ImageImageImageImageImage

Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland

Moderators: FNQ, HMFFL

FNQ
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 38,818
And1: 2,415
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: De-funked
   

Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#1 » by FNQ » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:33 am

As I understand it, the Raiders are 2nd in line behind the Chargers right now. If the Chargers choose to stay in SD, the Raiders will have the option to share a new stadium with the Rams in LA.

If the Raiders do not move, they will either receive a $100m loan to try and get a new stadium in Oakland (which for all intents and purposes is pointless considering Oakland doesn't want to pay a dime to keep them) or will receive favorable relocation considerations going forward
Trade and Transaction Board Cliff-Notes: Trade and Transactions Roundup IV
User avatar
HMFFL
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 36,599
And1: 484
Joined: Mar 10, 2004

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#2 » by HMFFL » Thu Jan 14, 2016 12:50 am

Right now, I feel very unsure of what the future holds.
The $100 million from what I have heard is really not going to do much to help us get a stadium.
I also continue to hear Texas being mentioned, but relocating to Texas is really not something that I want to see happen, so I hope LA becomes an option. I highly doubt it will be an option if we're behind SD.
User avatar
Quake Griffin
RealGM
Posts: 10,401
And1: 2,348
Joined: Jul 06, 2012
     

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#3 » by Quake Griffin » Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:35 am

Hoping the Chargers back out and we can go to LA.

Sucks being a tenant to Kroenke but it will keep the team in CA and around a bunch of Raider fans.


just lol at $100 million.
Might as well have given us $1.
dafuq are we gonna do with that? Build a tree house?
Clever reactions to aggressive situations

#PlayBrice
User avatar
HMFFL
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 36,599
And1: 484
Joined: Mar 10, 2004

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#4 » by HMFFL » Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:20 pm

One thing that bothers me about this situation is that the St. Louis public is stuck paying for the Rams stadium until 2021.
They basically just packed up and left the baggage with the public to deal with.
I just find it to be in bad taste and if I lived there I would be very unhappy.
FNQ
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 38,818
And1: 2,415
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: De-funked
   

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#5 » by FNQ » Tue Jan 19, 2016 3:51 am

Amy Trask very vocal that Las Vegas should be an option
Trade and Transaction Board Cliff-Notes: Trade and Transactions Roundup IV
User avatar
Quake Griffin
RealGM
Posts: 10,401
And1: 2,348
Joined: Jul 06, 2012
     

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#6 » by Quake Griffin » Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:21 pm

FNQ wrote:Amy Trask very vocal that Las Vegas should be an option

any reason we should GAF what she thinks?


not directed at you.
asking srsly and in general.
Clever reactions to aggressive situations

#PlayBrice
User avatar
JayBenzy
Freshman
Posts: 88
And1: 39
Joined: Jul 03, 2013
Location: SoCAL
   

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#7 » by JayBenzy » Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:44 pm

Will you guys be open to relocate to San Diego if Chargers move to LA? Read a CBS article i think or maybe ESPN about San Diego being possible location for the Raiders.
"I thought we got off to a decent start when we were 7-5 three weeks into the season"
FNQ
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 38,818
And1: 2,415
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: De-funked
   

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#8 » by FNQ » Tue Jan 26, 2016 5:36 am

Quake Griffin wrote:
FNQ wrote:Amy Trask very vocal that Las Vegas should be an option

any reason we should GAF what she thinks?


not directed at you.
asking srsly and in general.


She's still got close ties here
She works for the league
She's really, really smart

It might be a good move
Trade and Transaction Board Cliff-Notes: Trade and Transactions Roundup IV
FNQ
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 38,818
And1: 2,415
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: De-funked
   

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#9 » by FNQ » Fri Jan 29, 2016 5:10 pm

Las Vegas is becoming very real, and what isn't reported yet that Mark isn't in Vegas to 'scout the city', he's there to organize a pitch to the other 31 owners about bringing the NFL to the gambling capital of the U.S.

It's a far more realistic landing spot than San Diego or San Antonio.. would be a great move imo
Trade and Transaction Board Cliff-Notes: Trade and Transactions Roundup IV
User avatar
HMFFL
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 36,599
And1: 484
Joined: Mar 10, 2004

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#10 » by HMFFL » Thu Feb 4, 2016 5:46 pm

FNQ
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 38,818
And1: 2,415
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: De-funked
   

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#11 » by FNQ » Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:08 pm

Vegas is unlikely due to gambling/organized crime and also due to Mark Davis' perception as a 'rube'

From an outside perspective, Raiders probably the last team the NFL wants in Vegas. Ideally they'd want someone who is liquid rich, not liquid poor
Trade and Transaction Board Cliff-Notes: Trade and Transactions Roundup IV
User avatar
Twinkie defense
RealGM
Posts: 16,019
And1: 397
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#12 » by Twinkie defense » Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:26 am

All told I think the League has committed $300 mil to a Raiders stadium in Oakland... part of that may be gift with the rest being G4 loans. Even still there is a gap, but it's getting smaller.

