You can’t turn a page in the paper without the subject of stadiums dominating the news. The Oakland A’s to Fremont, the 49ers to Santa Clara—it doesn’t stop! Not that I don’t like hearing of sports teams coming closer to San Jose. I mean, we did pass Detroit in size, didn’t we? So by default we deserve more sports teams!
But, as we hear of the news to bring teams closer to our border, why are we not hearing that we are bringing teams within those borders? It seems we are doing everything possible to get teams to surround our city in small towns that barely register on the map. (Sorry Fremont and Santa Clara). I know, Bud Selig and Major League Baseball have something more to say about why the A’s can’t move past Fremont, but there is nothing to keep the 49ers from becoming a San Jose team. Instead, Santa Clara is reeling off their loss of the A’s a few years ago and trying to grab some—any—notoriety. And they just might get it.
Let’s face it, San Francisco is probably one of the most popular and most recognizable cities in the world, but the numbers of their sports fans are miniscule. It’s a horrible sports town where most of the fans come from the South Bay anyway. So I say good riddance to the 49ers in SF. I’ll bet that 90 percent of the fans will now save money on gas to go tailgating each Sunday.
It just drives me insane that we can’t get a ballpark or a stadium or even a music hall in downtown San Jose. Has it been so difficult to deal with City Hall and its bureaucracy that everyone is choosing to go to the small cities to get things done?
Everything moving closer is a good thing, but we need to think bigger and grander about how San Jose can start to get a larger piece of the pie than just being included in the name. But, who knows, maybe in a few years we will see the San Jose A’s of Fremont and the San Jose 49ers of Santa Clara or even the San Jose House of Blues of Mountain View.
Until then….
I see great opportunity in the new ballparks in giving mass transit a boost. The new mayor and the new members of the city council will have an opportunity to work with the county and ajoining cities to put in a workable and afordable system. There will now be focus. North San Jose down N 1st street has the opportunity to bloom as described during the mayorial debates.
Greg—Frank Taylor lost that battle,despite billions, a big staff, and the Murky. University Neighborhood won easily. The centerof their neighborhood is Original Joe’s. Maybe the Fairmont escapes the pull of their suburb. The Mini-Mayor “system” works for the Little San Jose “burb” like a charm. George Green, “Downtown” property Owner
Before Quakes fans respond in full force to this post by Single Gal, let me get this out of the way; Single Gal is referring to the top three sports leagues in the US; MLB, NFL, and NBA. We know already that MLS is coming back to San Jose, that Lew Wolff will build your SSS, that soccer is the worlds most popular sport, blah, blah, blah. I think with Chuck Reed taking the helm of San Jose, there’s a very, very small chance that the A’s could still relocate to downtown San Jose (but I won’t hold my breath). And Yes! The 49ers should relocate to San Jose proper (and this coming from a Raiders fan). A good location could be the former grounds of FMC; good freeway access and close to Caltrain.
SG –
You have a myriad of problems in play here.
1) The inability of San Jose to “think big”. As has been pointed out in other discussions, San Jose as a city and a population lacks the will to grow. Instead of thinking for city-wide growth, we get bogged down in neighborhood small thinking. Put a music hall downtown? No, fix my potholes in Evergreen instead! Build a soccer stadium and recreation complex on SJSU’s South Campus? Hell no! The People’s Republic of Willow Glen will revolt! San Jose lacks the ability to see beyond its own driveway. It’s the world’s largest bedroom community.
2) San Jose (and Bay Area) sports fans are the worst in the world. We can’t get the 49ers to move here because half the city is Raider fans (or fans of other teams) and they won’t vote for a 49ers stadium. We wouldn’t vote for a stadium for the Giants because half of our registered voters don’t like baseball. Let the millionaires build it themselves, they cry! Meanwhile, communities large and small are lining up to build new facilities because they have the long term vision to invest in their future and the patience to nurture it. We don’t. Rest in peace, Pavilion.
3) Downtown? Downtown’s a “failure”! Don’t put another cent into a “failure”! Yes, heaven forbid we make a 90-degree turn with our downtown and make it into something for all of us to enjoy, not just visitors and conventioneers.
But as long as we keep thinking small and blaming the past we will not have a future in this city.
Once upon a time, the West San Carlos Sears and Saddlerack location(s) could have been combined, thus making way for major league baseball.
