A plea and a promise

Last week I realized something. If I’m going to put some news out into the world, I better make sure the site can handle it. I’ve been in the process of evaluating different providers, and I found that I should have some headroom to handle large bursts of traffic should it come this way. There are other things I need to cover too such as caching, which will be part of the ongoing work here.

You may remember the five-part Lew Wolff interview from 2011 (Part 5). If you havent read it, do so. This blog format allows for the kind of expansive interview on display there that isn’t possible in a tightly edited form of media such as print. I know that you come here for expansive coverage, and I do my best to deliver it. To ensure that this work continues, I’m asking for donations, just as I did for the Wolff interview.

I’m asking for $10 or more, if you can afford it. The donations will help pay for ongoing site costs, travel expenses for meetings in Oakland, San Jose, San Francisco, and elsewhere. There’s a donate link to the left which will get you to PayPal. This worked quite well before, so I’m going with the same method this time around. This is not a request that I expect to make more than on an annual basis.

What will you get? Well, let me explain a few things. A handful of you know that I’ve been working on a book based on this blog. The book will not simply be a reprinting of articles. It will be fully chronological narrative of everything that has happened, going as far back as the early Finley and Haas eras. This book can’t be finished until some decision is rendered regarding the A’s future in Oakland and the Bay Area, which has frustrated me to some degree.

Until that’s all squared away, I’d like to offer a digest version of all of the important articles on this blog. It will include all of the analysis and opinion pieces written from 2005 to the present. News recaps will not be included. I’ve already been organizing all of this information for the purposes of the long book, so editing it for what I’ll call the blog archive is a relatively trivial matter. The blog archive won’t be ready this week, but I promise that it’ll be ready early during spring training. Included will be a preface, which won’t be posted on the blog. Like last time, I’ll provide a ZIP file containing multiple formats (PDF, ePub, Mobi for Kindle). If you’re interested, I may provide the archive organized by topic or in chronological order or both. I’m open to suggestions. I’m also exploring Apple’s iBooks format, though that’s probably for something else down the road which may involve a Kickstarter campaign or something similar…

Anyway, I appreciate your support and readership all these years. I’ll try not to blow a gasket putting together the archive, so that the tome gets to you as soon as possible.

—-

Regards,

M.L.

=====

P.S. – I should warn you that having written 1,700+ posts here, and the average length of each post being 500 words, even if I pull out a lot of the chaff the archive could look downright encyclopedic. That would preclude any chance of an actual print volume, though I suppose no one’s stopping you from printing parts of the PDF out. As I get closer to finishing the editing, I’ll provide an update on the length. Look at it this way: if you’re paying by the word, it’s CHEAP.

falcor-wink

Santa Clara stadium hasn’t planned for bad weather at SJ Airport

NBC Bay Area reported last night that somehow, the City of Santa Clara hasn’t completed planning for how to make football games work in concert with operations and Mineta San Jose International Airport. The FAA has made a Determination of No Hazard for the stadium, based on building height and sufficient clearances, even though some light standards will be slightly higher than FAA mandates. However, this only works when the weather is good, and the two runways at SJC are used for takeoffs to the north and landings from the south. When the weather gets bad or fog comes in, the airport flips the script and the landing approach comes in directly over the 49ers’ stadium site. If you flew in and out of SJC during the stormy recent November and December, you probably got a good glimpse of this. I did over Thanksgiving.

sjc_approach

Yellow line extending from Mineta San Jose International Airport’s 30R runway runs directly over 49ers stadium site (shown as a parking lot). Image from Google Earth

When bad weather forces this change, jets landing at SJC tend to loop around the West Valley (Cupertino/Mountain View) before making a 180 turn to land on 30L or 30R, the two commercial runways at the airport. During good weather, planes taking off to the north usually make a sharp easterly turn before heading east or south. Assuming that those planes are in good mechanical condition, takeoffs don’t operate that close to the stadium site. Even flights going directly north to Portland or Seattle tend to go east and loop around until they get to the right altitude before going north. It’s when planes in low altitude fly into SJC from the north that the stadium’s location becomes an issue.

Is this a big deal? Sure it is. San Jose and Mineta Airport are used to this to an extent, as the regular approach to SJC has jets constantly flying almost directly over HP Pavilion and directly over several tallish buildings in downtown. That’s what happens when the airport is built in the middle of the city. It’s convenient, but it brings its own set of issues. Comparatively, the approaches to SFO and OAK are over water, though SFO-bound planes coming from the east often turn north close to the Santa Clara stadium site. Even the Diridon ballpark site came under scrutiny because it’s close to the approach, especially the general aviation runway (non-commercial).

None of these buildings provide the kind and scale of target as the Santa Clara stadium, which on gamedays will regularly hold 70,000 including workers. This will be amped up even higher for an upcoming Super Bowl, when the number of people in the immediate area could approach 100,000.

