Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IMovedYourCheese t1_j5iduke wrote

While 49ers are far from San Francisco, being in Santa Clara puts them in the heart of the bay area and overall closer to a lot more people than they otherwise would be in downtown San Francisco. It's just the name that's wrong (but of course they don't want to change that due to the team history and brand).

20

Wilt_The_Stilt_ t1_j5ih5aw wrote

While that makes sense from an economic point of view that’s kind of like saying the packers would be ok to move their stadium to Sheboygan because it’s closer to a lot more people in Milwaukee than it otherwise would be in downtown Green Bay.

Sure that’s probably true. But it’s a betrayal of the heart of the team. It’s not the Bay Area 49ers or the sam Jose or Santa Clara 49ers. It’s the San Francisco 49ers. For the same reason the raiders would never have moved to SF.

13

DL_22 t1_j5ipwpb wrote

Packers played 4 games a year in Milwaukee for 40 years. They only went full time again after Lambeau was renovated in the 90s.

2

Wilt_The_Stilt_ t1_j5iqe4w wrote

And the 9ers play zero games a year in San Francisco because they built their stadium 40 miles south of the 800,000 person city they are in. Which is roughly 8x larger than Green Bay.

1

dbausano t1_j5jl20g wrote

I’m not sure I agree with you when you say it’s a betrayal to the heart of the team.

I know that football and baseball are different in terms of economics (salary cap, team values, etc), but when the Atlanta Braves moved out of downtown to the suburbs, it has been a major success in spite of all those who said it wouldn’t work. The stadium is now much closer to the majority of fans, attendance has increased, game day experience is much better, and these factors have led to an increased payroll and a better team on the field. All that said, the Braves only moved about 15 miles away vs however far the 49ers are, but I don’t think you can find anyone now (other than city of Atlanta politicians) who would say that it wasn’t the right move.

I guess my whole point is that doing what’s best for the team will pay off in the long run even if it means having a different address.

1

Wilt_The_Stilt_ t1_j5kbpqm wrote

I’ll start by making two disclaimers:

  1. I am not remotely familiar with Atlanta geography or culture so please let me know if I make mistakes there.
  2. San Francisco geography and cultural divides are very complicated and my opinion is that of a non native (though I’ve been here over 10 years) who has lived in Berkeley, Oakland, and San Francisco and notably NOT in the South Bay.

/disclosures

The big difference I see between your example with the braves and the 49ers is Atlanta is a major city surrounded by Atlanta suburbs. San Francisco is a major city surrounded by mostly water which is then surrounded by several other major cities, notably Oakland and San Jose.

This either cities have their own identities and cultures that are distinct from San Francisco. Collectively those three cities and the other around and in between make up the “Bay Area” so differentiating between a city and the Bay Area can be difficult.

The warriors (NBA) for example recently moved from Oakland. Across the bay into San Francisco. Very controversial. But they justified it by saying they are the “golden state warriors” not the Oakland warriors and they are the bay areas basketball team. Now that is very much open for debate and I’m sure most Oakland natives still have strong negative feelings about that.

On the flip side we have the San Francisco 49ers who are IMO Sam Francisco’s football team. For about 30 years they were not the only game in town and thus not universally the bay areas football team. Though very much open for debate considering the raiders were in LA, then Oakland, and now are gone. So moving them so far away makes me feel not like they are in a suburb of San Francisco but instead in nearly the heart of another city, San Jose. They are 8 molded from downtown San Jose and 40 miles from downtown San Francisco. San Jose is still very much Bay Area and they do not have another football team but I would imagine a large portion of their residents have been raiders fans for years (it’s just as far from the old raiders stadium to San Jose as it was from the old 49ers stadium).

As for being better economically, I don’t think the 49ers ever had attendance issues. They’ve been a very successful team historically I think the major economic driver was the cost to build in SF vs down south. While San Jose is by no means cheap, San Francisco is extremely dense and finding the space to build was probably going to be wildly complicated and expensive. The warriors managed to figure something out but I guess the 49ers couldn’t/wouldn’t.

2

dbausano t1_j5lo0bz wrote

I admittedly don’t know many details about San Francisco geography and team rooting interests/loyalty, but your response made sense. This past summer I happened to drive by where the 49ers play, and I was surprised at how far away it seemed from San Francisco. But I just assumed it was still in the heart of 49ers country. I guess the real lesson is owners will do whatever they want, fans be damned!

1

boatymcboatface22 t1_j5ijhg3 wrote

Santa Clara is not even close to the heart of the Bay Area. SF is the center on the Bay Area. Candlestick was a way more accessible location to all of the Bay Area. The Bay Area isn’t just Silicon Valley.

3

IMovedYourCheese t1_j5ilvdy wrote

San Francisco has a population of 815K. San Jose, which is at the other end of the Bay, has a population of 983K. All of Santa Clara county has a population of ~2 million. People in the bay area are heavily concentrated around the south and south east. The city of SF is very sparse in comparison.

Plus, until recently you had the Raiders just across in Oakland which further made a downtown SF team redundant.

5

----0___0---- t1_j5ip6hx wrote

They’re the.. San Francisco.. 49ers.. not the Bay Area 49ers.

−2

DL_22 t1_j5iq48i wrote

You can say San Francisco refers to San Francisco Bay. Levi’s Stadium is less than 2 miles from the bay shore.

2

sailor_sega_saturn t1_j5k1ti4 wrote

I could say that it actually refers to San Francisco de Campeche so the stadium is actually 2,243 miles away.

^(edit: I'm worse at google maps than I am at shitposting right after waking up apparently)

2