Years later, down the block, so to speak, the Del Monte cannery /property, was considered.
When our former soccer team departed, the revival was to have a venue constructed near Amtrak, even closer to downtown.
Whether we missed out or lucked out by not moving forward with a stadium plan still has this a nagging issue to many.
My take is, this never will happen, in the city ranked number ten.
Downtown
#4 – don’t bet on an Earthquakes revival. There are too many political hurdles and too many neighborhood “leaders” and the ilk of Cathy Chavez Napoli ready to say “no” and fight any sporting arena proposal.
And to SG’s argument that we “deserve” more sports teams…why? We don’t support what we have already. We lost a soccer team partly due to lack of support (yes, there were other political ramifications, but that was the core issue). We nearly let our university’s athletic program wither and die (it’s out of ICU, but it’s still not healthy). We lost a symphony and a ballet company and we’ve seen our local repertory theatre slide into debt. We’ve had all manner of “niche” sports from arena football to indoor lacrosse to indoor soccer to roller hockey to women’s volleyball to class-A minor league baseball. Only a fringe few support what we already have. How does that make us a candidate for “big time”? If I were an investor, I would look at other cities—smaller cities—that appreciate and support and embrace what they have before investing in a new venture here.
#4: No Anthony, you’re the one assuming that Single Gal is ONLY referring to NFL, MLB and NBA (the 49ers and the A’s happened to be the only teams mentioned in her post because those are the only two teams currently making headlines as far as moving to the South Bay). But it’s good of you to acknowledge that the San Jose Earthquakes ARE returning, albeit as an expansion team.
In any case, it’s interesting that each of the three locations within San Jose that Lewis Wolff and John Fisher are currently looking at to build “The [Corporate name] Epicenter at San José” is controlled by a different municipal entity: the downtown Diridon site is owned by the City of San Jose, the Santa Clara County Fairgrounds site is owned by Santa Clara County, and the SJSU South Campus site is owned by the California State University system.
-G
I think the Sharks are well supported and the fans are awesome…they would do the same for the 49ers – I don’t know if you hang out with too many Raider fans, but all the San Jose fans I know are 9er fans and Giants fans….but they will turn if you can go to a game in a downtown ball park and then walk to bars, restaurants, etc afterwards. It would be awesome, but yes, i agree with whoever said we don’t think like a big city….that needs to change and hopefully with Gonzo gone, it will..
Anyone interested in talking about Chuck Reed’s new appointments?
Ru is very competent.
Armando is pleasant—that alone will be a welcome change from Joe Guerra!
But Furman? It looks like Chuck picked a mini-me as his chief of staff. And why select someone who has only lived in this part of the world for two years? How effective can someone be if they have absolutely no history with San Jose?
I hope I’m wrong, but I think that Furman was a very poor choice.
#8: No, the San Jose Earthquakes were NOT relocated because of lack of support. As a matter of fact, a list of PAID attendence for all the MLS teams throughout the 2005 season was released (or was leaked… I’m not exactly sure which) shortly after the relocation which revealed that San Jose was FOURTH in the twelve-team league – if attendance was really the primary issue, over half the league should’ve/would’ve been relocated before the Quakes were.
The real issue was that AEG, who owned the Quakes, wanted someone (whether it was the City of San Jose or the Sharks or whoever) to build them a stadium here but to give all revenue/scheduling control (for games, concerts and such) to AEG without AEG having to pay a dime for the stadium’s construction. Of course no one here agreed to that, and AEG currently seems to be having trouble getting the same deal in Houston despite believing that they’d have such a deal there signed, sealed and delivered within a month or so of the team’s arrival there.
After Lewis Wolff revealed his plan to privately finance a soccer stadium here himself, he was then asked why he didn’t jump in to buy the Quakes and keep them here. He replied that he was led to believe that “that ship had already sailed”, which makes me wonder whether AEG already knew that no one here would agree to their demand.
The Epicenter is coming to San Jose, sooner rather than later.
-G
I for one can’t wait for the return of the San Jose Earthquakes…any of the above mentioned stadium sites would be fine with me. A great city like San Jose deserve’s a great soccer team. I support the A’s and the 49ers as well, and would love those teams to move south…but, I’d be most excited to see professional soccer back in the birthplace of Major League Soccer!