The early rains we had this season are somewhat unusual for the Bay Area, since we’re used to getting our heaviest rain from late January through March. It just goes to show that on a seasonal and monthly basis, it can be difficult to tell what will happen. The El Niño/La Niña phenomenon can be a contributor. Months out from Super Bowl XLV at Cowboys Stadium, no one was predicted the sleet and freezing rain conditions that beset the Metroplex. While early February could be great weather (mid 50’s, sunny) for Super Bowl XLIX or one of those NBC-flexed Sunday Night games, chances are high that bad weather will force a change to air traffic control. I don’t doubt that a practical plan will be developed to deal with that situation, but it’s a lot of juggling and adds an aspect of uncertainty that isn’t present at other NFL stadium sites, let alone Super Bowl sites. Let’s hope, for everyone’s sake, that everyone’s on their P’s and Q’s when games are played during the rain or fog. A lot more than division standings or a trophy will be at stake.

Rams win arbitration case, will St. Louis pay up?

A three-man arbitration panel ruled today in favor of the St. Louis Rams over the City/County of St. Louis, setting the stage for what will be either a major public payout for a renovated/new stadium or the Rams leaving Missouri altogether.

Last year, the Rams and the public agency (St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission) that runs the Edward Jones Dome presented different cases for what renovations would be required to make the Dome “top tier”, per the stadium’s lease. The Rams pushed to rebuild the roof and two-thirds of the stadium, a project that would cost up to $700 million. The agency’s offer was $128 million. Given the age of the facility and the number of new ones that have been built since, it only makes sense that the arbitration panel would rule in favor of the Rams. The St. Louis CVC now has 30 days to decide if it wants to go through with the renovations as specified by the Rams, or allow the lease to become year-to-year after the 2015 NFL season.

The ruling notes that for the Dome to be considered top tier, individual components of the stadium and the stadium as a whole would have to be among the top eight (quarter) in the league. The ruling doesn’t specify which stadia are top tier, but it’s not difficult to figure which ones would qualify in terms of amenities and fan experience:

  • Cowboys Stadium (2009)
  • MetLife Stadium (2010)
  • Lucas Oil Stadium (2008)
  • University of Phoenix Stadium (2006)
  • Reliant Stadium (2002)
  • Mercedes Benz Superdome (1975, renovated 2006 and 2011)
  • Ford Field (2002)
  • CenturyLink Field (2002)

This list could soon include the stadia for the 49ers and Vikings, raising the bar for the CVC in the process. The final determination date of top tier is March 1, 2015. Although the Rams are asking for lot, the simple fact of the matter is that they could’ve asked for more, like a fully retractable roof or Texas-sized scoreboards. Chances are, they would’ve been awarded it. That said, the ruling is pretty clear that what the Rams are asking for would propel “The Ed” to top tier status:

The Panel finds and concludes that The RAMS 2012 Plans will produce a First Tier stadium and that the CVC 2012 Plans will not. That is the Award of this Panel. There is no reason for the Panel to produce its own plan.

That last part is important, as it gives the Rams all of the leverage in future negotiations, should they choose to negotiate. The panel notes that it was left with a clear choice between one set of plans that would bring the stadium to top tier status and one that wouldn’t. One wonders if CVC had made a more accommodating offer, whether that would have been deemed acceptable by the panel.

The political phase comes next, and it promises to be juicy. There seems to be little public support for the cost and scope of renovations the Rams are asking for. In addition, the Cardinals could file a protest, considering that Busch Stadium was largely paid for with private dollars. The panel previously denied a CVC claim that the Rams pay for 49% of the project cost.

While the next decision is up to St. Louis pols, Rams owner Stan Kroenke has all the cards. Kroenke has repeatedly stated that he wants to keep the team in St. Louis, so an LA threat may not loom as large as it would for the Chargers, or even the Raiders. Still, AEG’s Farmers Field project should prove an effective stalking horse if Kroenke chooses to use it. Already there is some talk about the Rams moving to a new open air stadium, which could be located downtown or in the suburbs of St. Louis County. The Rams’ real goal may be to get a venue where they have control over all revenue streams, even if it means some sort of private contribution towards the stadium’s cost. In the end, a new stadium may be the only solution that works for both parties, since it wasn’t clear where the Rams would play while the renovations at the Dome happened (the project could take as long as three years).

The CVC uses the Dome as part of its convention facilities, and there may be a case to allow the Rams to leave for another stadium in the area because it’ll allow the CVC to open weekends that would normally be used for football games. That argument doesn’t seem to have legs, not when Indianapolis built a new stadium for the Colts and an expanded convention facility, and Atlanta is considering doing the same for the Falcons.

It’s not panic time for St. Louis Rams fans yet. But with Kroenke in such an advantageous position, no one can afford to play hardball with the man. The best they can hope is that Kroenke suddenly becomes magnanimous. Kroenke doesn’t have a track record of going all out for his teams (Rams, Denver Nuggets, Colorado Avalanche, Colorado Rapids, Arsenal), so don’t bet on him going all out for a new stadium.