The stadium should be kept in a cage. It's a thug.

To be fair, the Raiders have played in awful stadiums for decades. Both Coliseums are among the worst venues around. The LA Coliseum works for USC because they don't care about creature comforts, luxury boxes, and earthquake safety when you can pack 100,000 students in there. You don't draw the high end crowd without high end amenities

rjakobi: The stadium should be kept in a cage. It's a thug.

WELCOME...TO ANOTHER EDITION OF THUNDERDOME!

/got nuthin'

Every Raider head coach henceforth should be referred to as "Interim".

Hue Jackson was no Lombardi, but he certainly didn't deserve to be fired after one year with no training camp and the injuries. I'm sure there will be a long line of quality coaches waiting to grab this prize of a job, what with all the patience and confidence the front office has shown.

My theory: Al Davis isn't really dead.

oh_please: Every Raider head coach henceforth should be referred to as "Interim".

Hue Jackson was no Lombardi, but he certainly didn't deserve to be fired after one year with no training camp and the injuries. I'm sure there will be a long line of quality coaches waiting to grab this prize of a job, what with all the patience and confidence the front office has shown.

My theory: Al Davis isn't really dead.

I understand gms come in and want their own people. But consistency is key to putting together a winning team. Hue Jackson, did great considering he lost his starting qb and starting Rb to injury. I get they faltered toward the end, but they werent terrible, they were at least competitive. Jackson deserved another chance, and the Raiders need to have some consistency if they want to get better. As far as im concerned, this is mistake number one for the new GM.

Isn't the Oakland Colosseum one of the last of the 70's concrete bowl multipurpose shiatholes? I can understand that being one of the smaller fractions of the problem, behind years of poor executive leadership.

UNC_Samurai: Isn't the Oakland Colosseum one of the last of the 70's concrete bowl multipurpose shiatholes? I can understand that being one of the smaller fractions of the problem, behind years of poor executive leadership.

IIRC once the Raiders came back they upgraded the side that would be the outfield during A's games.

But yeah, it's still pretty much the old Coliseum

The Lions got a nice new stadium out of that line, why shouldn't Oakland try it? The Lions went 0-16 in that brand new facility, but they had a different kind of suck going on with them. Oakland's suckage is waaay different, and having to play in an older stadium is why.

The sad thing is that the NFL will buy that BS hook, line, and sinker. And what is more they will name the damn thing after Al Davis. And they will still suck.

In football, does the stadium really make a noticeable difference in how well a team performs? I can only think of a handful of examples where a team can tailor themselves to the stadium (dome teams and places with a muddy track like Heinz or Soldier Field), and all of the other advantages I can think of have to do with crowd noise (Seattle, dome teams minus St. Louis because they're awful, and perhaps Lambeau).

Otherwise, this is just ownership trolling for more dollars. Why not just renovate the Oakland Alameda Coliseum, or whatever it's called now?

vinnydoz007
I understand gms come in and want their own people. But consistency is key to putting together a winning team. Hue Jackson, did great considering he lost his starting qb and starting Rb to injury. I get they faltered toward the end, but they werent terrible, they were at least competitive. Jackson deserved another chance, and the Raiders need to have some consistency if they want to get better. As far as im concerned, this is mistake number one for the new GM.

According to Bill Williamson at ESPN (i know, take it how you will), after Davis' death, Hue Jackson took over on a lot of the personnel issues (Carson Palmer and others) and it was felt around the Raiders office that he was getting a little bit of a power complex...New GM doesn't want a power struggle right off the bat, so goodbye Hue, hello guy I hire...not defending or denigrating either, just saying there's a set of reasons in play...

oh_please: My theory: Al Davis isn't really dead.

Al Davis has been dead for the last 10 years.

8-8 and no playoffs? Not good enough. Just win, baby.

Give me a REAL coach, please. Someone who has experience would be nice. I'm tired of coordinators getting the reigns.

Don't blame the stadium, other teams win there just fine.

Cubs300: Otherwise, this is just ownership trolling for more dollars. Why not just renovate the Oakland Alameda Coliseum, or whatever it's called now?

Because the A's want out of that thing too. You have three teams in town and you're about to lose two of them, one to San Jose and the other to Los Angeles, unless you tear it down.

homarjr: oh_please: My theory: Al Davis isn't really dead.

