The Warriors and Snøhetta continue to provide sketches and renderings of the planned Mission Bay arena. Socketsite showed them first. The overwhelming impression most everyone gets from these renderings is that it looks like a toilet. A fancy toilet, to be sure, but a toilet nonetheless. The “back” with its two wide supports definitely doesn’t help.
For reference, here is the product I referenced in the post title.
It used to be that most arenas were simple ovals or circles with some sort of façade. No more! In order to accommodate the growing need for auxiliary spaces inside each arena (offices, practice facilities, special hospitality areas, restaurants), just about every new arena has had a side section or wing grown onto it. The “appendage” trend started with Staples Center.
Architects have to solve the problem of integrating such structures into the arena footprint. Inevitably it all looks like some variant of an oval with something on the back. From the top Staples Center kind of looks like a record player. The new arena in Edmonton (architected by 360 Architecture) looks like a skillet. And then there’s the Warriors’ arena, whose resemblance to a toilet is rather uncanny.
A big reason why a fairly up-to-date arena like Oracle is being dumped for a new home is this. And there’s a consistent effort to make such buildings less monolithic, a hallmark of many 60’s-80’s arenas. Different materials, surfaces, glass, and angles are designed to soften the appearance while making it an object of demand (if not desire). Most arenas are utilitarian in nature and don’t bring up the kinds of feelings of nostalgia or place as ballparks do so successfully. Really beautiful, transcendent works are few and far between. Even though Staples is only 15 years old, every time I pass by it I feel that it has aged 25 years.
Perhaps the role of an arena is to be of an era, to represent a time. I only hope that Snøhetta somehow gets rid of the unintentional comedy element in this design. There’s still time to do so.
I know they have been playing shitty but dam!
I believe that James Taylor, while performing the first-ever concert at San Jose’s new arena, said the place looked like a tin can.
What arena doesn’t? Arenas are even more nondescript than football stadiums. We really are spoiled as baseball fans as no sport has more diverse and unique venues than baseball in North America.
The current Oracle Arena looks better than the San Francisco “toilet.”
You’d be building a shrine to it if it were being built in Oakland.
No, it still would look like a toilet and be ugly.
It really couldn’t look more like a toilet if they tried.
I can see the headline now: Frisco Warriors flush Lakers in opening of “The Toilet” in Mission Bay
So awesome ML, you are so right, LOL, the big San Francisco Flush! Hopefully they wont play like it there.
They’ll be flush with cash and trendy fans coming to visit once they move to SF. They’ll do just fine inside the toilet bowl.
Hopefully they will. They deserve it.
Why? Because they’re moving back to their home city in the Bay Area and the center of the region they represent?
You mean Daly City where they played nine years as opposed to Oakland where they played 43 years?
Well according to them they’ve never represented Oakland so I don’t see what you’re beef is. If anything I thought you’d be happy that you’d finally be rid of the one team embarrassed to actually put Oakland on their jersey. In fact to this day they still sell more things with San Francisco or SF on them than they do anything related to Oakland.
We can called them the “San Francisco Cammodes.” Let’s hope they stink up the place for the way they treated Oakland.
They will be the Frisco Warriors, no doubt about it. At least they’ll actually be playing in Frisco, unlike another so-called Frisco team that is located closer to Oakland and San Jose but parks a blimp over the GG Bridge during game times to present the illusion that they haven’t left town. (I’d love to see the Raiders run a full-page newspaper ad: “San Franciscans: Which is your team? Raiders – 11 miles way, 49ers – 43 miles away.” )
There no doubt that some fans in SF will become fans of the Oakland Raiders.
Probably not, Elmano. The 49ers’ tiny, tiny season ticket base in Frisco (5% of season ticketholders) left the team not worrying about moving 43 miles away since few people from Frisco went to the games anyway. And they’re not going to go to Raiders games now. How much weeping in Frisco for the loss of the 49ers? Little to none. But I’d still love to see the Raiders run that ad. Along with the TV networks showing actual shots of downtown San Jose and Oakland instead of Frisco.
The banner idea would be hilarious. I agree with that. I can’t believe that the people in the Santa Clara/San Jose area didn’t realize that all the publicity would go to SF despite the South Bay having to deal with all the issues and problems created by an inaccessible huge stadium with a 70,000 fan capacity.
Yeah, someone should show these idiotic sports networks a map of the Bay Area
Even if they don’t revise the shape of the design (emphasis on if), it won’t be white and nobody will be looking at it from well above the roof.