Anthony, haven’t you heard? It’s over. The A’s will never build stadium in San Jose. On the other hand, the chances are very good that we will see a soccer stadium built somewhere within the San Jose city limits.
RIPavilion, you are out of touch with reality! Downtown is truly a vibrant family destination all year round. It has the Tech, Children’s museum and the plaza park. Don’t forget Camera 12, a haven for young movie goers. Where do you come off as downtown is a failure? There are some cute boutiques, too.
RIPavilion
If you are making an argument or ranting at least get your facts straight
inability of San Jose to “think big” or “will to grow ” – So what is North San Jose , Evergreen and Coyotte Valley plus massive infill development ? It is not inability to think big or grow it is poor planning, bad design, and worst implementation using exceptions not planning
Neighborhoods have legitimate concerns with many developers proposals that maximize profits while not address impacts
Music hall downtown was a city / county fight not San Jose resident issue
Fixing potholes is what cities do but San Jose neglects
Build a soccer stadium and recreation complex on SJSU’s South Campus? Who objected to that proposal – San Jose State would not cooperate and it did not have public transit
Downtown has decades of failure and retailers avoid it due to it’s unresolved problems and inability of downtown residents, business and city to solve problems Just because you build it they will not come if public see downtown as having decades of unsolved problems and other areas more attractive to go with free parking and better customer service attitudes
Too many wrong facts and basic lack of understanding to have a rational conversation
Yes we have problems but at least get your facts right before ranting
Guys: Here’s my bet. Everybody on this blog—and i mean everybody—travels out of the san jose city limits every day: to work, to shop, taking kids to school, etc. The truth is, we live in multi-city metropolis, roughly within the boundaries of our county. Why do we care so much which city limits a sports park falls into? As long as it’s close it serves a regional purpose—whether it’s campbell, milipitas, mountain view or san jose doesn’t matter to me. It’s all 20 minutes by car.
The San Jose Sharks convinced the city and the san jose downtown association to sue the county over the music hall. They won, or did we.
Why haven’t the sharks started on thier music hall? They force us to take legal action; cost the city millions, then they don’t do their concert hall.
What a great parnter for San Jose!!!!!
RGD#17: It may not matter to you, but it matters to government people who want tax revenue.
Rose Garden Dad
Thanks for a great comment – Santa Clara is closer than San Francisco and Fremont closer than Oakland
San Jose will not be ready for major league sports for many years and we can not afford to finance a billion or more for ML Baseball and 49ers, so let other fools do it
We have many other higher priority uses for our few tax dollars before paying / wasting hundreds millions on Major League Sports which has become a corporate business with multi millionaire professional sports owners and players interested only in how many more millions they are getting not the local city, kids or residents in which they play
How many San Jose residents can afford ticket prices to go on a regular basis – we will be mostly financing / subsidising Silicon Valley corporations attending games not regular people
Most major league sports teams require more millions per year as continous tax subsidies to keep the millionaire owners and players happy that we as city can not afford
Yes let’s support their move to Santa Clara and Fremont closer to San Jose but without problems
When discussing stadiums in cities and all the issues that goes with them, it helps to remain open-minded and focused on the impacts they will have to the communities and fans they will serve. I live in SF and am a Quakes fan. Eventhough I have never been a fan of baseball, when Pac Bell park came up for a vote, I supported and voted for the idea. Why? Because I could see the need for it on many levels. I knew Candlestick was a bad place for the game with going there just once growing up. I knew that the China Basin area needed a jumpstart, and I knew the fans of the Giants would love the new park. I’ve been there a few times, its great. So I urge all those who post here about stadiums to think about the fans and the people, but most of all stay opened-minded about land use discussions. If the deals are do right for all involved, then they should have support, regardless of whether its your sport or team involved.
L.
I think Lew Wolf can make a stadium work in San Jose. Our kids went to soccer camp over the Thanksgiving weekend and were coached by, imo, the best player playing in the United States. Having a stadium is important to the quality of life of the residents in San Jose, just as the opera and other arts groups. Hopefully, the Earthquakes and soccer will return soon.
