Feinstein, York at lunch: Main course, 49ers plan to move(Article)

[ethanh]

The temperature could get a little warm at the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce's annual 49ers booster luncheon today, as Sen. Dianne Feinstein takes the stage with a call for team owners John and Denise York to keep the Niners in the city.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/29/BAVHRQRRD.DTL

http://eastbay.bizjournals.com/eastbay/stories/2007/08/27/daily40.html?jst=b_ln_hl


The team wants to build a new stadium by 2012 and is proposing a project in Santa Clara, a suburb 40 miles south of the team's home at Monster Park in San Francisco.

Forty-niners officials said they have not ruled out staying in San Francisco, the team's home since it was founded in 1946. "We've never turned our back on San Francisco," said York. "We'll continue to listen" to proposals from the city.

After the team rejected a proposal to build a new stadium at Candlestick Point, San Francisco officials suggested the team build a new facility in Hunters Point, a former naval base.

Contaminants in the soil in that area would need to be cleaned up before a stadium is built. Feinstein said she and other Bay Area elected officials are pulling together federal funds for that purpose.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said "extraordinary" progress has been made since December that could allow the 49ers to build a stadium at Hunters Point. Navy officials have told the city that the area could be cleaned up in time for the team to finish building a stadium by 2012. Feinstein also said San Francisco officials will present the team with a more detailed building plan soon.

I wonder how the 49ers boosters, alumni, fans ext.. will react to her and Newsom's statements. I could see them getting cheered and it being very awkward for York or I could see them getting booed by those thinking it is not the time or place to make the statements. Anyone who is there please give an account.

[Hopper15]

I wish we had a owner like Jerry Jones, we'd already be started on building a new stadium by now. But instead all we hear is talk, talk, talk, more talk and no action.

[Peter Proud]

Feinstein, a big Niners fan and equally big critic of the Yorks' proposed move to Santa Clara, tells us she plans to use the event at the Hyatt Regency to urge the 49er faithfulto break their silence, "rally forth and convince Mr. York that San Francisco is the place to be."

Ms Feinstein needs to remember who the 49er Faithful are...or rather where they live....which 90% of the STH's don't live in San Francisco and they are part of the 49er Faithful!

[Roaring Back]

I wish we had a owner like Jerry Jones, we'd already be started on building a new stadium by now. But instead all we hear is talk, talk, talk, more talk and no action.

Yes, and we'd have a different coach every year who had no authority, and that owner would choose all of the draft picks and play for the camera in the draft day war room, and he'd sign toxic free agents, and he'd pace the sidelines on Sundays undermining the coaching staff, and....

No thank you.

[49Faithful]

Yes, and we'd have a different coach every year who had no authority, and that owner would choose all of the draft picks and play for the camera in the draft day war room, and he'd sign toxic free agents, and he'd pace the sidelines on Sundays undermining the coaching staff, and....

No thank you.

:clapping:

[ethanh]

Ms Feinstein needs to remember who the 49er Faithful are...or rather where they live....which 90% of the STH's don't live in San Francisco and they are part of the 49er Faithful!
Not everyone wants to remove the team from SF just so they can save traffic time. Some STH feel the franchise will be losing a lot if the team moves away from a world class city that caries their name and draws millions every year.

I think the owner owes it to the fans to get us the best stadium possible, not the best one we can squeeze into San Francisco city limits.
Not sure why you think this is a good sig? Are the 49ers not trying to squeeze the stadium in a small parking lot in SC where there are clearly parking issues?

[49Faithful]

Feinstein, a big Niners fan and equally big critic of the Yorks' proposed move to Santa Clara, tells us she plans to use the event at the Hyatt Regency to urge the 49er faithfulto break their silence, "rally forth and convince Mr. York that San Francisco is the place to be."

Ms Feinstein needs to remember who the 49er Faithful are...or rather where they live....which 90% of the STH's don't live in San Francisco and they are part of the 49er Faithful!

Plus she used to be Mayor of San Francisco, Newsom is also her golden boy and she wants to stop anything that would make him look bad.

[49Faithful]

Not everyone wants to remove the team from SF just so they can save traffic time. Some STH feel the franchise will be losing a lot if the team moves away from a world class city that caries their name and draws millions every year.

