turned out to be a football genius. There was no reason to believe so when he hired him. Eddie's first hire, Joe Thomas, wasn't such a wise choice.

York has followed much the same path. A non-football guy trying to find the right people to make his team win. His first attempt (brining back Bill Walsh) was a smart idea, but it was the wrong time for Walsh, and Walsh's decisions led to far more problems to overcome - especially his recommendation of Donahue to succeed him as GM.

All the faults of York can also be found in Debartolo - and more.

Ugh to the playoffs !

[fabie]

Personally I don't think it's arrogance. I think it's reality that San Francisco draws som many tourists and has a world wide presence. Sure there is Santa Clara - which used to be farmland - and they have the high tech centers and such, but San Francisco has the bay. San Francisco has the waterfront land to build on. Sure it will be expensive, but it will pay for itself with its ability to draw people to it. I remember malls being built in the middle of nowhere, and soon after the neighborhood began to surround them and after about a half a decade - the Malls were totally surrounded by business and residences.

If you look at Candlestick Point, Hunters Point, and the Brisbane area - that's all pretty much run down buildings and vacant land. It's ripe for a good idea.

I totally agree with anybody who says that it will be cheaper and eaiser to build in Santa Clara - no arguments from me there. But George Lucas could have built his movie studio in Santa Clara - yet chose the Presidio? Why is that? It's the draw of the city - that's why. Sony could have built the Metreon in Santa Clara yet chose San Francisco. Westfiedl Mall could have built another mall in Santa Clara yet chose to redevelop the Emporium and go through all the San Francisco red tape to build the Westfield Mall in San Francisco. York should do the same - its a GOOD buiness move.

Giediperhaps it is cheaper in terms of taxes too?

[The Vin]

If you look at Candlestick Point, Hunters Point, and the Brisbane area - that's all pretty much run down buildings and vacant land. It's ripe for a good idea.



Those places maybe run down and in need of renovation, but the problem is that renovating those areas with a stadium plan hasn't really gelled with what the Yorks believe will deliver a gameday experience to the fans. I'm sure that if those places were viable, didn't increase stadium costs, and if the city didn't try to pile on more infrastructure onto the 49ers they would consider. But right now, the current stadium sight would require all kinds of development that won't really contribute to the kind of state of the art football experience. Now if the city were to compromise, pitch in on their end, and work with the Yorks I am sure something will get done. But as it stands, it's unfair to the team to levy all the renovation costs of an area and have the team takeaway features of the stadium they want to build just to appease the city and stay in that area.

Also, in regards to the draw of the city versus the draw of Santa Clara, I'm actually kind of interested in that. The city has its name, popularity, and tourism. But unlike the Metreon (which Sony had to sell off), the 49ers stadium is going to have a fixed revenue every season from 49er fans. And for that reason, I would think that having the best and most accessible stadium nearest to the Bay Area is more important than building exactly in the heart of San Francisco.

[bsy]

Giants were able to do it. George Lucas was able to build his multi million dollar Movie Studio complex at the Presidio, and why cant York build his Stadium in the Hunters Point/Candlestick Point area too. The Presidio and Hunters Point are *ACHING* to be re developed. Both these areas are closed down military bases and are serving NO function at all but a money drain for the city. But George took over the Presido and I think York has the opportunity to take over Hunters Point - lets hope he's learned his lessons and take the opportunity and not give it away.

In using Google Earth to look at Hunters Point, I think Hunters point is almost TWICE as large as Candlestick point. Just by looking at it by raw eyes. And its a point and juts out into the bay, so it's surrounded by water. I can just imagine a Stadium located right at the bay where at the highest seats, overlook the whole bay area and is out over the water. I know Giant's Stadium is right by the bay too, and those foul balls can be caught by the guys rowing around outside the stadium.

Giedi

Sorry. I don't know the area so can't really comments on hunter's point. I guess you could look at it two ways:

1-Since the giants built their own stadium, why can't the niners?
2-Since the city got a break when the giants financed their own stadium and stayed in SF, the city should take the lead on building a new stadium and put up all the money or the majority.

[5decadefan]

I've been reading this thread with interest and i have few points to make.

I finally saw a money figure for the housing and other infrastructure costs. I'd been wondering about this since since I already had the estimated costs for the rest of the project. Here's the costs that I've seen written about in the papers.

the new stadium...............$800 mil
the parking garage..............800 mil
housing, retail & roads.........765 mil
-----------
total (so far) $2,365,000,000

I can't remember for sure but I think that the NFL has said that they will contribute 150 mil _IF_ the community puts up an equal amount.

So far, I haven't seen San Francisco do that. Someone has already posted that the city or county wants the 49ers to take that 100 mil bond before the voters again, at an additional cost of millions of dollars to the 49ers.

As far as I know, the city, county, and state governments have offered ZERO financial help to the 49ers (other than that now tentative bond). And, nothing else has been offered up either. This impossible deal has been going on for a decade now and it's not going to change. Californians initiated the concept of not liking to share their wealth when they passed Proposition 13 decades ago and that tight-fistedness (is that a real word?) remains. Also, the entire San Francisco Bay area is full of individuals and groups who each have their own agendas and they don't hesitate to politicize them. I can see why the Yorks have given up and are now trying to get a stadium built in Santa Clara. I support that decision. I have been a 49er fan for over 50 years and they will still be the San Francisco 49ers (and NOT the "niners"--you can shove it Chris Berman) for me, even if their new stadium is located down the peninsula.

5decadefan

[AlexSmith5rings]

I've been reading this thread with interest and i have few points to make.

I finally saw a money figure for the housing and other infrastructure costs. I'd been wondering about this since since I already had the estimated costs for the rest of the project. Here's the costs that I've seen written about in the papers.

the new stadium...............$800 mil
the parking garage..............800 mil
housing, retail & roads.........765 mil
-----------
total (so far) $2,365,000,000

I can't remember for sure but I think that the NFL has said that they will contribute 150 mil _IF_ the community puts up an equal amount.

So far, I haven't seen San Francisco do that. Someone has already posted that the city or county wants the 49ers to take that 100 mil bond before the voters again, at an additional cost of millions of dollars to the 49ers.

As far as I know, the city, county, and state governments have offered ZERO financial help to the 49ers (other than that now tentative bond). And, nothing else has been offered up either. This impossible deal has been going on for a decade now and it's not going to change. Californians initiated the concept of not liking to share their wealth when they passed Proposition 13 decades ago and that tight-fistedness (is that a real word?) remains. Also, the entire San Francisco Bay area is full of individuals and groups who each have their own agendas and they don't hesitate to politicize them. I can see why the Yorks have given up and are now trying to get a stadium built in Santa Clara. I support that decision. I have been a 49er fan for over 50 years and they will still be the San Francisco 49ers (and NOT the "niners"--you can shove it Chris Berman) for me, even if their new stadium is located down the peninsula.

5decadefan
what did chris berman say 5decadefan?

[bsy]

I've been reading this thread with interest and i have few points to make.

I finally saw a money figure for the housing and other infrastructure costs. I'd been wondering about this since since I already had the estimated costs for the rest of the project. Here's the costs that I've seen written about in the papers.

the new stadium...............$800 mil
the parking garage..............800 mil
housing, retail & roads.........765 mil
-----------
total (so far) $2,365,000,000

I can't remember for sure but I think that the NFL has said that they will contribute 150 mil _IF_ the community puts up an equal amount.

So far, I haven't seen San Francisco do that. Someone has already posted that the city or county wants the 49ers to take that 100 mil bond before the voters again, at an additional cost of millions of dollars to the 49ers.

As far as I know, the city, county, and state governments have offered ZERO financial help to the 49ers (other than that now tentative bond). And, nothing else has been offered up either. This impossible deal has been going on for a decade now and it's not going to change. Californians initiated the concept of not liking to share their wealth when they passed Proposition 13 decades ago and that tight-fistedness (is that a real word?) remains. Also, the entire San Francisco Bay area is full of individuals and groups who each have their own agendas and they don't hesitate to politicize them. I can see why the Yorks have given up and are now trying to get a stadium built in Santa Clara. I support that decision. I have been a 49er fan for over 50 years and they will still be the San Francisco 49ers (and NOT the "niners"--you can shove it Chris Berman) for me, even if their new stadium is located down the peninsula.

5decadefan

Woah! That'a lot of sheckles. How the hell did the Giants build their stadium for $357mil just a few years ago??

[BY97]

Woah! That'a lot of sheckles. How the hell did the Giants build their stadium for $357mil just a few years ago??
Easy. It's a 45,000 seat ballpark rather than an 80,000 seat football stadium. Also, they didn't build a parking garage... of even a parking lot of any significance, deciding to instead rely on public transportation. It also didn't involve a mall or housing.

[bsy]

Easy. It's a 45,000 seat ballpark rather than an 80,000 seat football stadium. Also, they didn't build a parking garage... of even a parking lot of any significance, deciding to instead rely on public transportation. It also didn't involve a mall or housing.

Hmm. Well, I don't know about a mall being absolutey necessary, so if you had to, you could scratch that off.

Only 45,000? That's not much. But I'm assuming they based that on average attendance numbers so again they might have made the right decision.

So, if one wants to drive to AT&T Park, where does one park?

