On Tuesday, Santa Clara’s City Council/Stadium Authority is expected to approve a small procedural change in the financing for the 49ers stadium. The change is fairly simple: Allow the 49ers to sell the naming rights to the stadium instead of the Stadium Authority. Doing so could reduce overhead for the Authority, which is important since it has no money of its own with which to operate.

Under the terms of the agreement (PDF), the 49ers – er, Stadco – would have 2 years to get the naming rights deal done before the task reverts back to the Authority. If a broker is used and is successful in getting the deal, it would get 5% of the top. The top of what, you ask? Well, the City isn’t willing to say. But they and the team have had a number in mind going back to when the stadium concept was hatched. Remember this?

$7 million a year for 40 years. That’s $280 million, or 40% of the $700 million naming rights deal announced two months ago between AEG and Farmers. The 49ers could be gunning for a higher figure because of what the Farmers Field deal represents. Then again, TBA Stadium won’t be domed so it won’t be flexible enough to hold nearly as many events, so perhaps a 40% deal is in order. If the 49ers have an on-the-DL Raiders agreement in their back pocket, it could provide impetus towards a higher number. Any increase over that $7 million per year figure could reduce pressure to sell Seat Builder Licenses (PSLs), which could in turn make financing the whole thing much more feasible.

The article mentions Yahoo! as a neighbor, though not as a naming rights partner. In 2007 I heard that Yahoo! was the likely candidate, though the company has since been knocked down several pegs and is still in a state of recovery. At this point they may not be the best choice, though they are certainly no fly-by-night operation. Intel may be a better partner, as would – you guessed it – Cisco. Both Intel and Cisco advertise heavily on ESPN and on other national sports broadcasts, so this would be right up their alley. However, you have to wonder about what Cisco’s possible deal with the A’s represents. Is Cisco’s naming rights worth more if the ballpark is in San Jose, not Fremont, and not tied to a land deal? Possibly. Would Intel or Cisco pay more than twice as much for naming rights to a NFL stadium than a MLB ballpark? That’s unclear. As much as I thought that the days of throwing funny money at stadia were over, the Farmers deal went and reset the playing field – even if it never gets built. We’ll find out over the next couple of years if it’s merely an outlier or the start of a trend.

On a tangentially related note, the Florida Marlins are looking to get a naming rights deal for its domed ballpark done sometime within the next month.