Is the key word. I believe most would rather have a nice stadium and a city that wants us there and not just for our money. The 49ers would not lose anything unless a name chance was forced but I dont think the people of the bay area would stand for that.

[Teke]

Ms Feinstein needs to remember who the 49er Faithful are...or rather where they live....which 90% of the STH's don't live in San Francisco and they are part of the 49er Faithful!

This always gets brought up but it's a moot point. Where the fans live should have absolutely no bearing on where the team is going to put its stadium. I'm sure there are a lot of Cowboys and Rams fans in California. Does that mean they should have their new stadiums in California? As long as the 49ers are in the general area of their fan base it doesn't matter. S.F. or SC are both fine for 49er fans.

[fabie]

This is all TALK! WHAT'S ON THE MENU on this luncheon?! That is the question! :laugh:

[49Faithful]

This is all TALK! WHAT'S ON THE MENU on this luncheon?! That is the question! :laugh:

Meatball sub from Togo's:this:

[arch]

not that this will matter one way or another, but I watched the Monday night pre-season game vs the Broncos and they had excellent night shots of the city. It really looked like a world class city comparable to London or Paris.

Then I watched part of the Raider home game vs. the Rams and they showed views of Oakland. Well...it looked like Oakalnd alright.

If the niners do play in Santa Clara, my guess is they'll show Great America, Intel, and all the really easy ways to get to the stadium :wink: :whistling: :stirthepot:

[Peter Proud]

Not everyone wants to remove the team from SF just so they can save traffic time. Some STH feel the franchise will be losing a lot if the team moves away from a world class city that caries their name and draws millions every year.


Not sure why you think this is a good sig? Are the 49ers not trying to squeeze the stadium in a small parking lot in SC where there are clearly parking issues?

The signature doesn't say anything about SC....just what should be the owner's focus....'the best stadium possible'! My point is that the 49er faithful isn't limited to the citizens of San Francisco, not have they been silent.

This always gets brought up but it's a moot point. Where the fans live should have absolutely no bearing on where the team is going to put its stadium. I'm sure there are a lot of Cowboys and Rams fans in California. Does that mean they should have their new stadiums in California? As long as the 49ers are in the general area of their fan base it doesn't matter. S.F. or SC are both fine for 49er fans.

Again, the owner should get the best stadium possible. Fans that drive a distance will continue to drive. For me being 2 hours away, 2-3 miles doesn't make a difference. I agree with your last sentence....it's Ms. Feinstein's reference to the 49er faithful as if they only reside in the immediate area.

If you have what people want, they'll come get it.

[sandiegojoe]

not that this will matter one way or another, but I watched the Monday night pre-season game vs the Broncos and they had excellent night shots of the city. It really looked like a world class city comparable to London or Paris.

Then I watched part of the Raider home game vs. the Rams and they showed views of Oakland. Well...it looked like Oakalnd alright.

If the niners do play in Santa Clara, my guess is they'll show Great America, Intel, and all the really easy ways to get to the stadium :wink: :whistling: :stirthepot:

mebbe. THey'll probably still show SF though. San Diego shows all sorts of downtown shots, and beach shots that are a good 15 miles away from the stadium, and the chargers are considering moving about 20-30 miles away from downtown.

I'm sure they'll still show the same aerial shots down there afterwards too.

[co2112]

Just break ground on something, we needed this to start 8-10 years ago when the Giants left the Stick.

[Hopper15]

Yes, and we'd have a different coach every year who had no authority, and that owner would choose all of the draft picks and play for the camera in the draft day war room, and he'd sign toxic free agents, and he'd pace the sidelines on Sundays undermining the coaching staff, and....

No thank you.

Speak for yourself, Jones is the best owner in the league.

[ethanh]

http://eastbay.bizjournals.com/eastb...ml?jst=b_ln_hl

An update on what was said although no mentione of reaction from the boosters.