Earthshaker! I’m a realist; I know the A’s will never set up shop in downtown San Jose (please refer to my “not holding my breath” comment of #4). But I’m personally not giving up (especially with the new Reed administration on the horizon) until dirt is finally turned over at Pac Commons Fremont. As for your SSS, I’m also pretty confident it will be built within SJ’s city limits. It’s just to bad soccer stadiums don’t provide the development/economic synergy of Major League Ballparks (see Petco Park in San Diego)…the atmosphere/vibe of SD’s Gaslamp is just awesome!!
#11: Gotta disagree with your concerns about Mayor Reed’s selection of Pete Furman as his chief of staff. Pete is very-likeable, reasonable, articulate and smart. Not only is he highly-regarded by many neighborhood and community leaders but his low-key yet collaborative style should help to improve the low staff morale found in so many city departments. Pete will be a welcome presence in City Hall and I’m sure he will serve our new mayor extremely well.
#11 (Willow Glen Mom): I think you’re going to be pleasantly surprised by Pete Furman as chief of staff to mayor Chuck Reed. Furman, who lives downtown and has in his short time in San Jose already become a highly respected neighborhood activist, is exceptionally bright, ethical, well-spoken, and has already shown a deep commitment to bettering San Jose. Furman embodies everything folks on this blog say they want from officialdom.
Furman was instrumental in the grass-roots effort to get the city council to boost the contributions of developers to reducing the deficit of parkland and parks infrastructure in this city. The Mercury News alluded to this in this morning’s story, but gave it short shrift, in my mind. The effort of Citizens for a Liveable San Jose (CAL-SJ) was a heroic one which prevailed against stiff opposition from the developer community. Furman was one of the leaders of the grass-roots effort.
I didn’t vote for Chuck Reed, but if all of his decisions are as good as selecting Furman as his chief of staff, everyone is going to be quite happy with his administration.
Oh . . . and, as for sports stadiums: Lew Wolff says he will build a soccer stadium on his own nickel—a $100-plus million private investment in San Jose—provided he is given the land to do it. (This is totally separate from the A’s stadium in Fremont.)
The project also includes recreational soccer (and baseball) fields, of which San Jose is in serious short supply, and which could be used by kids in our community, would also attract recreational tournaments, boosting tourism and thus in themselves add millions annually in economic impact to the city. Wolff has shown that he is serious about what he sets out to do, and he thinks soccer is a good investment. It’s about time San Jose got serious about this opportunity or lose it to a neighboring community.
#20: Your concern with most sports owners wanting tax or bond funding for new stadiums is certainly a valid one. Fortunately, Lewis Wolff is proving not to be like most sports owners.
Wolff and Cisco Systems have combined to pay for the entire cost of Cisco Field themselves, asking only for a good deal on the land and some surrounding roadside improvements (I believe that Wolff also plans to buld a “Baseball Village” of sorts there replete with shops, apartments, restaurants, etc.).
That’s EXACTLY the type of deal Wolff and Fisher are offering for the proposed soccer stadium: completely privately funded in exchange for a good deal on the land and some surrounding roadside improvements (I’m not sure whether or not a “Soccer Village” would come with that – such a “Village” would be easy to implement at a site with tons of free space like at the Fairgrounds or maybe the SJSU South Campus site, but perhaps not as likely for the Diridon site).
-G
#23: At the San Jose Chamber of Commerce Morning Buzz meeting on August 30th, Lew Wolff discussed (among many other things) how he tried everything he could think of to convince the San Francisco Giants and MLB to allow the A’s to build a San Jose ballpark, to no avail.
Wolff revealed that a huge reason (perhaps the main reason) why the Giants won’t give up their MLB territorial rights to Santa Clara County is that their banking relationships with the institutions that helped them privately-fund then-Pacific Bell Park specifically depends on the Giants holding onto those territorial rights.
To paraphrase a well-known saying: such banking agreements are thicker than water. The Giants would be in a WORLD of hurt if they were to break such agreements.
-G
Hi Anthony!
True, a soccer stadium would not be the economic engine a baseball stadium would, but, even a that, (like I said over on marinelayer’s blog), a baseball stadum has about as much econmic impact as a Macy’s department store. (per an article in a east bay newspaper.)
Clark and Dan,
Glad to hear your positive comments about Furman.
I still have concerns about appointing someone who has such a short tenure in San Jose, but it sounds like he is a quick learner and ethical to boot.