It doesn’t look any more like a toilet than the current Coli/Mt Davis combo does. http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/07/oakland-lease-extended-2024-amid-threat-move.html But at least it will presumably lack the “actual raw sewage flooding the building” feature.
I’ve never seen any sewage, as 99.9% of the fans have not. That’s a media created frenzy so all the clever people can repeat it to their friends at SF centric parties.
I see your self-imposed ban/boycott is characteristically not holding up.
you haven’t seen sewage? Do pictures that have been tweeted by national media figures count or does it have to be in your direct line of site to exist?
And, yes, the first thing I thought about when reading about how the Warriors design appeared to be a toilet was how much Mt.Davis looks like a toilet tank as compared to the seating bowl.
You must have misunderstood my post. I didn’t say that a sewage spill didn’t occur. I’m saying that this “sewage” nonsense does not affect 99% of the fans. It’s brought up by clever types in SF centric cocktail parties because they heard it from the sensationalist media as way to make fun of Oakland and the Coliseum. It makes then feel a little better about themselves.
BTW, did anyone ever find out who stuffed a towel down a toilet ner the clubhouse at the Coliseum?
You stated your “point” poorly, if that’s what you meant and aren’t just going back to correct it because you realize how silly it sounds. Forgive me for being skeptical.
And hooray for the conspiracy theory cliffhanger at the end of this comment. Because, it’s only happened once (not true, at all) and it must have been a Lew Wolff, noted hater of Oakland, who did it. It must be sad to live in that head of yours.
On the bright side, you really are an interesting case study…
Similar to the old Giants adds comparing the Stick to the Winter at Valley Forge, I always thought the A’s should try to play up the crappy (pun intended) elements of the Coliseum in a joking sort of way.
You can’t cover it up so you might as well embrace it and make the most of it. Just think of the possible promotions.
The fans may not have, but the A’s players have.
It’s kind of funny that people are making fun of the design based on a view from above. That view will be shown about once a game, and once the outside surfaces are put on, it won’t really look like that. Pretty dumb idea to put out that model with those colors though. Just bad PR. If they had made the colors different it would look fine.
I would pay to use this site if you let Elmano post something about the differences between Lew and Davis, what’s great about O.co, why Lew and Lacob, owe oakland anything. Why Levis traffic is bad. That’s alot of content I would pay for.
Nav already has a platform with EBX. I’ve extended the offer in the past to Doug Boxer. Guest posts need to come from people involved in real activities, not just guys on soapboxes.
Lew and Lacob owe Oakland a whole lot. These franchises demand loyality from the fans and the community but have no qualms at all about betraying that same community.
Sorry, but I’m not a cheerleader for disloyal billionaires who take money out of Oakland but when it’s time to invest their money they take it to a neighboring city which doesn’t really need it.
What the “Golden State” Warriors have done to Oakland for 43 years is inexcusable. The blatant disrespect they’ve shown the city and their loyal east bay fans is inexcusable. Kissing SF’s tushy for 43 years while ignoring Oakland is inexcusable. And now the ultimate disrespect by taking a billion dollars investment to a wealthy congested city which doesn’t need it. I’ll never apologize for these rich irresponsible and unethical people.
Elmano, you need to understand that your love of sports (A’s/Warriors) and Oakland are two different things. If you can grasp that separation, your perception of reality will come into better focus. Until then, you’re wasting a lot of energy being upset over it.
Yep. Oakland has bent over backwards to keep the Warriors, spending many millions on a total arena renovation just to have the new owners buy property in Frisco and pledge to move there. Yet, the Warriors owners don’t get the kind of hate that the A’s owners have for looking to move to San Jose, despite the A’s getting nothing from Oakland/Alameda County except the ruination of their ballpark in 1995. The way things are starting to look now, the A’s will be the only team left in Oakland. Even though Lew and the A’s really don’t owe Oakland anything.
Please don’t feed the trolls.
They designed it off the Coliseum only with a woman’s “touch.”
So sports franchises have no responsibility to the cities they call home?
Why are we so quick to excuse the irresponsible actions of billionaire sports owners? The love of a city or community should manifest itself in the love for the sports teams in that same city and community. It’s called civic pride and is something that all sports franchises attempt to tap in to.
Unfortunately, disloyal wealthy sports owners count on people not caring about a city as part of their support for the franchise. This is why they play musical chairs with cities. They know most fans don’t care and will reward them for their disloyalty by paying outrageous prices for more inconvenience.
As long as we don’t see anything wrong with screwing a city like Oakland, the billionaires will continue to screw Oakland and other loyal sports towns if they see what they perceive as a ” better opportunity” elsewhere.. It’s up to the fans to stand up and not show up to their new, expensive and inaccessible palaces.