Al Davis has been dead for the last 10 years.

8-8 and no playoffs? Not good enough. Just win, baby.

Give me a REAL coach, please. Someone who has experience would be nice. I'm tired of coordinators getting the reigns.

I'd be happy with Jack Del Rio. You aren't going to get any of the top candidates being bandied about like Fisher/Cowher/etc(unless Madden convinces them, apparently he was involved in the GM hiring), and Del Rio is NOT a bad coach.

Cubs300: In football, does the stadium really make a noticeable difference in how well a team performs? I can only think of a handful of examples where a team can tailor themselves to the stadium (dome teams and places with a muddy track like Heinz or Soldier Field), and all of the other advantages I can think of have to do with crowd noise (Seattle, dome teams minus St. Louis because they're awful, and perhaps Lambeau).


Generally, sports GMs could really care less about tailoring their teams to their field when they talk about "we want a new stadium and we want it free!" As say, the Packers and Patriots passing games can attest to.

The argument is that it's more about getting the latest skyboxes so they can afford to attract better players with higher pay (or just line the owners' raccoon coats thicker with wads of 100s).

I'm not sure if it's still the case now, but it used to be that while all the teams shared in the television revenue, the teams get to keep all the money they made in parking/ticket sales/sky box sales. So, if you can get your preferred city or state to build a stadium that consisted solely of skyboxes gilded of gold like you would find in Dubai, then that money was all yours when renting those spaces out.

Kurmudgeon: Don't blame the stadium, other teams win there just fine.

+1 funny

Like I said: the A's want out of the Coliseum too.

If one team wants out of your stadium, maybe it's the team's fault.
If TWO teams want out of your stadium? It's the stadium's fault.

FriarReb98: These stadiums make no sense to me. Places like Fenway, Harvard Stadium, LA Coliseum, and all the other stadiums that are over 80 have survived, while almost every stadium built in the 60s became completely obsolete overnight. I understand that there was more sentimentality around these places and all, but really, how did they all fail so hard? I know a few of them were horribly designed and/or located (like the Stick), but it just seems like such a failure of the entire design class. Are people that lame that they don't know how to take care of things anymore?

Many of the stadiums built in the 60s were multipurpose deals, which is one of those "sounded like a good idea at the time" situations. Why waste money on two venues when one can make two teams in two sports equally miserable?

Candlestick was actually designed as a baseball-specific stadium, and the 49ers were just kind of shoehorned in there.

$$$$$$$$$$

fark em

You have three teams in town and you're about to lose two of them,

the Warriors are moving too, to SF!

germ78: I know for a fact that this is the problem facing the Bears. Virginia McCaskey is old and wants to win with defense and running.

How else are you going to do it? Soldier Field is not friendly to the passing game(which, of course, is the same thing you see at the Meadowlands year in and year out with the QB troubles they have)

The Bestest: Many of the stadiums built in the 60s were multipurpose deals, which is one of those "sounded like a good idea at the time" situations. Why waste money on two venues when one can make two teams in two sports equally miserable?

Just in terms of baseball, look at the Oakland Coliseum: you have the circular stadium, so there's the huge foul areas between home plate and the bases > the fans in the front row, the ones that should yelling obscenities at the opposing team, are 100 feet away.

For football, I can't imagine sitting in that horrible add-on upper deck in the outfield, you might as well be watching the game in Burlingame.

I'm going to repeat this before all the brain-dead "El Lay can't support an NFL team, two left already DERP DERP" crowd gets here.

Georgia Frontiere. Al Davis. That's all you really need to know.

The prostitute lounge singer husband murderer moved the Rams from a shabby, but repairable Coliseum to a horrible Frankenstein monster of a stadium in Anaheim that sucked for football and made going to Angels games with 20,000 fans there a sad experience. She then tried to blackmail ANOTHER stadium out of the area and pissed off to St. Louis when they wouldn't bite. Hmmmm...already the Rams are making noise about moving because...wait for it....their dome is old and needs replacing.

