Niners Coaching Situation?

[Marvin49]

The Giants were able to get a stadium...
Golden State Warriors arena is being build in SF
Yeah impossible.

BTW I believe the NFL is trying to move two teams to LA, pretty sure they are going to build a new stadium.... in California.

I hope my reply isn't confused for taking you seriously, but FWIW:

*AT&T Park exists because it was entirely privately financed. It sits on 12.5 acres.

*The Warriors new stadium, if it ends up happening which is still up in the air, is also entirely privately financed. If it does happen the entire mixed-use space is being fit in 12 acres.

Compare that to Levi's which is the first semi-publicly financed to be built in California in my lifetime, and the mixed-use space consists of 22 acres for the stadium, 48 acres for additional parking, and 256 acres for the mixed-use development.*

As for citing the NFL trying to move two teams to LA as evidence for your argument, there's a reason why the NFL hasn't had a team in the second largest media market in the U.S. for over twenty years. There's a reason why there's still not a team there.

And just to insulate against bloviating about the role public financing plays, don't forget that your billionaire owner bilked Seattle for 75% of the cost of his football palace. CenturyLink has become a pretty popular case-study in academic work arguing against the practice of publicly financing professional sports stadiums, and a case-study of rent-seeking** in the economics literature.



*and just to be clear, even on this board I've criticized the city of S.C. for publicly financing Levi's to draw the team there.

**from google: "rent-seeking is spending wealth on political lobbying to increase one's share of existing wealth without creating wealth."

At least Paul Allen paid SOME of his own money on the stadium. York didn't have any money to put into his.

Wait...let me see if I'm getting this straight.

Allen (one of the richest men on earth) puts a small % into the stadium and makes the public pay for 70% = Hero.

York (not nearly as independently wealthy) takes 10% public funding and works deals with the banks and several Bay Area company sponsorships (Levis, Brocade, Sony, SAP, NRG, Toyota, BNY Mellon) and NFL for the rest = Dumba$$ owner.

I see how this works.

 

[rideaducati]

The Giants were able to get a stadium...
Golden State Warriors arena is being build in SF
Yeah impossible.

BTW I believe the NFL is trying to move two teams to LA, pretty sure they are going to build a new stadium.... in California.

I hope my reply isn't confused for taking you seriously, but FWIW:

*AT&T Park exists because it was entirely privately financed. It sits on 12.5 acres.

*The Warriors new stadium, if it ends up happening which is still up in the air, is also entirely privately financed. If it does happen the entire mixed-use space is being fit in 12 acres.

Compare that to Levi's which is the first semi-publicly financed to be built in California in my lifetime, and the mixed-use space consists of 22 acres for the stadium, 48 acres for additional parking, and 256 acres for the mixed-use development.*

As for citing the NFL trying to move two teams to LA as evidence for your argument, there's a reason why the NFL hasn't had a team in the second largest media market in the U.S. for over twenty years. There's a reason why there's still not a team there.

And just to insulate against bloviating about the role public financing plays, don't forget that your billionaire owner bilked Seattle for 75% of the cost of his football palace. CenturyLink has become a pretty popular case-study in academic work arguing against the practice of publicly financing professional sports stadiums, and a case-study of rent-seeking** in the economics literature.



*and just to be clear, even on this board I've criticized the city of S.C. for publicly financing Levi's to draw the team there.

**from google: "rent-seeking is spending wealth on political lobbying to increase one's share of existing wealth without creating wealth."

At least Paul Allen paid SOME of his own money on the stadium. York didn't have any money to put into his.

Wait...let me see if I'm getting this straight.

Allen (one of the richest men on earth) puts a small % into the stadium and makes the public pay for 70% = Hero.

York (not nearly as independently wealthy) takes 10% public funding and works deals with the banks and several Bay Area company sponsorships (Levis, Brocade, Sony, SAP, NRG, Toyota, BNY Mellon) and NFL for the rest = Dumba$$ owner.

I see how this works.