All we have to do is have one of these disloyal billionaires fall flat on their faces after screwing their “home city” and the rest won’t be so eager to repeat the process. I’m rooting for the Yorks to be the model for failure and dishonesty.
As a private business, no, they don’t have any responsibility to the city they’re in. Most help out in little ways here and there (as the A’s actually do, but you won’t give credit for), but beyond that, they’re like any other business out there and will go where it makes the most fiscal sense. This is also why cities shouldn’t be stupid and offer millions to them to build their facilities, since just because they’re willing to take a little public assistance (like many big businesses do), they have no responsibility to return the favor.
You’re right about the owners of the Warriors getting more of a free pass for what they are doing to Oakland. It’s because the media is SF centric and love to be cheerleaders for San Francisco’s economic growth.
The media is here to promote and protect anything SF.
Both ownerships should be criticized in the media for their anti-Oakland biases and disloyalty.
And what about the Raiders, Elmano? Looking for a large handout from broke Oakland (the A’s have not) and talking to San Antonio and LA about moving there, after having already abandoned the city once? Your double standard here (Wolff-bad, Davis-good) is really quite breathtaking.
The Raiders are also horrible. Oakland has the worst owners in all of sports.
I should also include the horrible York ownership in horrible Bay Area ownerships.
I’m at the point where I’m rooting for all of the teams to leave Oakland just so I can taste Nav’s sweet and salty tears. Nav, you’re the kind of ass that breeds resentment against an entire fanbase and you should be ashamed of yourself for that.
It’s be nice if Nav turned his efforts towards something constructive, like lobbying Apple to make a 4 inch iPhone 6. Then I’d totes have his back.
The picture of a toilet as the Oakland Coliseum is very classy, Marine Layer.
Thanks for sharing that clever picture.
That comes from outside SF, Elmano. Apparently the media conspiracy is spreading.
Yes, that’s the greatest problem facing mankind.
Of course you’re rooting for all the teams to leave Oakland. I wouldn’t expect any less from you.
Well it’s assholes like you that drive me to it.
this story had enough legs to go national as espn’s PTI mentioned it in their show tuesday.
Hopefully, they’ll include the small part of the Warriors abandoning Oakland after the tremendous support they enjoyed there. The SF ” toilet” story, pales in comparison to the ” Screw Oakland” story.
It’s not really that Oakland has awful owners of sports teams. It’s that in comparison to other cities, Oakland just can’t get it done. A struggling city of only 400,000 people, aligned with a state government that does not pay for pro sports facilities, has left Oakland unable to pay the going rate for new stadiums. A $2 billion+ price tag for 3 modern sports facilities, about the same amount as the city’s unfunded pension liabilities. And Oakland’s “let the owners pay for their own stadiums” plan doesn’t work because the city’s sports teams are low-revenue ventures compared to teams in other cities. There has to be an incentive and the only incentive Oakland can maybe offer is development rights to the Coliseum property. But there’s not enough of that to go around for two teams (A’s and Raiders. Warriors are already leaving).
Oakland is smack in the middle of the Bay Area and the Oakland/ East Bay region has the highest population of the three Bay Area regions.
Oakland is not a “small market.” Oakland is a market which is redlined by wealthy billionaires who don’t like its demographics.
There are much smaller markets throughout the United States with much better ownerships.
Nav, quit implicitly playing the race card. It’s bullshit.
Guess who builds the stadiums, Elmano? Wealthy billionaires!
But what do history and facts tell us, Elmano? These are low-revenue teams in Oakland. The Raiders got brand new state of the art luxury suites in the mid-1990s and they have been a bust. Would Al Davis have moved the team back if he saw how it was going to work out? No, he would not have. The 49ers have sold out their suites while the Raiders suites go begging. The A’s are a low-revenue team and the Warriors, the team with the fewest reasons for leaving, are already gone. Keep whining about the mean greedy owners all you want. But pro sports are supposed to be a moneymaking venture, not a charitable endeavor (like when the Haas family ran the A’s and lost money).
I guess the Warriors are “low revenue” in Oakland just like the Forty Niners were “low revenue” in SF.
It’s just simple greed from billionaires. The Warriors new ownership bought the team with the idea to relocate to SF. They figured that they could just screw Oakland and nobody would care. After all, in their circles it’s “just Oakland” and who cares about THAT city.
