digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at mercurynews.com

49ers, Raiders Could Share Stadium Due to Bad Economy

mercurynews.com — The 49ers say the battered economy may slow down their plans to build a new stadium in Santa Clara and now has them willing to discuss a once unthinkable option — sharing a new home with their cross-bay rival, the Raiders.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jan 11, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

48 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • smacksaw, on 01/11/2009, -1/+18I think the best compromise would be to build one stadium, but with two different sections. One for normal people, and a caged section for Raider fans who are allowed out of prison for good behaviour.

    Also, they could probably just combine the teams. There's probably enough players and coaches to field one 8-8 team if they joined forces.
  • inactive, on 01/11/2009, -2/+13Two pathetic franchises in one stadium? Sounds worse than a Miley Cyrus and Jonas Brothers concert.
  • iPood, on 01/11/2009, -3/+12Big ***** deal, the Giants and Jets have been sharing a stadium for how long now?
  • kilroyy, on 01/11/2009, -1/+9You won't see a team in Vegas for at least 25 years. This is not a joke. When you take into account the impact of recession on the city of Las Vegas, *and* the fact that the NFL commissioner has stated that putting a team in Los Angeles is his first expansion priority...you're looking at 25 years.

    Given the size and scope of this recession, there isn't going to be any expansion for a long time, much less in a city like LV. Sorry.
  • elister, on 01/10/2009, -4/+12Riiiiiight.

    http://i39.tinypic.com/bimkw2.jpg
  • inactive, on 01/11/2009, -2/+9Screw them. How long has Soldier Field been around? Put a playoff team on the field and then you can have a shiny new stadium with a worthless 20 yard long HD jumbotron that I want to watch porn or play duckhunt on.
  • louiebaur, on 01/10/2009, -5/+12Or the Raiders can come back down south we can hook em up!
  • thezackisback89, on 01/10/2009, -5/+11"If ain't broke, don't fix it."
    Do the 49ers really *need* a new stadium?
    I need a new car, too - the old one I have works fine,
    but I like the shiny Bimmer in the dealership lot more than the one I'm driving at the moment.
    I need it.
  • meed, on 01/11/2009, -0/+6If you haven't noticed that practice has faded away. Baseball season and football season have nice sized overlap, ever seen a tackle happen around the base line? It doesn't look pleasant for either of the players. Not to mention that if you have a grass field your talking about a huge ammount of wear and tare happening with not much rest time between games. Football games literatly rip up the field, sometime leaving like swiss cheese or worse if it is raining.
  • onegoodsoul, on 01/11/2009, -1/+6Actually, Soldier Field has been completely rebuilt - twice. Though, it is still the smallest stadium in the NFL.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldier_Field


  • Yegger, on 01/10/2009, -2/+6Totally. The Raiders would be a lot better off in LA. too bad that wont happen till Al Davis kicks the bucket
  • aralls, on 01/11/2009, -2/+5Good deal for these teams - combined, they could win 4 or 5 games next season
  • Wolfie351, on 01/11/2009, -0/+3LA Raider attendance was miserable, what makes you think it will be different now?
  • meed, on 01/11/2009, -1/+4I think it is a great Idea, think about how much money each team would save.

    Finding a good place for the shared stadium to be build will not be as easy though.
  • Anubis2051, on 01/11/2009, -0/+3Seams like a good idea to me. The Giants and the Jets do it already, and it makes sense. Think about it, the stadium is used for 8 games a year as it is. It's just a waste of resources to have two of them within a city. Use one, and save some money, not to mention get more value for your dollar. Same reason Hockey and Basketball teams share arena's all the time, saves money. Baseball is different however, with 81 home games, it becomes much more difficult to schedual games, especially with rain outs, but for the NFL it makes perfect sense.
  • lingyai, on 01/11/2009, -0/+3So true, why build a $400+ million dollar stadium that is used less than 10 times a year?
    More college and pro teams should share stadiums.

    Like UW should use Qwest field in Seattle.

  • Anubis2051, on 01/11/2009, -0/+2Giants and Jets? and most teams shared stadiums with baseball teams at some point. Even Yankee Stadium and Wrigley hosted NFL games.
  • onegoodsoul, on 01/11/2009, -2/+4Too damn long...
  • EtherGnat, on 01/11/2009, -0/+2As somebody who has been to Candlestick Park (I refuse to call it anything else) many times I can say YES, they do need a new stadium. They needed a new stadium when I moved away from the area 18 years ago, and they definitely need one now.