You're talkin out yer ass. The Yorks financed 90% with personal seat licenses and by selling off hotel and local area futures. York paid NOTHING. He relied on bilking the fans with outrageous prices on everything. He stood there with a team and had the niner fans pay for everything...with interest.

Seattle raised taxes on tourist traps like hotels and rental cars and restaurants. They also get revenues from events all year. To top it all off, Seattle didn't pay over a BILLION dollars for wifi.

 

[Marvin49]

I hope my reply isn't confused for taking you seriously, but FWIW:

*AT&T Park exists because it was entirely privately financed. It sits on 12.5 acres.

*The Warriors new stadium, if it ends up happening which is still up in the air, is also entirely privately financed. If it does happen the entire mixed-use space is being fit in 12 acres.

Compare that to Levi's which is the first semi-publicly financed to be built in California in my lifetime, and the mixed-use space consists of 22 acres for the stadium, 48 acres for additional parking, and 256 acres for the mixed-use development.*

As for citing the NFL trying to move two teams to LA as evidence for your argument, there's a reason why the NFL hasn't had a team in the second largest media market in the U.S. for over twenty years. There's a reason why there's still not a team there.

And just to insulate against bloviating about the role public financing plays, don't forget that your billionaire owner bilked Seattle for 75% of the cost of his football palace. CenturyLink has become a pretty popular case-study in academic work arguing against the practice of publicly financing professional sports stadiums, and a case-study of rent-seeking** in the economics literature.



*and just to be clear, even on this board I've criticized the city of S.C. for publicly financing Levi's to draw the team there.

**from google: "rent-seeking is spending wealth on political lobbying to increase one's share of existing wealth without creating wealth."

At least Paul Allen paid SOME of his own money on the stadium. York didn't have any money to put into his.

Wait...let me see if I'm getting this straight.

Allen (one of the richest men on earth) puts a small % into the stadium and makes the public pay for 70% = Hero.

York (not nearly as independently wealthy) takes 10% public funding and works deals with the banks and several Bay Area company sponsorships (Levis, Brocade, Sony, SAP, NRG, Toyota, BNY Mellon) and NFL for the rest = Dumba$$ owner.

I see how this works.

You're talkin out yer ass. The Yorks financed 90% with personal seat licenses and by selling off hotel and local area futures. York paid NOTHING. He relied on bilking the fans with outrageous prices on everything. He stood there with a team and had the niner fans pay for everything...with interest.

Seattle raised taxes on tourist traps like hotels and rental cars and restaurants. They also get revenues from events all year. To top it all off, Seattle didn't pay over a BILLION dollars for wifi.

When did I say York paid something? Is it your contention that Seattle DOESN'T have Seat Licenses?

Hrmm...

https://seahawks.strmarketplace.com/Cha ... enses.aspx

http://www.pslsource.com/buy_seattle_seahawks_csl

Instead of charging the city to build Levis, the cost of the SBLs was passed to people who would actually use the stadium. Please show me an example of a stadium that didn't use SBLs in the last decade. I'll wait.

Hotel and Local Area futures? Wha? That's City of SC Homey. They also have a local area hotel room tax, just like Seattle. Don't weep for the City though because they are about to have a developer build them an entirely new downtown on the developers dime. 5 times the size of the stadium and about 200 feet away.

Yup, the Clink didn't cost 1.3 Billion...it cost 360 million TWELVE YEARS AGO.

 

[Maulbert]

When did I say York paid something? Is it your contention that Seattle DOESN'T have Seat Licenses?

Hrmm...

https://seahawks.strmarketplace.com/Cha ... enses.aspx

http://www.pslsource.com/buy_seattle_seahawks_csl

Instead of charging the city to build Levis, the cost of the SBLs was passed to people who would actually use the stadium. Please show me an example of a stadium that didn't use SBLs in the last decade. I'll wait.

Hotel and Local Area futures? Wha? That's City of SC Homey. They also have a local area hotel room tax, just like Seattle. Don't weep for the City though because they are about to have a developer build them an entirely new downtown on the developers dime. 5 times the size of the stadium and about 200 feet away.