Single Gal, seems as though you have a parochial mindset about our Downtown. I recall that the RDA, namely Frank Taylor, had the same view. In his day, it was damn near impossible to open a lemonade stand without Frank and his cohorts demanding that it be in Downtown. What is it about folks who think everything should be in Downtown?
I am not a San Jose resident, and spend little time or money in the city – except for soccer. For 10 years I went to every game and spent money there whenever the Earthquakes played. When Lew Wolff gets them started up again I will be there. I have nothing against MLB or NFL, and they certainly don’t need me to be successful, but soccer can be just as successful or even more so as an image-booster for San Jose if San Jose wants to get behind it. In this era of globalization, soccer can connect soccer to many influential people and places in the world. Combine that with a high-tech image and you won’t have to spend $200,000 to a PR firm to get attention for the city. There are many baseball and football fans here who think that without their sport San Jose is doomed to be a minor-league town. I submit that if city and business leaders decide to promote soccer and, through soccer, San Jose, they will be seen as “big-league” in fairly short order. Treat it as an asset and use it as an asset and it will become a bigger asset. Lew Wolff knows that is true and is acting accordingly.
Willow Glen Mom,
In today’s paper Chuck said about Furman that he wanted someone who walked like Chuck, talked like Chuck, and had one agenda, Chuck’s agenda. In other words, a YES man.
Whether that is good or not remains to be seen.
However, I seem to remember reading that a common trait of failed leaders is that they like YES men, and only hear what their YES men tell them. The problem is YES men always tell the boss what he wants to hear. Whether it is true or not.
Sorry Single Gal,
The city doesn’t have the money…
Throughout Reed’s campaign he was quick to point out that the city doesn’t have the money to spend on even simple services like park maintenance since the dot com bust trashed the city’s tax base.
Next Tuesday, city council is set to spend $222,612.37 on Herman Miller chairs. The very symbol of the irrational behavior that doomed the dot coms in this Valley!
Isn’t the city looking at a budget deficit?
I am very much intrigued by all the comments on this issue. I am not trying to take the sunlight away with my own little tree in this forest. I do want to ask, sincerely, do people think the idea of the 49ers going to Santa Clara is good one?
As for my views, I am posting those on my blog, http://www.missioncitylantern.blogspot.com.
Most of you have analyzed San Jose’s stadium plans quite well. I am sincerely pledging not to add my own replies to your views, because I am really interested in seeing what people that respond here on Silicon Valley’s main political blog, really think about the idea of the 49ers locating in Santa Clara.
You can even begin your replies, if you want:
DEAR MAYOR MAHAN
Thanks
Mayor Reed is first city official to honestly tell public about San Jose’s actual financial condition rather that more happy talk and evasion under Gonzo and Lame Ducks
We have $1-2 billion in unfunded San Jose liabilities and deferred maintenance – Reed disclosed yesterday
Look for Spring 2007 Budget financial surprises and more hundreds millions and maybe billions in the coming months from Reed’s new Budget Director after Gonzo and the Lame Ducks are gone and city staff is not afraid of political or job retaliation to be completely truthful about San Jose’s tax, physical and financial condition
Gonzo’s financed his multi billion spending spree by deferring maintenance, not disclosing city future liabilities, and issuing billions in bonds.
Clark and Dan,
WGM and BlueFox have it right. Furman is a wildcard and you give Furman too much credit for CALSJ. Who says he wasnt a mole for the Reed camp since virtually all of CALSJ backed Chavez?
I highly doubt we are going to see any reforms from Reed based on his staff selection. Not many new faces and news ideas.
Gomez has been with Reed since 2000 and a Milpitas councilman? No conflict there.
And Weekakoon? 17 year RDA veteran. How about RDA lifer. Weekakoon is married to Richard Keit, RDA Neighborhood Business Districts lifer. Expect to see status quo economic development.
Next 4 years should be good for Milpitas.
Earth to Reed, Evergreen sprawl is death to downtown.
As has been said before, it will take years to recover from the damage heaped upon us by Gonzales and his stooge council. Too bad. If “leaders” like Chavez, etc. had stood up to this clown our city would be in much better shape. Thanks for nothing.
#16 is quoted as saying “Downtown has decades of failure and retailers avoid it due to it’s unresolved problems and inability of downtown residents, business and city to solve problems Just because you build it they will not come if public see downtown as having decades of unsolved problems and other areas more attractive to go with free parking and better customer service attitudes”
…and therein proves my point. Thank you #16.
A clarification to my posting #30 above. While I am not a resident of San Jose, I have worked in San Jose for the past 30 years. I had hoped to make the point that it was soccer that draws me (and others I know) back into San Jose after work or on weekends as a recreational spender.
Here’s yet more proof that we don’t take care of what we have (or, in this case, had). Perhaps if we in this city showed the same passion for the San Jose Earthquakes as the city of Houston shows for it’s Houston Dynamo, perhaps the Dynamo would never have happened!
http://www.metroactive.com/metro/11.29.06/hall-of-shame-gift-guide-0648.html
We don’t “deserve” more sports teams until we already care for what we have.
#39: That’s a good (if bittersweet) article, but the responsibility to create the conditions for such a “buzz” lies with the team’s ownership group. It’s still up to the ownership to advertise, market and promote the team and to sell tickets, and its Public Relations department to constantly keep in contact with the local media. AEG has been spending money and other resources creating such a buzz throughout the season in Houston in a way it NEVER even tried to do in its years of ownership in San Jose.
Still, if you’re implying that City Hall didn’t do enough to help keep the Earthquakes here, then you may have a good point. However, if the “we” in your post refers to the sports fans and/or the general populace of San Jose, then you’re off-base.
Believe me, there was MUCH more local “buzz” after the San Jose Earthquakes won MLS Cup 2001 (who were owned at the time by the San Jose Sharks’ Silicon Valley Sports & Entertainment, until the NHL team’s ownership change months later forced SVS&E to cut ties with MLS in late-2002 to right their own floundering (at the time, both on and off the ice) Sharks) than there was after AEG’s San Jose Earthquakes won MLS Cup 2003 – considering the two ownership groups, that was NOT merely a coincidence.
A case in point about the difference in ownerships comes from that linked article: after MLS Cup 2003, the champion Earthquakes were stuck on a single faux cablecar that was lost among the floats in the San Jose Christmas Parade. That was in complete contrast to the huge celebration thrown in St. James Park right after the Quakes’ MLS Cup 2001 win that was followed a few weeks later by Earthquakes goalkeeper Joe Cannon’s and CyberRays (who had won the WUSA Founders Cup that same year) goalkeeper LaKeysia Beene’s appearance as grandmarshalls, or at as least honored guests, in the San Jose Christmas Parade that year.
Such celebrations (or lack thereof) are generally initiated by a team’s ownership. While judging by the Earthquakes/A’s San Jose office-opening event held earlier this month, it fortunately seems like Lew Wolff’s treatment of the new San Jose Earthquakes will be much closer to SVS&E’s than AEG’s.
-G
#39 (RIP Pavilion): It’s not true that the people of San Jose cared less about their two champion soccer teams than the people of Houston do about their current one. It is true that the opinion leaders and power-brokers in San Jose and Silicon Valley cared less about their team than do their counterparts in Houston.
Who lost the Quakes? There’s blame to go around —although absolutely none for the loyal San Jose fans, without exaggeration the very best in major league soccer. (Privately ask any of the former San Jose players now in Houston.) But the chief villain is the San Jose Mercury News’ sports and news departments. (The editorial side has always been supportive of keeping, and now regaining, a team.)
The Mercury News sports staff very often simply refuses to report soccer news when it happens, including in one instance omitting even so much as a fine print line score of meaningful San Jose Earthquakes game—versus Minnesota in a US Open Cup game in 2004. (You read it here first that the Quakes won that game and advanced in the tournament.) By contrast, as this week’s Metro story shows, the Houston Chronicle, and Houston’s mayor, treat with respect and as a valued community asset their championship squad.
Imagine if the Mercury News didn’t report Sharks scores, let alone stories about what happened during games? A steady diet of that kind of “journalism”, and every Californian’s embedded prejudice against hockey would be reinforced and the team would become invisible. You really don’t have to imagine it. There was a time in the 1980s, before the Sharks, when the Merc simply did not report on the NHL. They could have continued with the same mindset despite the arrival of the Sharks, and in that event, because the Merc has a monopoly and isn’t answerable to its customers’ wishes for local news, the team probably would have folded or moved to Saskatoon. Happily, however, some key folks on the Merc were easterners who appreciated hockey, and so the Sharks got a fair shake—unlike the Quakes.
The Mercury News sports and news departments continue to refuse to cover the Quakes—and I use the word refuse advisedly. Lew Wolff had a big party at the Fairmont attended by the mayor of Santa Clara, other dignataries and SEVERAL HUNDRED SOCCER FANS (during business hours on a week day) to launch his soccer initiative on a Wednesday evening the day after the election—the same night the 49ers made their bolt-from-the-blue announcement about Santa Clara to capture that same mayor’s attention; no coincidence there. The Merc had a sports reporter and a columnist there and yet said nothing about it until three days later, on a Saturday, buried inside the sports pages in literal fine print too small for any reader over 40 to decipher.
Despite the active condecension of our Valley’s opinion leaders for the Quakes, in 2004 and 2005 the team drew over 13,000 a game, about 75 percent of what the Sharks draw per game, with all their shiny corporate boxes. And thousands here still bleed Quakes blue, as evidenced by the plurality of soccer posts any time sports are mentioned in San Jose cyberspace.
So when you talk about San Jose not deserving a soccer team, speak for yourself. San Jose is Soccer Town U.S.A. Sorry you missed that story in the Mercury News.
#41 – Don, you make my point for me with this very statement – “By contrast, as this week’s Metro story shows, the Houston Chronicle, and Houston’s mayor, treat with respect and as a valued community asset their championship squad.”
San Jose does not value the “community assets” it already has. It’s lost a symphony that was the oldest orchestra west of the Mississippi. It’s lost a ballet company. And it’s lost its “championship” soccer club.
And we “deserve” more? Not yet, not by a long shot.
#42 (RIPavilion): I cannot tell whether we agree or disagree because you do not define your terms.
When you talk about “San Jose does not value the ‘community assets’ it already has” and rhetorically imply “we” don’t “‘deserve’” to get our team back, you seem to include not just San Jose’s indicted mayor and local daily newspaper (as contrasted with Houston’s counterparts) but also ordinary citizens, including the Earthquakes’ sizeable and still rabid fan base. Why impugn such people, who are obviously blameless, and thereby literally add insult to their injury?
#43 – Don, don’t take my stance so personally. I’m not speaking specifically that San Jose doesn’t “deserve” a soccer team. If you’re able to make that happen, more power to you. I could argue that point but I know better than to argue with the vocal number of soccer fans that swarm to the defense of the game.
What I refer to is Single Gal’s assertion that by our mere size and population density that we “deserve” more sports teams “by default”. We as a population have proven that we don’t “deserve” anything more, and certainly not “by default”.
My mama always said, “you don’t need more toys, you don’t even play with the ones you’ve got!” We as a population (with only one glaring exception in the SJ Sharks) by our past (and not just our sporting past) have not shown that we can or will support what we have. Why should we get anything else given to us? Simply because we have a high population number? That’s not a valid reason.
#43: Great point, Don.
Besides, in the case of new stadiums, what does it matter who “deserves” what when sports owners (in this case, Lewis Wolff and John Fisher) plan to build said stadium completely with their own money?
-G
Earth to all you soccer fans…MLS ISN’T! I REPEAT! ISN’T NFL, NBA, OR MLB! Heck, it’s not even on par with the NHL. I think the Merc has been correct in how it has reported the former Quakes and MLS in general. If you haven’t noticed, SI and ESPN the Magazine pretty much do the same in regards to MLS reporting. Look people, MLS is on par with Single A baseball/SJ Giants! It does not deserve the same newsprint as the Niners, Raiders, A’s, Giants, Sharks, Warriors! San Jose deserves the BIG TIME! Not some more sports gimicks like MLS, roller derby, or lacrosse.
#46: You should inform Houston (currently the 4th biggest city in the U.S., as compared to 10th biggest San Jose) that its MLS team didn’t “deserve” the front-page news and all the media attention that the franchise received there and didn’t receive here. Its local media obviously missed the memo.
Never mind that Houston also has teams in the NFL, MLB and NBA in addition to MLS (basically, all the major leagues that are also represented throughout the Bay Area except for the NHL), yet the local Houston media seems to treat its MLS team as “BIG TIME!” nonetheless. Granted, AEG’s (the team’s ownership) PR department undoubtedly put in a lot more effort to work with the media there than it ever did here, but it also had a more willing and open-minded local media to work with in the first place.
Also, never mind that the owners of one of the Bay Area’s major league sports organizations are currently seriously attempting to build a brand-new stadium complex here, as has been (and is still being) done for MLS teams all around the country – with their own money, no less (AEG only moved the previous Quakes because no one here would build AEG a stadium yet give AEG full revenue/scheduling control). Has that been done for other “sports gimmicks” like roller derby or outdoor/indoor lacrosse?
The San Jose Earthquakes that was here deserved a HECK of a lot more media coverage than the scant coverage it actually received; after all, only the very beginning and the very end of the MLS season overlapped a bit with the NFL, NBA, NHL and college football seasons.
And let’s not use the “pro soccer has tried here before and failed” argument. Unlike previous U.S. pro soccer leagues, MLS owners have been building soccer-specific stadiums and starting in 2007, for the first time ever for a U.S. pro soccer league, will have a television deal with ABC/ESPN2, Fox Soccer Channel/Fox Sports en Español, HDnet and Univision/Telefutura that will PAY THE LEAGUE a rights fee (!) to broadcast games – and that’s just the national broadcast package, not to mention the local/regional TV packages each MLS team has.
No one here is saying saying that MLS necessarily “deserves” MORE coverage than the NFL, MLB, NBA or even the NHL, but it “deserves” a LOT more than Single A baseball, roller derby and lacrosse. Houston certainly understands this, and the other U.S. major league sports leagues would never accuse that city of being “SMALL TIME!”.
-G
According to THE 2006 SPORTS BUSINESS MARKET RESEARCH HANDBOOK, published by Richard K. Miller & Associates (http://www.rkma.com), by 2010, Major League Soccer (MLS) will clearly have replaced the National Hockey League (NHL) as the fourth major professional sports league. A 4% rise in attendance in 2004 to an average of 15,559 per game means MLS had nearly caught up with the NHL’s average game attendance of 16,533.
Remember also that MLS began only ten years ago. So comparisons to MLB and NFL should be taken with a grain of salt. If San Jose leaders are to have a forward-looking mindset, they should take a cue from Lew Wolff and consider what the next 20 years can bring, and get in on the ground floor of the elevator ride.
#48—yeah, and in that same 20 years you’ll have to oprima numero uno to get a phone tree en Ingles.
#49 JMO:
With a comment like that, you’re exposing nothing more than your ignorance of the issues involved. And I thought it was only the influx of us central American players playing baseball (you know, the so-called “All American” sport) which created this “numero uno” stereotype. And only English speaking white boys in America watch baseball, none of the central American immigrants care to watch their countrymen playing this “Made in USA” sport, no? Never mind the fact that guys like me have bothered taking English education classes and can read/write English just fine.
Sincerely,
Sammy Sosa
Lest anyone think that in #48 above I cited a biased pro-soccer or anti-hockey source, I should point out that the client list for Richard K. Miller & Associates, publishers of THE 2006 SPORTS BUSINESS MARKET RESEARCH HANDBOOK, includes MLB, NBA, NFL, and the NHL… and not Major League Soccer.
#50 said: “Never mind the fact that guys like me have bothered taking English education classes and can read/write English just fine.”
I wish there were more like you. Unfortunately, a huge plurality, if not a majority, do not take those classes, so we get interviews of Lotto winners or crime victims who have lived here 20+ years conducted en espanol.
#52 JMO:
“Unfortunately, a huge plurality, if not a majority, do not take those classes, so we get interviews of Lotto winners or crime victims who have lived here 20+ years conducted en espanol.”
And it’s relevant to this issue, because?
Never mind the fact that you aren’t addressing your real hypocrisy – a claim that “soccer” should be treated as a foreign sport and talk about “hispanic majority” support, when the fact of the matter is, this issue is completely orthogonal to the debate. As is shown by general demographic trends as well as what is happening with other mainstream American sports today, including baseball – the other sport in which Lew Wolff is involved in building a stadium near San Jose.
I didn’t hear any “numero uno” comments when people were discussing whether the baseball stadium should be in Fremont or downtown San Jose or whatever.
#53: Soccer? I wasn’t talkin’ about soccer.
#54: Good reply, thanks for making my point. You don’t know what you’re “talking’” about and just blabbering without actually reading of the posts you’re replying to.