    Yeah, we could argue about the semantics of "need", but Candlestick is one of the most decrepit stadiums in the nation.
  • smacksaw, on 01/11/2009, -1/+3Both of those teams need a new stadium. The 49ers more than the Raiders, though. It's really the A's that need a new stadium.
  • Wolfie351, on 01/11/2009, -0/+2Yeah, because everyone LOVES to be outside in Las Vegas during the summer
  • catalystmotive, on 01/10/2009, -1/+2this doesn't seem too bad... there's alot worse that our current economical state is causing. but I guess it would disappoint those who live in Cali.
  • alamedaman, on 01/17/2009, -0/+1Niners: 5 Lombardi Trophies
    Raiders: 3 Lombardi Trophies

    more than most of the teams in the league (I'm looking at you Charge-whore bandwagon fans)
  • Sms4001, on 01/11/2009, -2/+3ooh they have to share a stadium boo hoo! I live in vegas ... when the ***** do we get our team?
  • asgardshill, on 01/11/2009, -0/+1No. Because that's just what they'd be expecting us to do.
  • Wolfie351, on 01/11/2009, -2/+3Eight Super Bowl wins between the two franchises? Hardly pathetic
  • EtherGnat, on 01/11/2009, -0/+1Actually the people in SF have been proven to look favorably on bond measures and such to help finance a new stadium. I think the sticking point is that the area needs a huge amount of infrastructure upgrades to be a suitable host to a new NFL stadium. Ever try and get out from the 'stick after a game? Be prepared to wait two hours on crappy two lane industrial roads. There's nothing else in the area. No clubs, no restaurants nothing. It's my understanding they're wanting to turn the stadium into a 7 day a week destination (old plans included a mall, etc) so that's a problem.
  • EtherGnat, on 01/11/2009, -1/+2The 49ers finished the season 5-2, and it could have just as easily been 6-1 (the Arizona game was strange--as they usually are). I think their prospects might finally be looking up with Singletary as coach.
  • Anubis2051, on 01/11/2009, -0/+1Agreed, especially when it comes to state schools. Why waste double the tax payer money? Some cities have caught on to this (pitt, miami, philly), and have saved themselves a ton of money as a result.
  • HeDiggMe, on 01/12/2009, -1/+1So between both teams the fans might get 3 or 4 home wins.
  • romeyb1105, on 01/10/2009, -2/+2Well in this case, maybe we should finally end the Bay Area football war once and for all by combining the two teams into one so that way, nobody has to be scared to go see a game. LOL! J/K. If they do give the teams one stadium, I hope it works out.
  • inactive, on 01/12/2009, -1/+1San Francisco is the epitome of government incompetance, their teams suck, so who cares? Nancy Pelosi is the one thing San Francisco has exported...and look at what a fantastic job she's doing.
  • jedinate, on 01/12/2009, -1/+1The Raiders can just move to the nearest Pop Warner field.
  • smacksaw, on 01/11/2009, -1/+1One good thing is that they'd get more games on TV/less blackouts. And there would probably be a lot more doubleheaders on TV since both play in the afternoon and have west coast divisions and kickoff times.
  • pappy97, on 01/11/2009, -1/+0A's to Las Vegas. Warriors to Seattle. Raiders to LA. 49ers to OC. That the way people of SF and Oakland can get off their high horse and finally support the best major pro sports team of the Bay Area, the San Jose Sharks.
  • rsantoro, on 01/11/2009, -2/+1I wouldn't really call these teams rivals they are not even in the same division let alone league. 49ers NFC West, Raider AFC West granted the fans may hate each other but they barely even play in the season if they even do get a game vs each other.
  • kilroyy, on 01/11/2009, -1/+0Does anyone really care about Raider blackouts?
  • jh4rms, on 01/10/2009, -3/+2I blame Woodrow Wilson.
  • Daryl209, on 01/11/2009, -3/+1Hell no
  • Uthman, on 01/11/2009, -3/+1why the heck do the SAN FRANCISCO 49ers wanna build a stadium allllllllllllllllllllllll the way over in SANTA CLARA anyways?

    the people in sf dont wanna new stadium for a reason. what makes them think santa clara wants it? put that money into educating our degenerating youth, into healthcare, into tax cuts, into economic stimulus, etc.
  • Sigmabob, on 01/11/2009, -3/+149erchan?
    I here there's boxxy in there too.
  • akshay626, on 01/11/2009, -3/+1*****!
  • kilroyy, on 01/11/2009, -3/+0This is...such a bad idea.
  • Broncosrule, on 01/11/2009, -5/+1dont share the same stadiums. That is a stupid idea. The nfl wouldnt be the same anymore if they pulled this off. who eevr heard of two teams sharign the same stadium. And even worse they are rivals

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...

© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.