I wonder. Are most san franciscans happy with AT&T Park?

[Niner Jan]

Since the giants built their own stadium, why can't the Niners?

This will be privately funded, as well. There is really a lot of information about the stadium in the videos that are on 49ers.com. Then CBS put out a video of the entire press conference the day or two after the elections.

Be my guest! Listen and watch! :yahoo: :go: :towel:

[Niner Jan]

But George Lucas could have built his movie studio in Santa Clara - yet chose the Presidio? Why is that? It's the draw of the city - that's why.

It could also have been that the Presidio was EMPTY and available AS IS due to so many military bases closing. Ya think, maybe?

Which reminds me of something else. Was the NASA area (Moffett Field) ever converted to some other public use? I didn't keep up with all that, sorry to say.

Niner Mom

[1st2Five]

I'm sure many 49ers fans are scratching their heads over the angst of the politicos in SF caused by the Niners organization's intentions to build their new stadium in Santa Clara.

Newsom knows that having the distinction of being the mayor that lost the SF 49ers could possibly hurt any political aspirations he may have beyond the city limits.

I personally don't care about him or his aspirations -- though his recent statement that he has a Niners football on his bed that he plays with every night before going to sleep gives me an insight into why his marriage may have foundered -- but I care very much about his threats to the Niners organization, and specifically those that threaten me as a fan.

I sent the following letter to him after reading his comments in the paper last week. I suggest that you consider letting him know your feelings about pulling police services and transportation support, especially if you attend games. I guess he thinks this will hurt the 49ers organization more than it will the fans. And we think we have a dumb President???

gavin.newsom@sfgov.org

Take care Faithful.

1st2Five (aka 49RSRUL!)

With all due respect Mayor Newsom, you are not doing yourself or the City any public relations good by threatening to make life difficult for the team if it continues to pursue options for building a stadium outside of SF. According to the Mercury News,

"The mayor said that if having its new stadium in an urban area is not enough to tempt the team into staying, the city could play hard ball by withholding essential services such as game day police protection and rerouted buses until the 49ers lease runs out in 2008."

As a 49ers Faithful and season ticket holder, it really irritates me that you and the other politically motivated government representatives are making such empty threats without regard for the impact to the team’s fans. We are the ones who have supported the team through thick and thin; and we are the ones who deal with the hardships that only the Candlestick experience could possibly provide on game day. It’s our hard-earned money that supports the SF 49ers and pays the bills.

Bottom-line: we’re a pretty hardy, committed bunch and we don’t scare too easily. It’s more than a little galling that you would even raise such a fuss about the team leaving after the City’s decades of neglect. This team that was the first to achieve 5 Super Bowl Championships plays each home game in the oldest, most decrepit stadium in the league. And yet 49ers fans ensure sold out games each season. The rest of the City’s elected officials haven’t cared before so are we to believe that suddenly you do? Have you even ever attended a Niners game??

Do what you were elected to do and serve the public. Let the Niners go where they will receive the treatment they deserve. Let them build a stadium that will provide its fan base the best game day experience possible. It’s not up to you Mayor Newsom, Ms. Feinstein, or Ms. Pelosi. We would all have preferred a new stadium at Candlestick Point. But it’s too late. You waited too long to act and do the right thing. Now the 49ers organization is acting and doing the right thing. Just let it go. Let my Niners go.

[Fromthe3rdRow]

Nice letter!

Good job.

[Peter Proud]

Mr. Mayor wants to 'pull city services?

Please, start with that group of Nazis that run the parking concessions in the dirt lots!:hunter:

[Niner Jan]

10 points for you, buddy! Your letter was excellent and to the point--where I hope it HURTS the politicians in SF:

Bottom-line: we’re a pretty hardy, committed bunch and we don’t scare too easily. It’s more than a little galling that you would even raise such a fuss about the team leaving after the City’s decades of neglect. This team that was the first to achieve 5 Super Bowl Championships plays each home game in the oldest, most decrepit stadium in the league. And yet 49ers fans ensure sold out games each season. The rest of the City’s elected officials haven’t cared before so are we to believe that suddenly you do? Have you even ever attended a Niners game??

Do what you were elected to do and serve the public. Let the Niners go where they will receive the treatment they deserve. Let them build a stadium that will provide its fan base the best game day experience possible. It’s not up to you Mayor Newsom, Ms. Feinstein, or Ms. Pelosi. We would all have preferred a new stadium at Candlestick Point. But it’s too late. You waited too long to act and do the right thing. Now the 49ers organization is acting and doing the right thing. Just let it go. Let my Niners go.

Seeing Nancy's name reminds me that I have to amend my Feinstein email and send one to her, too.

Niner Mom :yahoo: