MODS PLEASE LOCK

What will be most important for a successful season?

  • Derek Carr's development

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Khalil Mack's development

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Jack Del Rio's staff handling of the team

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • The 2015 NFL Draft Class

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Addition of Free Agents

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Less Difficult Schedule

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
Show All
HNL HI said:
laker4lifeman said:
We were sponsored by hawaiian airlines so not surprised
Click to expand...

that has nothing to do with it lol. I definitely see more RAIDERS gear than any other team. Steelers are real popular too, lots of 9ers stuff pops up whenever theyre good.
Click to expand...

I don't care where in the world it is, you will see more Raiders gear than any other NFL team. Only American sport franchises that top our brand in myexperience are the Yankees and maybe the Chicago Bulls. :smokin
 
Last edited:
Buddy of mine went to visit Italy back in Feb-March. He went into a store and they already had this year's raiders draft hat on display complete with a raiders bomberman style jacket. He's a niner fan so he had to show us and be like "Out of all the teams."

LOL.
 
It's only going to get more popular now. You have the NWA movie coming out the team is getting better and maybe a new stadium things are looking good. :smokin
 
Vic Tafur reporting Carr doesn't need surgery for his hand, and that he fully expects him to be throwing at the beginning of mini camp June 9.

Rather, it's Lev Facher of the SF Chronicle reporting the news. Tafur is RTing the report. Good stuff.
 
Last edited:
ICE CITY FC said:
 
The only thing more tiring than these stadium updates is the "Oakland's officials need to get their **** together" rhetoric. I don't understand what people want from the city.

Like do people honestly expect the city to contribute in bearing the costs of the stadium? Forget the fact that when pro sport venues get public financing, it comes from the state 99.99% of the time, not the local city.  Forget the fact that it's something that will never again happen in this state by any significant scale. The  < 10% Levi's Stadium got was beyond a bargain and literally borderline crook work.

Is the city of Oakland is supposed to give away thousands of acreage for FREE in what's one of, if not the hottest municipality in the country for investment at the moment and the last four years (not that external factors haven't been an influence, but something Oakland's elected officials dating back to Jerry Brown absolutely do deserve some credit for) ??? 

Point me in the right direction, where has the city of Oakland been the problem throughout this process.  
Click to expand...
It's called show, not tell.

Mark Purdy's piece from yesterday.

SAN FRANCISCO -- Wednesday morning, the Oakland Raiders delegation was on stage at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel. The show didn't have much to offer.

 ​

 ​

Mark Davis, the Raiders owner, joined team president Marc Badain in a meeting room. Upon request, they presented an update on Oakland's stadium situation to the other NFL owners who are assembled here this week for the league's spring meetings.

 ​

 ​

Details were not made public. The door was closed. But the whole thing could not have taken more than a few minutes. Why? Oakland has kept its streak alive. For the third straight year, the city has not given the Raiders any sort of plan with real meat to consider. So the Raiders had diddly to report.


The Oakland Raiders players are introduced before their preseason NFL game against the Detroit Lions at O.co Coliseum in Oakland, Calif., on Friday, Aug. 15, 2014. Raiders won 27-26. (Ray Chavez/Bay Area News Group) ( RAY CHAVEZ )

 ​

 ​

And, man, is the NFL ever displeased about the diddly.

 ​

 ​

"This is not a new issue," commissioner Roger Goodell told reporters at the meetings' conclusion. "We do need ... a proposal from the people here about how they are going to keep the Raiders in Oakland. It's something that we have not seen, to my knowledge, any specific proposal."

 ​

 ​

Meanwhile, during the two-day meetings, Davis spent much time in the hotel lobby patiently trying to explain the Raiders' situation with all of the varied factors.

 ​

 ​

"This isn't checkers," Davis said. "This is chess."

 ​

 ​

He is so right. The question is, when will checkmate occur?

Within six to nine months, it says here. I spent both days with my boots on the ground here at Camp Goodell. My impressions:

Advertisement

​
  • The Raiders, whether they like it or not, are in a race to Los Angeles with the San Diego Chargers and St. Louis Rams if the idea is for each to leave their home markets because of insufficient stadium love. It's clear the NFL will be in Los Angeles by 2016 or 2017. The Rams have formulated their own stadium plan in Inglewood. The Chargers and Raiders are working together on a jointly occupied stadium in Carson. The Rams and Chargers seem prepared to declare before Jan. 1 that they wish to move. Davis told me: "Personally, I don't think it should be a race -- it should be done right." But he knows he can't wait forever.
     ​

     ​
  • Davis' terms are simple. He says he has assembled $500 million to put toward a football stadium project in Oakland that will cost $900 million or more. That leaves a $400 million gap for Oakland to fill. And no one from the city has come close to suggesting how it gets filled. San Diego and St. Louis have each made proposals to keep their teams. Oakland has yet to do so.
     ​

     ​
  • Politicians in Oakland and Alameda County are about to face reality. For so long, they have successfully deflected attention away from themselves toward the Coliseum City proposal that has been championed by San Diego financier Floyd Kephart. You can see what's ahead. When Kephart's plan flops, as I predict it will, those politicians will blame him and claim it wasn't their fault if the Raiders leave. No one should let them get away with that excuse. Coliseum City was folly from the start. Anyone who took time to examine the proposal could see it. Long ago, Oakland needed an alternate plan. None has been forthcoming.
     ​

     ​
  • In Davis' lobby conversations, the Raiders' owner kept saying that he hoped some answers about the Coliseum City project will surface on June 21, when Kephart faces a deadline to present certain "deliverables" to Oakland officials. Davis shouldn't hold his breath. Read the fine print. All that Kephart must do by June 21 is produce a "market feasibility study." He does not have to produce a financing plan or reveal his money sources until Aug. 21. And who knows where the Los Angeles proposals might stand by then?
     ​

     ​
  • News that former 49ers executive Carmen Policy is now working with the Chargers and Raiders on their Southern California game plan is not necessarily a positive sign for Los Angeles interests. Policy is smart and smooth. But he's failed in his last two stadium missions involving the 49ers -- a project at Candlestick that went south when owner Eddie DeBartolo Jr. left the team after Louisiana legal troubles and another proposal by developers at Hunters Point that the York family rejected in favor of Santa Clara. So maybe there's hope for Oakland after all.
     ​

     ​
  • No one in Oakland should expect empathy or patience from Eric Grubman, the NFL executive tasked with overseeing the Los Angeles stadium landscape as well as issues in the East Bay. Grubman held court by a Ritz elevator Wednesday. In a grim assessment of the Oakland situation and the city's continued promises to submit a plan, Grubman said: "I've heard that for three or four years and it hasn't been produced. The time has shrunk and no results have been produced."
     ​

     ​
  • As readers of this column are well aware, I have relentlessly pounded the drum on the reality that Oakland must make a tough choice and pick one pro franchise to try to satisfy with a new venue -- either the Raiders or A's. I am more convinced of that than ever. There's nothing wrong with being unable to afford both teams. It will just take a grown-up person to say so publicly. Perhaps that grown-up will be Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf.
     ​

     ​
  • One big reason that just a single team can be satisfied: Both the Raiders and A's want rights to the property on which the current Coliseum structure sits. Those who say the teams should consider other options aren't grasping the point: If the city is asking the teams to put up hundreds of millions of dollars toward a stadium project, those teams have the right to ask for what they want. The city can then accept or reject those terms. Either is acceptable, depending on the taxpayers' desires. Limbo doesn't work. Limbo is where we continue to be. And the biggest message from the NFL to Oakland this week was: No more limbo.
 
Last edited:
Schaaf awaits proposal, too

Meanwhile, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said the city wasn’t ambivalent about keeping the Raiders. Schaaf is waiting for a finance proposal from the city’s private development partner, Floyd Kephard, but it’s not due until June 21. Schaaf said she spoke with Grubman on Tuesday morning and is tentatively scheduled to meet with Goodell when she is in New York early next month.

“We share the NFL and Raiders’ frustration,” said Schaaf, who took office in January. “The last (city) administration produced a string of unsuccessful development partners and, frankly, some false promises … (Grubman) acknowledged frustration with the past team, but he also seemed very committed to working with us in coming up with a solution here.”

Schaaf said the solution in Oakland is more complex than in San Diego and St. Louis because the Raiders share a stadium with the A’s and the land is owned jointly by the city and Alameda County. She noted that the city has completed zoning and environmental clearance to create a Coliseum development area that could support the project.