If the A's could get the heck off that plot of land and build a nice baseball stadium e.g., at Howard Terminal the gap could be closed with $ from a bigger development.

No Mexico City Raiders? :lol: I'm seriously thinking about heading to DF in November for the game.
User avatar
Quake Griffin
RealGM
Posts: 10,401
And1: 2,348
Joined: Jul 06, 2012
     

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#13 » by Quake Griffin » Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:56 am

oh God.

dont mention us losing a home game to play in that ****.
Clever reactions to aggressive situations

#PlayBrice
User avatar
benchmobbin02
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,839
And1: 156
Joined: May 28, 2015
     

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#14 » by benchmobbin02 » Thu Feb 11, 2016 4:46 pm

FNQ wrote:Vegas is unlikely due to gambling/organized crime and also due to Mark Davis' perception as a 'rube'

From an outside perspective, Raiders probably the last team the NFL wants in Vegas. Ideally they'd want someone who is liquid rich, not liquid poor


That is old perception from the previous commissioners office and organized crime has been in charge of Vegas for decades. Now the part about the league preferring a more financially stable team to be the one to move to Vegas is more accurate. But they wouldn't block it if corporate partners line up to build the stadium and even take on some ownership to improve the Raider image league wide.
You're either part of the PROBLEM or part of the SOLUTION!
Royalty Doesn't Believe the Hype!
User avatar
Twinkie defense
RealGM
Posts: 16,019
And1: 397
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#15 » by Twinkie defense » Thu Feb 11, 2016 8:46 pm

Quake Griffin wrote:oh God.

dont mention us losing a home game to play in that ****.

Azteca Stadium is way nicer than the current Raiders stadium!

Re. Vegas, the League got caught sitting on its hands with the rise of Fantasy Football. They can now see what a natural fit that is and what a big money machine it could be for the League. I'm sure Las Vegas fits into the broader plans around fantasy football - and anyway you don't need to go to Vegas to gamble on the outcome of games anymore.
User avatar
benchmobbin02
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,839
And1: 156
Joined: May 28, 2015
     

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#16 » by benchmobbin02 » Fri Feb 12, 2016 3:01 am

FNQ wrote:
Quake Griffin wrote:
FNQ wrote:Amy Trask very vocal that Las Vegas should be an option

any reason we should GAF what she thinks?


not directed at you.
asking srsly and in general.


She's still got close ties here
She works for the league
She's really, really smart

It might be a good move


Agree 1000% bout Amy! She well be in charge of a team in some capacity in the future.
You're either part of the PROBLEM or part of the SOLUTION!
Royalty Doesn't Believe the Hype!
User avatar
Twinkie defense
RealGM
Posts: 16,019
And1: 397
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#17 » by Twinkie defense » Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:13 pm

Now that there is a Rooney Rule for women I'm sure the Princess of Darkness will get a lot of interview opportunities around the League.
User avatar
benchmobbin02
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,839
And1: 156
Joined: May 28, 2015
     

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#18 » by benchmobbin02 » Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:10 am

Yeah, now give her the respect she deserves smh
You're either part of the PROBLEM or part of the SOLUTION!
Royalty Doesn't Believe the Hype!
User avatar
Quake Griffin
RealGM
Posts: 10,401
And1: 2,348
Joined: Jul 06, 2012
     

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#19 » by Quake Griffin » Thu Apr 28, 2016 10:47 pm

$500 million pledge to Las Vegas???


The city of Oakland has disappointed me on this one man.
Clever reactions to aggressive situations

#PlayBrice
User avatar
HMFFL
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 36,599
And1: 484
Joined: Mar 10, 2004

Re: Raiders *tentatively* to stay in Oakland 

Post#20 » by HMFFL » Fri Apr 29, 2016 10:19 pm

It's very disappointing.
I wanted us to stay in Oakland or move to LA.
If not those, I suppose I can deal with the team moving to Vegas, but I still think it's a bad decision.

Return to Oakland Raiders