Yup, the Clink didn't cost 1.3 Billion...it cost 360 million TWELVE YEARS AGO.

Interesting.... $360,000,000 in 2002 dollars is only $475,129,961 in 2014 dollars.

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

 

[rideaducati]

When did I say York paid something? Is it your contention that Seattle DOESN'T have Seat Licenses?

Hrmm...

https://seahawks.strmarketplace.com/Cha ... enses.aspx

http://www.pslsource.com/buy_seattle_seahawks_csl

Instead of charging the city to build Levis, the cost of the SBLs was passed to people who would actually use the stadium. Please show me an example of a stadium that didn't use SBLs in the last decade. I'll wait.

Hotel and Local Area futures? Wha? That's City of SC Homey. They also have a local area hotel room tax, just like Seattle. Don't weep for the City though because they are about to have a developer build them an entirely new downtown on the developers dime. 5 times the size of the stadium and about 200 feet away.

Yup, the Clink didn't cost 1.3 Billion...it cost 360 million TWELVE YEARS AGO.

Interesting.... $360,000,000 in 2002 dollars is only $475,129,961 in 2014 dollars.

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Marv, you're the one bitching about an owner getting others to pay for a stadium. The Seahawks owner paid more than York did for a stadium that cost 1/3 the amount.

I know it is hard for niner fans to admit it, but Seattle just has it better than Santa Clara does right now. Better owner. Better stadium. Better team. Better GM. Better coach. Better players. Better fans. Better websites. It's just better.

Suck it!

 

[hawkfan68]

I'd be delighted if Holmgren got the 49ers gig.

The game has moved on.

Really....have you kept up with the Browns lately? A big reason why they are winning is because of Holmgren. He acquired most of the players on that team.

 

[Maulbert]

I'd be delighted if Holmgren got the 49ers gig.

The game has moved on.

Really....have you kept up with the Browns lately? A big reason why they are winning is because of Holmgren. He acquired most of the players on that team.

Holmgren also drafted Colt McCoy, Brandon Weeden and Trent Richardson.

 

[Sports Hernia]

When did I say York paid something? Is it your contention that Seattle DOESN'T have Seat Licenses?

Hrmm...

https://seahawks.strmarketplace.com/Cha ... enses.aspx

http://www.pslsource.com/buy_seattle_seahawks_csl

Instead of charging the city to build Levis, the cost of the SBLs was passed to people who would actually use the stadium. Please show me an example of a stadium that didn't use SBLs in the last decade. I'll wait.

Hotel and Local Area futures? Wha? That's City of SC Homey. They also have a local area hotel room tax, just like Seattle. Don't weep for the City though because they are about to have a developer build them an entirely new downtown on the developers dime. 5 times the size of the stadium and about 200 feet away.

Yup, the Clink didn't cost 1.3 Billion...it cost 360 million TWELVE YEARS AGO.

Interesting.... $360,000,000 in 2002 dollars is only $475,129,961 in 2014 dollars.

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Marv, you're the one bitching about an owner getting others to pay for a stadium. The Seahawks owner paid more than York did for a stadium that cost 1/3 the amount.

I know it is hard for niner fans to admit it, but Seattle just has it better than Santa Clara does right now. Better owner. Better stadium. Better team. Better GM. Better coach. Better players. Better fans. Better websites. It's just better.

Suck it!

BINGO!

 

[hawkfan68]

I'd be delighted if Holmgren got the 49ers gig.

The game has moved on.

Really....have you kept up with the Browns lately? A big reason why they are winning is because of Holmgren. He acquired most of the players on that team.

Holmgren also drafted Colt McCoy, Brandon Weeden and Trent Richardson.

Very true. I never said he was perfect...He also drafted Josh Gordon, Jordan Cameron, and Joe Haden. Can't just cherry pick the misses and ignore the hits.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

I know it is hard for niner fans to admit it, but Seattle just has it better than Santa Clara does right now. Better owner. Better stadium. Better team. Better GM. Better coach. Better players. Better fans. Better websites. It's just better.

Yep. Very true.
:thirishdrinkers:

 

[chris98251]

Erickson had experience in the NFL before going to SF, but when he was hired it was widely predicted that his tenure would be short lived and that the 49ers were only using him as a short term solution and future scapegoat. Which all proved to be 100% true.

This edit came in while I was writing my post, but uhhh, link? I don't remember there being a groundswell of excitement about the hire, but I don't remember this characterization of it at the time AT ALL.

Where did I say 'excitement'? It was the total opposite.

Oh, sorry if my post was unclear. We agree that there wasn't a ton of excitement about the hire, but I seriously don't remember anyone anywhere arguing that they were just hiring Erickson so that they could keep on losing and then use him as a scapegoat (let alone it being widely predicted).

That's because you were not looking from the outside in, Erickson is a wild card coach, he is about fun, he won Championships in Miami but his teams players were always in trouble, up here in Seattle he also had a loose hold on his players.

He is a good coach but needs a good GM and some disciplinarian to reel in his players. The epitome of a players coach who probably would be most favored to be at the parties his player threw if he could get away with it and if the booze was free.

 

[Popeyejones]

Oh, sorry if my post was unclear. We agree that there wasn't a ton of excitement about the hire, but I seriously don't remember anyone anywhere arguing that they were just hiring Erickson so that they could keep on losing and then use him as a scapegoat (let alone it being widely predicted).

That's because you were not looking from the outside in, Erickson is a wild card coach, he is about fun, he won Championships in Miami but his teams players were always in trouble, up here in Seattle he also had a loose hold on his players.

He is a good coach but needs a good GM and some disciplinarian to reel in his players. The epitome of a players coach who probably would be most favored to be at the parties his player threw if he could get away with it and if the booze was free.

What you wrote doesn't have anything to do with what I said.

 

[Popeyejones]

Oh, sorry if my post was unclear. We agree that there wasn't a ton of excitement about the hire, but I seriously don't remember anyone anywhere arguing that they were just hiring Erickson so that they could keep on losing and then use him as a scapegoat (let alone it being widely predicted).

I do remember there being a lot of chatter at the time, probably from talking heads and radio. A lot of people were saying he was making a big mistake leaving Oregon State for a team that was likely about to decline and just using him.

(I edited the post above)

My guess is it may have been much more talked about in those terms in Seattle than anywhere else simply because he'd coached professionally in Seattle already.

Good point.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

How would you Hawk fans feel if we hired Holmgren?

Definitely be an interesting way to go but I'm not convinced that the game may have already passed him by. Regardless it sure would keep the rivalry going but then again I don't think Harbaugh should be the one to go in your situation. It would be far smarter to hire a different OC and quit trying to make Keapernick something he isn't.

 

[chris98251]

Oh, sorry if my post was unclear. We agree that there wasn't a ton of excitement about the hire, but I seriously don't remember anyone anywhere arguing that they were just hiring Erickson so that they could keep on losing and then use him as a scapegoat (let alone it being widely predicted).

That's because you were not looking from the outside in, Erickson is a wild card coach, he is about fun, he won Championships in Miami but his teams players were always in trouble, up here in Seattle he also had a loose hold on his players.

He is a good coach but needs a good GM and some disciplinarian to reel in his players. The epitome of a players coach who probably would be most favored to be at the parties his player threw if he could get away with it and if the booze was free.

What you wrote doesn't have anything to do with what I said.

Sure it does, take off the blinders the rose colored glasses, Dennis was never going to take a team that was in disarray and make them competitive, he does not have the discipline, he would rather drink and party with them then kick their asses back into shape. He has done it his whole career. I was a student that had his father as a teacher who is Pinky Erickson, good coach in his won right, for high school, so we know all about him here. Erickson was a QB up here so we know about his history.

Why we knew he was a lame duck coach hire.