Also, you forgot to mention the pension liability in San Jose even though you brought that up for Oakland. San Jose is also down 500 cops. SJ is down to 900 cops in a city of 950,000 residents.
Nobody sings the “Woe is Oakland, Poor Victim Oakland” song better than Elmano. Sorry – Oakland is not entitled to free stadiums. It’s going to have to pony up something, and it doesn’t have much to pony up other than the aforementioned development rights…re: San Jose pension liability. San Jose’s is $3 billion with population of 1 million, vs. Oakland, with a pension liability $2 billion and a population of 400,000. And San Jose has higher property values, higher per capita income, etc before. San Jose has a much much higher tax base than Oakland. You’ve played this silly game with stats before.
Would Oakland have agreed to take the Raiders back if Al Davis told them what a horrible team he had in store for Oakland? That’s 12 non-winning seasons and counting.
Let’s try that in Santa Clara and see how many luxury boxes they sell in the old multi story soviet-style hotel.
So it’s OK that the Raiders are a financial flop in Oakland because the team stinks. I think I understand now.
Of course billionaires build stadiums. And we all know where they like to invest their money unless they get some town to pay the freight.
Billionaires have no problem building in places like downtown Detroit if they get corporate welfare.
In light of that, how does Oakland keep its teams?
Oakland can tell them here is Howard Terminal, here is Coliseum City. You can develop the land and we’ll help with some of the infrastructure. Pick one, or good riddance. Good luck in San Jose, Dublin, Blythe, or where ever you can con the local politicians into paying your way.
Another thing. I’m watching Billy Beane’s savior getting racked by the Angels even as the offense is once again non-existent. And Oakland is going to draw 2 million fans for this travesty created by Billy Beane and Lew Wolff?
Yes, they drew 2 million fans. They sure want to drive fans away, don’t they?
There’s really no point in arguing with Elmano. He’s in his own “Oakland is perfect, blameless and a victim” world.
Elmano’s “SF centric” media paranoia isn’t going to ring any bells for your “Frisco centric” media paranoia is it?
This is can be a very hostile blog for those who don’t agree with the Lew Wolff agenda. Why the insults from you, SMG and Briggs? Where is Marine Layer when SMG attacks me personally with profanity lased insults?
Also, I should have made the post a little more clear for you.
Wolff’s agenda is to get the A’s a new stadium in the Bay Area under a plan that makes financial sense. Elmano’s agenda is for the A’s to get a new stadium in Oakland, paid for by the team owners without regard to whether it’s financially feasible or not. Oakland is entitled to a free ballpark, Elmano believes.
You intentionally come here to stir up trouble despite the fact that literally no one agrees with you or takes you seriously. You go on to repeatedly claim that you are leaving this blog forever, only to come slinking back each and every time to stir up more shit.
You add ZERO substance to any discussion on this site, only emotional bullshit based on conjecture and 100% opinion. You’re a joke and bad person. It’s that simple.
You add quite a bit to this blog with your angry emotional outbursts. The profanity and insults are also very becoming. And to top it off, you’re a Giants fan.
Have fun bullying and insulting other posters. I’m bored with you.
Good, now leave like you’ve promised you would do dozens of times. Or expect to continue to be called out on your bullshit when you inevitably come skulking back like the troll you are.
Elmano, you can’t seriously troll and then start pointing fingers. I’ve deleted comments and threads on your behalf more times than I can count.
You really think I’m trolling? Is this a forum for people with various opinions? I’m writing my sincere opinions here and you accuse me of “trolling” while SMG has his violent emotional outbursts without any kind of reprimand?
Come on Marine Layer, I don’t waste my time “trolling” and I think you know that. These are my sincere opinions and if this is a reputable impartial blog you wouldn’t have a problem with the way I’ve conducted myself here.
It’s a blog. Not the Associated Press. It has no duty whatsoever to be impartial.
@Elmano – You may be the least self-aware troll on the planet. You’ve admitted that you sometimes can’t control yourself. Spare me.
@Elmano – I appreciate what you contribute to this blog.This blog has definitely always had an anti-Oakland feel to it.
I don’t know Elmano but it seems like he just wants his Oakland teams to win and have a decent stadium/ballpark to play in. Biased individuals on this blog give him a hard time for that. Clueless people like to pretend racism and certain biases (SF MEDIA BIAS) don’t exist and have “the nerve” to insult the ones who bring up those VERY REAL issues. And Now we have tough guys swearing at people in their comments?
You can’t just claim Lew Wolff is a racist with literally zero evidence to support that. Are you and Nav Kanye “George Bush hates black people” West?
And in that same vein, then you’d have to argue that the Braves are the most racist organization in baseball currently, moving away from all those black neighborhoods up to the white suburbs. It’s totally because they hate black people. [/sarcasm]
@Brian – Have you ever thought that “wants his Oakland teams to win” and “have a decent stadium/ballpark to play in” may be incompatible because of the money required? Fact is, if you aren’t figuring out the money part everything you’re talking about is either an excuse or a distraction. Full stop.
The fact is that Wolff doesn’t want to spend money in one city, but wants to spend money in another city. The fact is that Wolff bought a baseball franchise in one city and now wants to move it to another city, so in his mind, it becomes more valuable.
Why do Wolff and the Warriors refuse to build in Oakland? What do you think it could be? Why won’t these billionaires invest their money in Oakland, but are eager to do it in San Jose or in San Francisco? Of course it’s not economic racism. How naive can you be.
It’s the same reason that the Braves want to move from a perfectly good stadium in a Black neighborhood in Atlanta.
The long-held misconceptions about Oakland are still alive and well in some circles.
Brian, I appreciate the kind words. I wish this was a more balanced blog where pro Oakland folks would feel free to express their opinions without being harassed or censored.
I’m a Pro-Oakland fan, that also appreciates Elmano and his contributions, along with eeveryone’s, as long as they are well thought out and respectful of others.
There are (have been), people that have been disrespectful that are Pro/Only Oakland, or Pro – San Jose, or no particular slant that just want a new park, somewhere in the Bay Area.
Something is weird about Golden State’s blueprint for a new arena. @KeithOlbermann weighs in on the Warriors’ design. http://es.pn/1n0VoZl
Olbermann is worried about superficial and silly things like why an arena is looking like a toilet instead of, “Why are the Warriors abandoning Oakland?”
That should be the real question here.
When the Lions moved from the Silverdome to Ford Field, did were they abandoning Pontiac?
When the Bullets/Wizards moved from the Capital Center to the Verizon Center were they abandoning Landover?
When the twins left the Met for the Metrodome were they abandoning Bloomington?
This move is no different. The Warriors are the San Francisco Bay Area’s basketball team. They are moving from one city within the Bay Area to another. They’re not abandoning Oakland.
So if the Sharks were to move to Oakland, they wouldn’t be abandoning San Jose. Is that right? Am I following your logic here? After all, the Sharks are the San Francisco Bay Area’s hockey team and Oakland is in the center of the Bay Area.
Slacker, the “SF” Bay Area is not one big happy family. There are three very different regions with their own airports, zoos, theaters, cultural institutions and sports teams.
These regions are in competition with each other for businesses, residents, tourists, restaurants, etc.
The Warriors are leaving Oakland for San Francisco. These are two separate cities. No one I knew growing up in Oakland ever identified with San Francisco. So yes, the Warriors are leaving Oakland for SF and that’s the definition of abandonment.
The Warriors are also abandoning their downtown Oakland headquarters directly next to the Oakland Convention Center. The Warriors are going to hurt Oakland economically in may ways with this irresponsible and needless relocation.
I wouldn’t view the Sharks moving as abandoning San Jose, but I would view it as a bad business decision.
Most of the Sharks major sponsors (including the owners company) are tech companies with a major presence in the South Bay. The Sharks also have a very large fan base in the South Bay and Oakland is difficult to get to from the South Bay.
Flip it around though, do the Warriors have large corporate sponsors in Oakland? Even the naming rights to their arena are from a silicon valley based tech company (arguably not exactly south bay). Besides your friends, are you seeing massive up rising from Warriors fans about the commute? SF will be harder to get to for some East Bay residents, but it’s not terrible. It will also be easier for South Bay and Peninsula residents to get to the new arena than it is for them to get to the Coli.
Every thing you said about the Bay Area cities competing also applies to the cities I mentioned.
Similar to the Warriors all of those teams made a move because they thought they could make more money in moving to the center (not geographic but iconic) of the area.
Like it or not, its called the San Francisco Bay Area and not the Oakland Bay Area for a reason.
The Warriors would have abandoned Oakland in the mid-70s if the arena proposed for the site now occupied by the Moscone Center had been built. They almost moved to San Jose in the late-90s.
Yes, they almost moved to San Jose but wisely decided to stay in Oakland where they have been one of the most successful franchises in the NBA, as far as attendance.
Yet, they are leaving Oakland for Frisco. Go figure. Why are these new owners pouring piles of money into a new arena for the Warriors when the current one is mostly adequate – except for the narrow concourses – and the place sells out? Obviously, they feel they will make piles more money in Frisco than Oakland. That’s just the way it is. Lacob and Co. know they will more than make their money back when the franchise brings in much more $$ and skyrockets in value. If the second team in LA brought in $2 billion, what will the Bay Area’s only NBA team be worth once it moves to glamorous, high-profile Frisco? Fair or not, that’s the way it is. An NBA team in Frisco is worth more than an NBA team in Oakland.
Also, Chris Cohan had a deal all set to move to San Jose. They were even going to be called the San Jose Warriors. But this deal was taken back to Oakland as leverage, and Oakland caved and paid to renovate its arena. Perhaps all those pleas from North Bay, Frisco and East Bay ticketholders who didn’t want to travel to San Jose for games had an impact? Maybe Oakland should have told the Warriors to take the San Jose deal back then, since now the city is left with a recently renovated, soon-to-be-tenant-less arena that still has a hefty mortgage on it?
OK, I think I get it. It’s OK to use a city, be very successful in that city with regular sell-outs despite horrible teams, have that city renovate your arena with tax payer money, leave that city with 62 million dollars in unpaid debt, and then move to a neighboring city because your team will be worth MORE there.
Isn’t this the definition of greed, selfishness and disloyalty?
There is no way to rationalize this injustice other than turning a blind eye as a shallow sports fans who could care less about Oakland and is just worried about wether or not they can get to the games and wether they can afford the games.
The Warriors count on people not caring about Oakland while perpetuating stereotypes about Oakland by abandoning a city which has done everything for them. It’s all about economic redlining and racism being perpetuated on Oakland in order to make their corporate and Peninsula clients more ” comfortable” about coming to the games.
The media will never criticize the Billionaires about this because they need to maintain access to the product.
It doesn’t have a damn thing to do with racism. Stop your whining, Elmano.
It has a lot to do with economic racism.
No it doesn’t. You discredit yourself and everyone who agrees with you when you play the race card. It makes you a bad person. Period.
I said it earlier and I’ll say it again: if that (the race card) is your argument, then you have to argue that the Atlanta Braves hate black people.
How is it easier for South Bay residents getting to SF when Bart is coming to San Jose? Not that we should judge this move on how much easier it is for people in the South Bay and Peninsula to get to the games.
Also, the Forty Niners don’t have a corporate sponsor from the South Bay or from Silicon Valley. And if SF is the center of the Bay Area universe, how come they lost their team to Santa Clara? What happened to all the “glamour” in THAT case?
You mean the Levi’s naming rights sponsor is not from the South Bay. There goes Elmano with his selective use of the “facts” again. I’m sure they have dozens upon dozens of South Bay corporations leasing the expensive suites at the stadium…Frisco lost the 49ers because there was no feasible place to put a new stadium there and not enough people in Frisco cared enough to make a new stadium worth the investment. The 49ers are closer to their season ticket base now. Santa Clara should have required that that team be called “Santa Clara” but was so smitten and starstruck with the attention it was getting from the glamorous 49ers that this was not made a requirement…Isn’t there a basketball team in Oakland that has never called itself “Oakland”? The city spent untold millions renovating the arena in 1997 and never required the team take Oakland’s name.
yes, I meant stadium naming rights sponsor.
What do you mean there was no “feasible” place to build in San Francisco. How about right next to Candlestick in Hunter’s Point?
I’m sure Howard Terminal, with all those 500,000 dollar condos surrounding it, would be “feasible” for Wolff if the parcel were located somewhere other than Oakland.
@Elmano, you are correct on one thing, Howard Terminal would potentially be feasible if it weren’t in Oakland.
Howard Terminal will cost a ton of money to make the site shovel ready and to make the necessary infrastructure improvements. That money has to come from a combination of city/state government, corporate support and development rights.
In Oakland there is no government money to be had and there is little to no corporate support. There is some potential for development rights but not enough to cover the massive costs.
The exact same site in another city with massive corporate support and government money is potentially feasible.
It’s not an insult at Oakland. It’s just money.
Simple, Caltrain, 101 and 280 are better options for folks that live and work in the south portions of the south and western portions of the south bay than BART out of downtown or 880.
Plus BART into the city (with the underground subway connection) isn’t that much farther than BART to the Coli when you consider the overall time of the trip.
Also more people work in SF than Oakland so for folks going to a game after work it’s easier.
I will give you though that for folks in places like Milpitas and parts of Santa Clara who work in those same cities it will be harder. On the whole though it’s easier.
In terms of SF being the center of the Bay Area, doesn’t the fact that the 49er’s are still the SF 49’ers even though their stadium doesn’t physically reside in SF tell you something?
Yes, it tells me that Santa Clara didn’t have enough self-respect to have the Forty Niners change their name. Also, San Jose is right next door. If anything, they should be called the San Jose Forty Niners.
If Oakland didn’t have an NFL team, and the Forty Niners decided to relocate, I can guarantee you that the team would never be allowed to be called “San Francisco” while playing in Oakland.
They would have been made to change their name to “Golden State” Forty Niners like the Warriors had to.
So the Cowboys should be the Arlington Cowboys and the Jets and Giants should be the East Rutherford Jets and Giants?
The physical address of the stadium sitting within particular city limits doesn’t dictate the area the team represents. Teams represent the larger metropolitan area, typically referenced by the “major” city in the area. In our case, like it or not, that’s San Francisco.
If I’m talking to someone from outside the area and they ask me where I live, I tell them I live about 35 miles from San Francisco. I don’t say I live about 20 miles from Oakland because I’d rather avoid the follow up question of where is Oakland.
Nav, Why aren’t these teams all respectively called called:
the Arlington Cowboys?
the East Rutherford/New Jersey Giants and Jets?
The St. Petersburg Rays?
the Auburn Hills Pistons?
the Landover Redskins?
the Orchard Park Bills?
the Uniondale Islanders?
the Arlington Rangers?
the Chester Union?
the Harrison Red Bulls?
the Carson Galaxy?
the Bridgeview Fire?
or FC Frisco?
Oh right… because your “logic” doesn’t hold up, has never held up, and will never hold up.
Yep, Elmano, Mean Old Lew Wolff is out to get Poor Victim Oakland. Do you really believe all this nonsense or do you just put this stuff on here to see what kind of reaction you’ll get? Like a joke writer or something?
This is no joke. Economic injustice and redlining is serous business.
Somebody provide a violin accompaniment for Elmano’s Lament. I think I better stop before ML deletes all these posts anyway.
I really hope he does come in here and just shut down the entire comments section on this post.
After winning Super Bowls and World Seires titles along with having a world class port, everyone knows where Oakland is.
Oakland and San Jose are large cities and SF is just 12% of the Bay Area’s entire population. While LA, Chicago and NYC make up a huge portion of their regions, SF is just a tiny 49 square mile tip on a peninsula representing just 12% of the total population.
I think you give “mighty” SF far too much credit for what it is.
Linking your wagon to SF, is for those smaller suburban cities who really have no identity of their own and are more than happy to cling to 50 mile long “glamorous” coat tails.
One more thing, Oakland has corporations like Clorox, Cost Plus, Pandora, Kaiser Permanente, Ask, Sungevity, etc.. Also, the companies in SF are only 6 miles from Howard Terminal.
The CEO of Clorox who was instrumental in building the ballpark in Houston thinks Howard Terminal is feasible. Even the owner of the Warriors believes Howard Terminal is feasible for a ballpark. It seems that Lew Wolff is the only person who absolutely hates Howard Terminal and makes all kinds of excuses even as million dollar penthouses sit less than a 1/4 of a mile away.
Sports fans have heard of Oakland because of the A’s and Raiders. Sports fans also know of Arlington, East Rutherford, Pontiac, etc. Are they major cities?
SF and SJ are the economic centers of the Bay Area.
There are expensive condos near HT is because the condos in SF are even more expensive.
The companies you listed are peanuts compared to those in SF and Silicon Valley. Wells Fargo alone is worth three times all of those companies combined. Kaiser is the largest and they’re a non-profit.
While I understand that you view these comments as an insult to Oakland, they’re not. They are simply facts. It does not mean that Oakland isn’t a nice place. It just means teams can make more money in other cities.
You’re right, there are smaller cities than Oakland that have professional sports teams. Those teams are supported with public money. Cities are forking over the money for all of the civic pride reasons you are calling out. That’s not an option, nor should it be in Oakland.
You’re talking about economic injustice, how would you feel about the city paying millions of dollars to sports teams, starving the schools, police, fire, etc in the city?
It would be nice if there was a rich philanthropist who agreed to buy these teams, build them stadiums knowing that they would probably lose money. These people aren’t floating around and if they did I think investing their money in education and social programs would do a lot more good than running a sports team.
Your passion for the city of Oakland is commendable, but you need to direct your passion to the areas that will actually make a difference.
If the Clorox CEO thinks Howard Terminal is so great, why is he refusing to personally fund an EIR? And if it’s so great, why did MLB explicitly dismiss the site?
@elamano- then the Ex CEO of Clorox should rally his investors and build a ballpark at HT- or at least do an EIR which would be a nice first step- and if Lacob loves Ht so much remind me again why he won’t build on it-
Wolff would need to sell the team and he won’t do it. He’d rather take his ball and scamper to San Jose.
I do take your comments as an insult because you’re misrepresenting Oakland.
Oakland is a major city. Oakland is not Pontiac, or East Rutherford. As a matter of fact, downtown Oakland has 84,000 workers compared to 39,000 in downtown San Jose. Downtown Oakland is the second biggest downtown in the Bay Area next to SF.
Another thing that San Jose supporters like to do is include all Silicon Valley corporations when talking up San Jose while putting a bubble over Oakland city limits when talking about Oakland regarding corporate support.
Have you ever heard of the Oakland Bay Bridge, or Oakland International Airport, or the Oakland Zoo, or Lake Merritt, or Jack London Square, or the great theaters? I doubt that East Rutherford or Pontiac have all the big city amenities Oakland offers.
Also, I wonder if people who live next to Long Beach tell everyone they live in Los Angeles. Could it be you just don’t want to be identified with the twisted image created for Oakland? They might think you live in the ghetto if you told them you lived near “Oakland.” That’s the real reason to say you live near “San Francisco” when you really live closer to Oakland. It has nothing to do with people not knowing where Oakland is.
re: Oakland has 84,000 workers compared to 39,000 in downtown San Jose. …And how many workers are the entire city of San Jose? Far far far more than Oakland, I’ll bet. More of Elmano’s deceptive nonsense
In the context of a downtown ballpark Lew Wolff loved to talk about so much before he fell in love with the Coliseum, downtown Oakland makes much more sense because it’s more than twice the size of downtown San Jose.
There is LITERALLY nowhere to build a ballpark in downtown Oakland. Jerry Brown killed whatever chance there was when he was mayor.
Jerry may get turmed out as the governor, just in time to become Oakland’s new mayor in 2018, so he can put a match to what hope I have left, that something can be done for the Raiders and (or), the A’s.
He seems like the kind of guy who would run for public office just out of spite. Hell, he already did that back in the ’70s. It would be comically evil.
The so-called Blue Ribbon committee looked hard at downtown Oakland and concluded there were no viable sites. Had they found one, we’d have known about it. But let Elmano continue with his fantasy. Of course, the Howard Terminal delusion will persist anyway, even though its a contaminated site, bound by railroads and right next to heavy industry.
There are plenty of places to build in downtown Oakland. Jack London Square, Auto Row along Broadway, Laney College parking lot, Estuary Park south of Jack London Square, etc.
There are zero city officials and developers that agree with you. But by all means, keep up the delusion.
I would agree with you, there are places that a ballpark could be built on in, or around downtown Oakland. I think the problem is that none of these places can be built on easily (if at all), and someone would have to really want to do it.
I think we can agree that if Wolff ever built a ballpark in Oakland, he is not going to put in the type of effort, that it would take to build in downtown Oakland. If he can’t get it done at the coliseum site, I doubt it will happen, with Wolff in charge that is.
There’s not a single even remotely plausible theoretical ownership group that would try to build a ballpark in the core of downtown Oakland (i.e. on the inland side of 880).
I’d take Jerry Brown as Mayor of Oakland even at 85 years of age. The man is amazing and he did so much for Oakland. I remember when the SF media would try to marginalize Jerry as Mayor of Oakland, by saying things like ” who wants to be Mayor of Oakland” and “Jerry Brown is just using Oakland.” Jerry’s response would be ” What you mean? Oakland is using me.”
What a great man.
Jerry Brown may have done some good things as the mayor of Oakland (I voted for him, in his first term) and the governor of California, my problem with him, is his unwillingness to work toward a solution for the A’s to have a new home. I know there are other things that may be more important to the running of the city, but I selfishly admit the most important thing to me, concerning Oakland, is the A’s getting a new home.
The city’s sports teams were simply not a priority for Jerry Brown. He did less than nothing for them. Oddly enough, the only time I ever saw Jerry Brown in person was when he showed up at an A’s pre-first-game-of-the-season event held in one of the suites on Mount Davis.
Staples Center is hideous. It might have some millennial charm one day if people decide to look back on this era fondly, but I doubt it. It looks like a tacky background set for Demolition Man or a giant Nerf toy. As for the proposed SF arena, I’ve got nothing good to say about it. No matter what color palette those go with, this structure is ugly.