Al Davis moved here and the Raiders were (and still are) HUGE in the black and Latino communities. Ah, but the Coliseum is now rundown and dangerous to go to. He tried to extort a stadium out of the city of Inglewood (home of the Forum) and actually got the city of Irwindale to pay him $10 million to move to their shiathole city in the San Grabriel Valley that's mostly gravel pits. He bailed back to Oakland when his scam blew up.

The new stadium by Staples is probably going to be built just because it's AEG. If it helps redevelop the Convention Center, even better. AEG tried to push through a stadium in the early 2000's but after announcing the plans to build by Staples (in a different location that's mostly parking lots now), the deal fell apart in days when the City Council announced that not one penny of taxpayer money would be spent on it.

Enough corporate welfare for billionaires like Anschutz, let them pay for their luxury boxes and food courts themselves.

germ78

My thought is that aging ownership held the Raiders in a state of torpor, wedded to the old ways of the past that worked so well... in the past. The game has changed rapidly in the last decade away from running the ball and stout defense towards one of strong passing attacks and putting as many points on the board as possible

Know how I know that you've never paid attention to the Raiders before?

As a Bronco fan, it is my Constitutional duty to give Raiders fans a ration of shiat for any reason whatsoever.

However, just looking at the stadium on TV, it's abundantly obvious that it's out of date, falling apart, and basically a hellhole. It's not the source of the Raiders' problems, but it sure isn't helping.

How much you want to bet that when that new palace is built in LA the Raiders AND Chargers attempt to move there?

Henry Holland: Enough corporate welfare for billionaires like Anschutz, let them pay for their luxury boxes and food courts themselves.

Which is one bonus for the Industry stadium. Completely self-funded.

That whole family is just goofy.

oh_please: Hue Jackson was no Lombardi, but he certainly didn't deserve to be fired after one year with no training camp and the injuries.

I'm of two minds about the situation.

I was livid when I first heard the news. Then I read up a bit more. I didn't realize that there was a new GM in town. I also didn't realize that Hue threw a bunch of people under the bus in his final press conference and was going for a power grab within the organization. Now would Hue having more power have been better for the team? I don't know. I think it might have. However, lots of fellow Raiders fans seem very optimistic of this Mackenzie fellow. I honestly don't know much about him.

What I fear, is another rebuilding year. My only hope is that Palmer has a whole offseason to work with his receivers and becomes less pick-prone. It sounds like he's going to be our guy next year, even though I'd much rather have Campbell.

InferiousX: What I fear, is another rebuilding year. My only hope is that Palmer has a whole offseason to work with his receivers and becomes less pick-prone. It sounds like he's going to be our guy next year, even though I'd much rather have Campbell.

I honestly hope they cut Palmer, even if it puts them on more cap money (which they have precious little of already). It's like paying five times the sticker price for a used car. And once they get to 2013 and 2014 when some of the more egregious deals start to wash off the books Reggie can go to work. That said, I'm taking the under for season wins in 2012 in Oakland, KC and Denver and San Diego might not be a bad bet either for that. Really not helpful when you play the NFC South and AFC North.

Ken VeryBigLiar: That said, I'm taking the under for season wins in 2012 in Oakland, KC and Denver and San Diego might not be a bad bet either for that. Really not helpful when you play the NFC South and AFC North.

With the Raiders imploding and the Chefs being the Chefs, I'd probably bet on the Chargers to win the division given the harder schedule the Broncos will receive given their 1st place finish.

Cubs300: In football, does the stadium really make a noticeable difference in how well a team performs?

Otherwise, this is just ownership trolling for more dollars. Why not just renovate the Oakland Alameda Coliseum, or whatever it's called now?

You missed the point with your first question, but got it with your second. The owners care more about how a team performs as a business than how it performs on a field. In that sense, shiny new stadiums with HD screens and million-dollar skyboxes will almost always lead to your team outperforming a team in a crappy concrete bowl...even if that crappy team in an old stadium is about to win a 2nd straight Super Bowl.

jackiepaper: meanwhile, across the bay in an equally if not more shiatty stadium....[The Niners] ...are in the playoffs.

I go to Candlestick about 5 games a year (I'm going on Saturday for the Saints) and I go to a few A's games and one or two Raiders games at the "O.co" Coliseum. And I've been to games all over the country, in several sports.

There is NO WORSE venue in all of sports, as far as I can tell, then the mess that is in Oakland. It's all concrete. Sightlines suck. It's such a dedicated baseball joint that there's dirt on the football field most of the time, and it's painted in A's colors, so even during Raiders games everything's green and gold. The entire upper deck is blocked off, probably for safety. Every passage, tunnel, entryway, etc. is a cramped, oddly-shaped concrete passage, so that getting from the main walkways to your seat honestly feels like you're entering a rape room. Getting there is next to impossible, parking sucks, traffic is horrid. It's in a full-on shoot-you part of Oakland.

Candlestick really isn't that bad. The weather is cold but there's a decent view, even in the super-nosebleeds way out over and behind the visitors. It's old, but so what. Except for that power outage (I was there, a transformer blew up, that could happen anywhere) there really aren't any problems, not from a fan perspective. Hell there's even escalators to get you to your seats.

jackiepaper: Scrotastic Method: There is NO WORSE venue in all of sports, as far as I can tell, then the mess that is in Oakland. It's all concrete. Sightlines suck. It's such a dedicated baseball joint that there's dirt on the football field most of the time, and it's painted in A's colors, so even during Raiders games everything's green and gold. The entire upper deck is blocked off, probably for safety. Every passage, tunnel, entryway, etc. is a cramped, oddly-shaped concrete passage, so that getting from the main walkways to your seat honestly feels like you're entering a rape room. Getting there is next to impossible, parking sucks, traffic is horrid. It's in a full-on shoot-you part of Oakland.

I'll definitely agree on the passageways etc. But at least you can get to and from the Coliseum without sitting through 2 hours of parking lot traffic by simply taking BART. And furthermore, the Stick is in a much worse part of SF than the Coliseum is in Oakland.

/Both sides are teh bad.
//So vote Green Bay?

The Stick is in a worse part what? There is nothing around the stick, at least, not since last time I was there, and I've never had to wait 2 hours to get out of it. Its right on the freeway I always thought it was pretty convenient tbh.

The 2 best parts of the stick are first of all your in the sun and its 90 degrees then the sun dips below the wall and it drops to negative 30. Then when every flag is blowing in a different direction because of the swirling tornado wind it gets.

/good times.

bhcompy: Ken VeryBigLiar: That said, I'm taking the under for season wins in 2012 in Oakland, KC and Denver and San Diego might not be a bad bet either for that. Really not helpful when you play the NFC South and AFC North.

With the Raiders imploding and the Chefs being the Chefs, I'd probably bet on the Chargers to win the division given the harder schedule the Broncos will receive given their 1st place finish.

The difference in their schedules will be Den vs. NE and Houston and SD vs. NYJ and Tennessee. Sure, probably more difficult for Den, but not *that* much more.

/assumes the change in offensive coordinators proves fruitful for the NYJ

It's not the age. It's the quality. What would you rather have around: the Palace of Versailles (made what it is back in the 17th century) or a Soviet brutalist government building (built during the mid-20th century)?

xdedd: That whole family is just goofy.

[nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com image 246x211]

InferiousX: oh_please: Hue Jackson was no Lombardi, but he certainly didn't deserve to be fired after one year with no training camp and the injuries.

What I fear, is another rebuilding year. My only hope is that Palmer has a whole offseason to work with his receivers and becomes less pick-prone. It sounds like he's going to be our guy next year, even though I'd much rather have Campbell.

He is not going to become less pick prone. The 33 year old QB is not going to become less pick prone, he had twenty picks the year before he came here, he had 16 this year, he had twenty picks the year before his arm injury, he's going to keep throwing picks, that's all there is too it.

germ78: My thought is that aging ownership held the Raiders in a state of torpor, wedded to the old ways of the past that worked so well... in the past. The game has changed rapidly in the last decade away from running the ball and stout defense towards one of strong passing attacks and putting as many points on the board as possible.

I know for a fact that this is the problem facing the Bears. Virginia McCaskey is old and wants to win with defense and running. Her age also has caused her to be loyal to certain parties (Team Prez Ted Philips, Coach Lovie Smith) to a fault, since now they have to hire a GM who will work with the head coach instead of letting the GM choose his own guy. (which is what happened to the Raiders yesterday)

The 49ers, Ravens, Texans, arguably Broncos laugh at your silly conceptions.