 

[rideaducati]

How would you Hawk fans feel if we hired Holmgren?

Definitely be an interesting way to go but I'm not convinced that the game may have already passed him by. Regardless it sure would keep the rivalry going but then again I don't think Harbaugh should be the one to go in your situation. It would be far smarter to hire a different OC and quit trying to make Keapernick something he isn't.

The right thing to do for the niners would be to fire Baalke and let Harbaugh pick the next GM. Harbaugh's coaching has vastly outperformed Baalke's drafting over the past couple years.

As for Holmgren being the niner coach? We know their defense would fall off drastically, but their offense would improve. They wouldn't be anything close to being a balanced team.

I am one of the few that believe Holmgren is among the most overrated coaches ever and would love for the niners to hire him. His teams rarely beat teams they aren't supposed to and they will always be considered soft.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I think it's pretty obvious York is picking Baalke when the decision is ultimately Baalke or Harbaugh. To me, that decision looks utterly ridiculous.. as Harbaugh came within Kyle Williams letting a ball bounce off his knee to going to back-to-back Super Bowls with Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick. This coming after he made Josh Johnson an all-star in FCS play at San Diego and turned Stanford into a powerhouse program - quickly.

In other words, the man can coach.

To me.. Baalke reeks of Tim Ruskell. Seahawk fans have seen this story before.. team has success, GM wants to shoulder all the credit for it, ego grows.. said GM gets pissed he's not getting as much credit as the coach/players and slowly but surely that relationship goes completely sour before the GM runs the great coach out of town.

Baalke will absolutely hire from within, because Tomsula/Fangio don't have a HC track record to fall back on.. and how many first time coaches get a roster that made 3 NFC Championships in 4 years?

But it's not going to work. Meanwhile, Harbs.. even if he is an insufferable douche.. will go to his next job and turn that team around too. Whether that's Oakland, the Jets or Michigan.. the man can coach. I'm just glad Trent Baalke is too much of an idiot to not check his ego at the door and to sucker York into keeping him.

As for Holmgren, or Shanahan, or Gruden going to SF.. never going to happen. Holmgren isn't the raging douche Harbs is.. and neither are Shanahan and Gruden for that matter.. but they all have the ego. They're not going to co-exist with Baalke. No chance.

This whole thing is why I think the Seahawks FO was brilliant for hiring the coach before the GM. You need the GM to work with the coach, not the other way around. Having Pete Carroll find his best fit is exactly why this FO is one of the best in all of professional sports.

 

[Hasselbeck]

My guess is that they'll take a few long shots for guys like Nick Saban, and in the likely scenario where they don't get a home run hire, they'll simply promote Fangio to act as Dennis Erickson 2.0.

Agree 100% .. also as an aside..

Do not be surprised if Nick Saban becomes the next coach in Atlanta. Arthur Blank is cut from the same cloth as Paul Allen. He wants to win badly and is willing to spend money to do so.. but he's hands off. Not to mention, Saban already loves Dimitroff and wouldn't have to move very far to take the Falcons job. The Falcons also have a new stadium coming in 2016.. so what better way to sell some PSL's and season tickets than to hire the biggest named coach in the collegiate ranks. Not to mention, the NFC South isn't exactly a juggernaut division and the Falcons do have talent already at their disposal on offense.

If Alabama wins the CFP .. I really think Saban will think long and hard at trying to win in the NFL again. I think Saban is very similar to Pete in that even though both had a ton of college success.. their first NFL coaching experiences left a bad taste in their mouth.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Both those posts are really, really good Hasselbeck. ^^^^^
Baalke is Timmmmaaaaay 2.0 huh? Interesting. I can see it. Hope if it plays out like this, you jump in and quote yourself so folks are aware you saw it coming.

As for Saban, I'm not as convinced he leaves Bama, but we shall see. Wouldn't surprise me though, that's for sure.

 

[RationalNiner]

You need the GM to work with the coach, not the other way around.

Why do you feel that it doesn't work the other way around?