“While I’ve been clear that I can’t support putting more city money into stadium construction, I am committed to providing the Raiders with more clarity about other ways the city can contribute,” Schaaf said. “I recognize that also has been a frustration to them. And that’s something I’m committed to correct.”

The Raiders, of course, are moving forward with Plan B: a proposed $1.7 billion stadium they would share with the Chargers in Carson (Los Angeles County). On Monday, the teams hired former 49ers executive Carmen Policy to spearhead the campaign for the team to relocate to Los Angeles. On the same day, they finalized a deal to purchase 168 acres on the proposed site.

- I guess we will find out June 21st...

http://www.sfchronicle.com/raiders/...hp?t=dd33fabbb7f3689a9f&cmpid=twitter-premium
Th3RealF0lkBlu3s said:
KTLA is reporting the NFL is announcing a team is moving to LA in August.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
LOL watch the NFL say just that in the announcement in Aug....

Goodell walks up to the podium...

"The NFL would like to announce....That is a team moving to Los Angeles... Details to follow."

Although I think it will be the announcement of the Rams for sure.

Still don't know why the A's and Raiders can't work something out.

 
Last edited:
Also, anyone follow Tuck on instagram? Seems he has taken to the mentor role for the young guys. Seems to be working with Khalil.
 
OaklandCA said:
 
ICE CITY FC said:
 
The only thing more tiring than these stadium updates is the "Oakland's officials need to get their **** together" rhetoric. I don't understand what people want from the city.

Like do people honestly expect the city to contribute in bearing the costs of the stadium? Forget the fact that when pro sport venues get public financing, it comes from the state 99.99% of the time, not the local city.  Forget the fact that it's something that will never again happen in this state by any significant scale. The  < 10% Levi's Stadium got was beyond a bargain and literally borderline crook work.

Is the city of Oakland is supposed to give away thousands of acreage for FREE in what's one of, if not the hottest municipality in the country for investment at the moment and the last four years (not that external factors haven't been an influence, but something Oakland's elected officials dating back to Jerry Brown absolutely do deserve some credit for) ??? 

Point me in the right direction, where has the city of Oakland been the problem throughout this process.  
Click to expand...
It's called show, not tell.

Mark Purdy's piece from yesterday.
Click to expand...
I don't know if you read my post but as stated in the article you posted, the crux of the issues is
Davis' terms are simple. He says he has assembled $500 million to put toward a football stadium project in Oakland that will cost $900 million or more. That leaves a $400 million gap for Oakland to fill. And no one from the city has come close to suggesting how it gets filled. San Diego and St. Louis have each made proposals to keep their teams. Oakland has yet to do so. 
Click to expand...
It's not the city of Oakland or any other municipality's responsibility to provide $400 million dollars for a stadium. The city hasn't suggested how the funding gap get's filled because it's obvious. Private funding. It's not the city of Oakland's primary responsibility to secure that private funding, that primary responsibility falls on Mark Davis - it might appear that way, because the Raiders are effectively strong arming the city by saying come up with half a billion dollars or we split - which is perfectly fair they have leverage. But it's not an issue of the city being broke or incompetent.  It's an issue that revolves around Mark Davis having no real experience and more attractive options, no matter how many times he says he'd prefer the team in Oakland, thus giving the city a very difficult and complex problem to solve. 

And can we stop citing Goodell and the NFL on this issue? The league would prefer the team in Los Angeles for obvious reasons $. As an owner with a 1/32 stake in the league Mark Davis is effectively Goodell and any league employees boss. They're not going to say anything publicly that doesn't support Mark or the team. We know they're not unbiased on this issue. 

To be perfectly blunt, Mark Davis is broke (relatively speaking), and has zero business savvy. If he had either of the two in any meaningful capacity, the stadium would have been largely privately financed. Like the Warriors, Niners and Giants current and future venues.

Instead Mark has no money and doesn't have the business savvy to effectively pool investors nor hire someone who does. The city of Oakland has been trying to do that, obvious by how quick everyone is to point how they've failed to find a solution over the last few years with each of the two developers they've brought in the mix. The same people blast the city for being "inactive." It's not an easy task, some would say closer to impossible.  But it certainly is easy as fans to cross our arms and say hey, the city's elected officials suck, they should have long been able to get this done. I'm saying that's naive and unrealistic. 
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest News

View All News

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom