|
Plenty of people say they should be the NJ Jets and Giants. I mean, they practice in NJ, they play in NJ, and the team offices are in NJ.
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 20:24 |
|
|
You can see the Manhattan skyline from the Meadowlands, I think that is close enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
I've never really understood the pedantry associated with the location of Levi's Stadium. Of course it isn't within the city-county limits of SF but it isn't as if people are unaccustomed to commuting pretty substantial distances/times in the Bay Area. It just makes sense to treat it as a region when it comes to sports teams.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Santa Clara is an hour's drive because of traffic, though. It's only 45 miles. Alright I'll reword my statement: No California football team (Niners, Chargers, Raiders, Rams) will play in the same stadium in 2020 that it played in in 2010. Holy poo poo nerds it was a commentary on all the NFL movement in the state.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:No California football team (Niners, Chargers, Raiders, Rams) will play in the same stadium in 2020 that it played in in 2010. How bad was Candlestick out of curiosty? I know it wasn't O.Co bad but I was under the impression it actually was a pretty bad stadium at the end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:How bad was Candlestick out of curiosty? I know it wasn't O.Co bad but I was under the impression it actually was a pretty bad stadium at the end. It was literally falling apart. I remember I was slapping the seat of the chair in front of me and a bolt came flying out that was never replaced. Another time I slipped going down the stairs because a chunk of concrete about the size of a fist came out from under my feet. It was really bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
King Hong Kong posted:I've never really understood the pedantry associated with the location of Levi's Stadium. Of course it isn't within the city-county limits of SF but it isn't as if people are unaccustomed to commuting pretty substantial distances/times in the Bay Area. It just makes sense to treat it as a region when it comes to sports teams. From my point of view it's pretty hilarious since I live in the UK. Like, if I drive 20 minutes down the road I am definitely in another city, with it's own sports teams, accents and culture. The notion that you can drive anywhere for a hour and still be in the same "city" is pretty weird to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:From my point of view it's pretty hilarious since I live in the UK. Like, if I drive 20 minutes down the road I am definitely in another city, with it's own sports teams, accents and culture. The notion that you can drive anywhere for a hour and still be in the same "city" is pretty weird to me. In San Francisco you can drive for an hour and only be three blocks from where you started. That said, the SF Bay Area is really three large cities (SF, San Jose, and Oakland) plus a lot of satellite cities and suburbs, some of which have a distinct character, and some which do not. Santa Clara is south of SF and is actually closer to San Jose than SF, but it doesn't have much of an identity itself. Calling the team the San Francisco 49ers is mostly because that's the traditional identity of the team: it's always been a "Bay Area" team, but while there are SF fans all across the Bay Area, the presence of another NFL team in Oakland muddies the water a little. East Bay residents (which includes more or less everything in a triangle with points at Richmond, Antioch, and Fremont) are more likely to be Raiders fans than Niners fans, but there's plenty of overlap. Most teams are the only team in their state, and so a few of them just identify the team as belonging to the whole state. So it doesn't matter if the Arizona Cardinals play within the city limits of Phoenix or not... and they don't, their stadium is in Glendale, which is just West of Phoenix. It makes a lot of sense to put up a huge stadium on cheaper land on the outskirts of a city, with good freeway access and plenty of room for parking. Downtown stadiums exist of course, but they're more expensive to build, usually involve demolishing something that was already there, snarl traffic, and can be more politically difficult to get (publicly) financed and built (see: San Diego). The placement of city limits also differs. Older US cities are more like European cities in that they tend to have a smaller official/political footprint and are surrounded by many suburbs and small satellite cities that contribute to the total metropolitan area; but many newer US cities have huge total sizes. San Francisco, stuck on the tip of a peninsula, is a little under seven miles by seven miles square, or about 47 square miles. Houston, TX is 627 square miles! It is a hell of a lot easier to find a spot within the flat, sprawling area of Houston to plop a big football stadium. For comparison, London's official size is 607 square miles, Berlin is 344, and Paris is just 40. Some cities expand their political borders as they sprawl, while others do not, and the variation is more down to differences in state or national legal structures. Many cities are constrained by geographical features (SF literally cannot grow without consuming South San Francisco, Daly City, or Brisbane) while others are not (Phoenix can just continuously expand into the desert). The Niners moved from a stadium placed in the very southeast corner of the city limits (on land that is ecologically sensitive, very near the Bay, and rapidly becoming extremely expensive to purchase or develop if development is permitted at all) to a place still on the SF Peninsula, set back a bit from the Bay, with good transit options from SF and San Jose, and already developed for traffic access. The selection of the site was controversial, and there has been ongoing conflict due in no small part to Jed York being a tremendous motherfucker who has repeatedly tried to cheat Santa Clara and its institutions or weasel out or around agreements he made in order to get his stadium built there. There are a fair number of San Franciscans who are sad the stadium wasn't built in SF - they managed to get a new stadium for the Giants built, and that seems to have been pretty successful (and it's a gorgeous stadium). SF repeatedly approved plans for a new stadium, located near where the old one was, but York hosed off to Santa Clara and really just blew off SF a maybe because he thought (probably correctly) that his franchise would make more money and be more valuable by being identified more easily as the Home Team by people in San Jose and the South Bay, by being more easily accessible by car to that area, and by manipulating a smaller and less savvy city council into agreeing to what he wanted. Worse, the new SF stadium was supposed to help SF bid for the Olympics, so when he unilaterally pulled out, the Olympic bid - which had already cost the City money - was effectively killed. So anyway, "technically" or, actually for reals, they're the Santa Clara 49ers because that's where their stadium is located. But in terms of franchise identity, team loyalties, continuity of ownership, and fan perceptions... they're still the San Francisco 49ers. They may have moved South but they didn't relocate to a distant place that fans can't easily get to on game day. It's much less impactful of a move than the Chargers, and not at all in the same category as the moves by the Rams or Raiders. Arguing they're not the San Francisco 49ers is, indeed, a bit of pedantry, but it's also a way for Niners fans to express some frustration with how the team's relocation coincided closely with a truly spectacular plummet from an annual championship contender to second-to-last in the league due almost entirely to mismanagement by Jed York. He decided to walk away from probably viable plans to build a new stadium in SF, he hosed up the team, and divorcing one's SF identity from the SF team by disclaiming ownership of it is just coded expression of that anger and frustration. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Mar 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Santa Clara is an hour's drive because of traffic, though. It's only 45 miles. gently caress Arte Moreno. Los Angeles Angels my rear end
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
a neat cape posted:gently caress Arte Moreno. I think you mean the Anaheim Angels of Los Angeles?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I think you mean the Anaheim Angels of Los Angeles? *grinds teeth*
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
That's why I don't get why the Chargers moving is such a big deal, Ross is accustomed to cheering for LA teams. The Angels, the Ducks.... don't know what NBA team he likes
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
California Angels should just play every home game in a different city within the state, as long as it has a single-A or better field.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Being pedantic about cities vs. their close-in suburbs is silly. That said, Santa Clara is not a close-in suburb of San Francisco. It is an incorporated suburb of San Jose, a nearby but completely different city. The stadium is actually a huge pain in the rear end to get to from SF. It is not a "50 minute drive" by any stretch, at least not on game days, because you either leave early enough to avoid the traffic (which, y'know, doesn't actually mean you don't count the extra time you spend waiting at the stadium) or you crawl through standstill traffic for an hour. I was fortunate enough to live near BART on the southern side of the city, and it still took about two and a half hours to get there on public transit. Just the final train ride from Mountain View takes over thirty minutes. It's faster to get there from Oakland. I agree that a lot of the anger is because the Niners have been terrible, but San Francisco is not wrong to feel like it got abandoned.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
Intruder posted:That's why I don't get why the Chargers moving is such a big deal, Ross is accustomed to cheering for LA teams. The Angels, the Ducks.... don't know what NBA team he likes Spurs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:California Angels should just play every home game in a different city within the state, as long as it has a single-A or better field. Going back to being the California Angels is all I want
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
a neat cape posted:Spurs. Well I mean absent any SDSU players because the second Kawhi is out of there I imagine you're moving on
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
a neat cape posted:Spurs. Whoever has a good SDSU player really, not that I blame you (he's real good).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Are the niners still the local team for people in Sam Francisco for tv purposes ?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Intruder posted:Well I mean absent any SDSU players because the second Kawhi is out of there I imagine you're moving on Absent that, I grew up liking the clippers because gently caress the Lakers. These days it's whatever team Lebron is on
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:Being pedantic about cities vs. their close-in suburbs is silly. That said, Santa Clara is not a close-in suburb of San Francisco. It is an incorporated suburb of San Jose, a nearby but completely different city. Yeah the 45-50 minutes is laughable because I live 5 or 6 miles from the stadium and it takes me a half hour because the traffic is a clusterfuck
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:I was fortunate enough to live near BART on the southern side of the city, and it still took about two and a half hours to get there on public transit. Just the final train ride from Mountain View takes over thirty minutes. It's faster to get there from Oakland. Really? Bart to Millbrae from wherever you were in south SF was probably like 15 minutes, and then what, did you not check a train schedule in advance to time your arrival to a scheduled train? Caltrain from Millbrae to Mountain View is as you said a little over half an hour. They run extra baby bullets on game days so you shouldn't have had to wait that long. And then you take the VTA light rail to the stadium from Mountain View... which on game days should be the "VTA 49ers Express" service... how long does that take? I would have guessed like 1.5 hours from an SF Bart station to stepping off the VTA at the stadium station. 2.5 hours really is terrible but we can thank our failure to extend BART to the South Bay for a big part of that. euphronius posted:Are the niners still the local team for people in Sam Francisco for tv purposes ? Yes. a neat cape posted:Going back to being the California Angels is all I want I mean, OK, but they really don't matter to anyone in northern California, so it's also weird to give them the entire state as a domain. But they should just call them the Anaheim Angels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I mean, OK, but they really don't matter to anyone in northern California, so it's also weird to give them the entire state as a domain. But they should just call them the Anaheim Angels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Now that they're good and the Lakers and Clippers are poop, probably a lot
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Eli Wiggum posted:By that same token, how many people in southern California care about the Warriors? Lakers fans now that Kobe retired.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:Lakers fans now that Kobe retired. Nah. The Lakers fans are the one team that stays loyal in Los Angeles, especially now with Magic involved.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Eli Wiggum posted:By that same token, how many people in southern California care about the Warriors? Fair point. Although the gold rush was more of a norcal thing, so the Golden State Warriors... I dunno. To me, never having really given it much thought, it feels more like they belong to northern California than the whole state. But then what about the Kings? Maybe they should be, I dunno, the Santa Ana Angels or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Don't be so cruel as to make the Kings anyone's team
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
To answer your question, Intruder, the reason i dont like the Chargers moving is for a few reasons. 1. They're a lot further away now 2. The act of moving a team and all the bullshit leading up to it absolutely takes a toll on the players and can affect their performance -- A lot of Chargers players said after the season that this was absolutely on their mind During the season 3. Spanos stringing the city along like he did for the last three years was bullshit 4. This one is less logical, but the Chargers just BELONG in San Diego. It still seems incredibly weird to me that they're leaving a market they own for one that doesn't want them. That, and on a more emotional level, I have tons of memories of going to games and watching games with my parents and grandparents. Watching the San Diego Chargers. Not the Los Angeles Chargers. Now that's all gone. 5. The San Diego Super Chargers song is now defunct
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Fair point. Although the gold rush was more of a norcal thing, so the Golden State Warriors... I dunno. To me, never having really given it much thought, it feels more like they belong to northern California than the whole state. But then what about the Kings? Look, man, I have a bunch of old Angels hats with the CA on them and I want them to be relevant again ok
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
a neat cape posted:To answer your question, Intruder, the reason i dont like the Chargers moving is for a few reasons. I was just intentionally being a pest anyway 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
The worst thing about the Whalers moving was no more Brass Bonanza
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Intruder posted:That's why I don't get why the Chargers moving is such a big deal, Ross is accustomed to cheering for LA teams. The Angels, the Ducks.... don't know what NBA team he likes It all boils down to one simple truth: Eli was right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Intruder posted:Don't be so cruel as to make the Kings anyone's team Seattle almost took em. I still probably wouldn't watch the nba though if we had.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Guys it's not so bad when your team moves. Maybe in 5 years you'll get a new expansion team who will be the laughing stock of the league for a few decades. Silver linings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
aperion posted:It all boils down to one simple truth: Eli was right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
a neat cape posted:Look, man, I have a bunch of old Angels hats with the CA on them and I want them to be relevant again ok You can still wear those hats if you want to. It gives you cred, actually. Always wear ancient team gear. I have a SF Giants hat from the 80s I trot out about once every five years or so, just for old time's sake. But I guess if you want your team to win then I'm sorry about how lovely MLB is what with not having all the teams have identical salary caps and how any given game for most of the season feels fairly pointless and inconsequential and also that the Angels are and always will be overshadowed by the Dodgers. I enjoy a nice lazy baseball game from time to time but the excitement and high stakes of a football game just blows it out of the water. Playoffs baseball is way better of course but when have the Angels been to the playoffs? http://losangeles.angels.mlb.com/ana/history/postseason_results.jsp Oh I guess fairly regularly, although their only world series was in 2002. Huh. Who knew?  e. I'm obviously not a big baseball fan but it's funny there are some teams I actually forget exist for long periods of time and the Angels are one of them. Another is the Brewers. e2. oh dear, no wonder Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Mar 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
The Angels are responsible for Barrold Bonds not having a ring which is a travesty
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
gosh look at all these teams The Nationals, forgot about them. When did the Marlins become the Miami Marlins? Did the Rays used to be the Devil Rays? The Reds, does any major league team on Earth have a more boring team name? I guess the Browns. The Rockies have a dumb name, Colorado doesn't own the entire Rocky mountains come on. The <Place> <Thing vaguely associated with place> naming theme can be taken too far, it sounds like a name picked by a committee after consulting with focus groups for a year. Are the Twins just named after Minneapolis-St. Paul? The Phillies also have a stupid name, that's like the San Francisco Friscos or the Los Angeles LAers. e. I have a meeting in 17 minutes and don't feel like doing any work between now and then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 20:24 |
|
|
A filly is a horse. Your other points were fair.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2017 19:43
|
|