[Rattlehead]

This is the common sense I was talking about in my thread. Sooner or later people in charge will understand what it means for the city to have the Niners and what it means to the Niners to be in the city. IMHO it's unthinkable to move a 61 year old franchise from its roots. Madness! But the ball is slowly starting to roll in the right direction. Better late than never. We'll get through this. Afterall, common sense is exactly what SF is known for. In all walks of life.

[TheWiz]

I wish we had a owner like Jerry Jones, we'd already be started on building a new stadium by now. But instead all we hear is talk, talk, talk, more talk and no action.

Now that's funny. You know what happened when the Cowboy's wanted to move? First the city did a study on whether they even wanted or could handle a stadium (i.e feasibility study). Then the Cowboy's had to get the city's approval and then had to spend months working out the financing details. You know, it took nearly 2 years from when they said they wanted to build a new stadium until it was finalized. The perception that anyone does it any faster than anyone else is only created by the fact that you didn't pay attention to their stadium ordeal and believe it happened quickly. Also, it's being built in TEXAS where open land is more abundant than fresh water.

Not everyone wants to remove the team from SF just so they can save traffic time. Some STH feel the franchise will be losing a lot if the team moves away from a world class city that caries their name and draws millions every year.

And those same STH's will be the first ones to complain about how bad the traffic and/or condition of a new stadium is if it were built on any of the proposed SF city sites.


Not sure why you think this is a good sig? Are the 49ers not trying to squeeze the stadium in a small parking lot in SC where there are clearly parking issues?

Funny how it is suddenly a 'small parking lot'. Candlestick by the way is just on 'some tiny peninsula'. See, it's easy to use adjectives to make anything look as bad as you want.

not that this will matter one way or another, but I watched the Monday night pre-season game vs the Broncos and they had excellent night shots of the city. It really looked like a world class city comparable to London or Paris.

Then I watched part of the Raider home game vs. the Rams and they showed views of Oakland. Well...it looked like Oakalnd alright.

If the niners do play in Santa Clara, my guess is they'll show Great America, Intel, and all the really easy ways to get to the stadium :wink: :whistling: :stirthepot:

Okay, this is stupid, sorry. So, we should base our choice of stadium entirely upon how nice you think the surrounding landscape is? So if the team built a world class, 85k seat mega-stadium that was the envy of the league for decades, we shouldn't because on TV the landscape shots may not be as neat? At what point does a fan who actually attends a game spend his time starting away from the field to admire a 'nice skyline'? Placing skyline high on the list is like placing 'nice hubcaps' as a priority for a new car purchase.

Just break ground on something, we needed this to start 8-10 years ago when the Giants left the Stick.

We did start something 10 years ago. Then the oft-lauded owner got indicted on federal charges, lost all control of his team while under investigation, and had to sell the team to his sister. That led to the team having no influence in the mayor's office and replaced a deep-pocketed owner with one who barely had the finances to buy the team. Within short time the company behind the deal went bankrupt and it all fell apart.

This is the common sense I was talking about in my thread. Sooner or later people in charge will understand what it means for the city to have the Niners and what it means to the Niners to be in the city. IMHO it's unthinkable to move a 61 year old franchise from its roots. Madness! But the ball is slowly starting to roll in the right direction. Better late than never. We'll get through this. Afterall, common sense is exactly what SF is known for. In all walks of life.

Common sense? COMMON SENSE? "We have more tradition than any other ballclub in any sport. Everyone knows this!" is common sense?

What ball? I see no ball. The ball is in your head rolling around with dreams that we are magically fans of the only team with 'tradition'. I think it may have replaced all of the marbles that were up there. There is no ball. You want a ball? Within the month the Santa Clara city council will be voting on the feasibility study. If they approve it about the only thing keeping the team out would be a proposed public vote that by straw polls would be a landslide victory for the team. So, if there is a ball, it's rolling down the bay towards Santa Clara, not back up Lombard street. When the team actually suffers a setback, then you'll have your ball.

I understand that you think the team should stay in San Francisco. I'm sure many people want them to stay there. But you can't demand a team sticks to a region with no room to house it. I think people forget about how badly the current mayor has treated the team. Beyond his administration failing to follow the lease to maintain the teams current home, he also ignored the team's efforts to build a stadium in the city until the team announced its decision to move! Does no one remember the "The Yorks are backstabbers" speeches he made when it had been publically told by the team and in Bay Area news all August that the team had Santa Clara as a secondary site. It wasn't until it was clear that his popularity and job were on the line that he paid attention.

The team has spent many years trying to work out sites in San Francisco. The best the city has to offer is Hunter's Point, even they aren't trying to pitch the idea of Renovations or a Candlestick location. Meanwhile, it's just not a superior site to Santa Clara. Maybe you want a stadium next to a housing project and built on contaminated soil. It would be fun, the waterboy would wear a haz-mat suit. and we could be co-sponsored by the CDC. But the team would lose money through the nose with such a venture and believe it or not, despite your bleeding heart, the team is a business, not a public trust.

If you want a ball, get a grassroots organization together and get every STH to agree to pay twice the amount for the rights to a seat in a new stadium. Then go to the games this year and get ticket holders to agree to a 20% ticket price increase. When that's done, you'll have the evidence that the team should give up potentially large profits to build a stadium in a less affluent location.

[ethanh]

Wiz i have been wondering when you were going to post. You let the Newsome KNBR propaganda thread slide but not the senator luncheon? So I am curious what you make of the push from the city/senator. Is it just lip service to save face for losing the team to SC or is York feeling any heat? He said today," he never abandoned the city," an attempt to stay out of the headlines. Clearly, by York pulling out of the purposed Olympic idea (however flawed) he did do some abandoning leaving the city shocked. But, is there any reason to think this push by the city will have any effect. I would think if there was enough bad PR (deserved?) it could not be good for the 49ers.


P.S. You know the SC site is a tight squeeze, could it hold a stadium, yes. Is it ideal? No

[TheWiz]

Wiz i have been wondering when you were going to post. You let the Newsome KNBR propaganda thread slide but not the senator luncheon? So I am curious what you make of the push from the city/senator. Is it just lip service to save face for losing the team to SC or is York feeling any heat? He said today," he never abandoned the city," an attempt to stay out of the headlines. Clearly, by York pulling out of the purposed Olympic idea (however flawed) he did do some abandoning leaving the city shocked. But, is there any reason to think this push by the city will have any effect. I would think if there was enough bad PR (deserved?) it could not be good for the 49ers.


P.S. You know the SC site is a tight squeeze, could it hold a stadium, yes. Is it ideal? No

Unfortunately I don't find some sports radio as interesting as a senator that actually criticizes a team at its own function.

They should not be any heat felt. It's ridiculous to think the city has any leverage in making the team feel guilty. The last stadium the city provided was Kezar which did its job for as long as it could. Meanwhile, they've had the team in a deteriorating subpar baseball stadium for over 3 decades. It's fair to say that the city has reaped millions from the team. Championships, tourism, charities and public image, the team has been a major boon and benefit to the city and the bay area. I know I'm repeating myself. The city also barely even supported a 100M bond measure a decade ago to help the team out that had given them so much in return. The city also more or less turned on the team after Eddie left because we were politically taboo.

Every turn the city has done its least and has definitely not helped the club financially. I think it's ridiculous and rude to expect a private organization for which you've done so little and gotten so much to feel guilt. It's not like the city is giving us a good offer to stay, they can't even give us a location! In the end, we're playing nice though. The team has more than enough ammo to shoot barbs back but we won't. At least not until we're ready to move to Santa Clara and those politicians try to spin the story to get re-elected.

Also, with regards to the Olympic concept, that itself was politics. On top of how little the city has given the team, the team should build a stadium for the city to host the olympics? The city would stand to reap tens of millions in profits from hosting such an event. The team? NOTHING. Sorry but that entire debacle was only proof that San Francisco had no shot to begin with and even with a new stadium, there is no guarantee that the United States bid would even beat international ones.

At this point, the more the city pushes, the more they look like whining children. It also looks more like desparation as the time goes on too. But I'm sure it will get very vitriolic if and when we do finalize a deal in Santa Clara.

[prospector]

Agree 100%. The City had decades to make a substantial effort to keep the 49ers and did nil. The idea that the 49ers pulling out ruins SF's Olympics bid is laughable. If the SF is concerned about the Olympics, organize the construction of a stadium and give the 49ers a decent deal. What passive aggressive crap. It is amusing to see these political hacks puff up and try to go on the attack now, when the game is all but over. I can't wait until the cast of retards on the board of supes start to act up.

I love the city of Ess Eff, heck I'm even a native, but the team and it's fans would be better served in Santa Clara. It wouldn't hurt San Franciscans to commute down 101 to see their team. The City can posture all it wants, but there is no way in hell the 49ers will have up the name 'San Francisco' as long as we're willing to fight for it.

[Roaring Back]

Speak for yourself, Jones is the best owner in the league.

Why?

[49Faithful]

Why?

Because he is a Cowgirl fan.:whistling:

[Rattlehead]

Common sense? COMMON SENSE? "We have more tradition than any other ballclub in any sport. Everyone knows this!" is common sense?

I'm getting on your nerves, good! Finally someone rattles the mighty Wiz! Besides, I never said we have more tradition than anyone else. I said we have more tradition than 80% of the NFL. We are one of the few teams with tradition.

What ball? I see no ball. The ball is in your head rolling around with dreams that we are magically fans of the only team with 'tradition'. I think it may have replaced all of the marbles that were up there. There is no ball. You want a ball? Within the month the Santa Clara city council will be voting on the feasibility study. If they approve it about the only thing keeping the team out would be a proposed public vote that by straw polls would be a landslide victory for the team. So, if there is a ball, it's rolling down the bay towards Santa Clara, not back up Lombard street. When the team actually suffers a setback, then you'll have your ball.

This is really a desperate segment in your post. Besides, you don't have to get rude. I mean, just because you can't see the big picture doesn't mean you have to try and ridicule me.

I understand that you think the team should stay in San Francisco. I'm sure many people want them to stay there. But you can't demand a team sticks to a region with no room to house it. I think people forget about how badly the current mayor has treated the team. Beyond his administration failing to follow the lease to maintain the teams current home, he also ignored the team's efforts to build a stadium in the city until the team announced its decision to move! Does no one remember the "The Yorks are backstabbers" speeches he made when it had been publically told by the team and in Bay Area news all August that the team had Santa Clara as a secondary site. It wasn't until it was clear that his popularity and job were on the line that he paid attention.

See, this is much better reasoning by you. This should not be about politics or who did what and when. Afterall, that's totally off the mark when it comes to the important issue at stake. Two wrongs don't make a right but maybe in this case it's going to be an exemption.

No room to house it? BS! Tear down the 'stick. There's your room. No overgrown baseball/football hybrid. It's going to be taller and not as bulky.

The team has spent many years trying to work out sites in San Francisco. The best the city has to offer is Hunter's Point, even they aren't trying to pitch the idea of Renovations or a Candlestick location. Meanwhile, it's just not a superior site to Santa Clara. Maybe you want a stadium next to a housing project and built on contaminated soil. It would be fun, the waterboy would wear a haz-mat suit. and we could be co-sponsored by the CDC. But the team would lose money through the nose with such a venture and believe it or not, despite your bleeding heart, the team is a business, not a public trust.

It doesn't matter how many years they spent. It matters what they decide now and the previous plans and evaluations should not be considered or counted. They were what they were, no more, no less. Hunters Point is my last alternative but it still beats SC by lightyears.

You bring up the money issue again?! When will it get through your head that money isn't a factor in the NFL anymore. It's only a factor for players. Not for teams and team owners. Every team owner in the NFL could spend more money than they are allowed to do. They can't. The value of the rosters is a just a small percentage of every owners' expenses over a season. They make money anyway and they would continue to make money if the salary cap was raised by 100%.

If you want a ball, get a grassroots organization together and get every STH to agree to pay twice the amount for the rights to a seat in a new stadium. Then go to the games this year and get ticket holders to agree to a 20% ticket price increase. When that's done, you'll have the evidence that the team should give up potentially large profits to build a stadium in a less affluent location.

How is the city a less affluent location compared to Santa Clara? Are you kidding me! Besides I don't need a grassroots organization. I know most fans of the Niners agree with me. The waters haven't really been tested yet regarding this matter.