Another Bear said:
philbert said:
Another Bear said:
ColoradoBear said:
Another Bear said:
Turns out Da Raiders have 3 first round picks in '19, and 2 more in 2020. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out, and I'm not a Raiders fan.
Playing for the future seems like a good financial plan when you have to sell tickets and psl's in your future city, not current one. Oakland should really sitck it to the Raiders and give them the boot after this year, unless the lease next year is truly financially advantageous.
It looks like they're following the Rams model: new city, new stadium, better team. It makes sense, winning will get fans in seats. That said, Vegas coughed up how much money, a state ballot initiative? Few places in Caloifornai will fund a pro sports stadium/arena, minus Santa Clara. I see that a good thing. Like billionaires need help funding private enterprise. You know FCCK that.
Santa Clara chipped in money for Levi's?
They put in $114m. They're suppose to get revenues over the life of the stadium to cover that, but who knows. There's already been back and forth on it, talk of a lawsuit (which I think was tamped down) and the city wants to reevaluate revenues. Meanwhile I believe they have to supply police and traffic control, and that area is a clusterf*** on game day.
In fairness, SF has to pay for police and traffic control for events at AT&T, as does Oakland for Raiders games.
The recent hubbub was the 49ers wanted to pay less in rent (because they said the stadium was pulling in lots of extra revenue), but it got rejected.
