[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

Are subjects not truly related to Stanford permitted here ? If not, please delete this thread.

Originally I had been a lifelong 49er fan and season ticket holder, but when the York's announced they were vacating SF, I became an Oakland season ticket holder.
Two years ago, when  the NFL owners voted approval of the Raiders move to Las Vegas, I signed on as a Stanford season ticket holder. Rooting for the Cardinal has been a great experience, including the stadium which I like very much.
Now there is litigation between the city of Oakland and, or, Alameda County against the NFL (for vacating Oakland-Alameda) and the Raiders have rescinded their offer to play at the Oakland Coliseum one final year.
Possible "home field" options for the 2019 Raiders, I guess are Levis-Santa Clara, Stanford, Cal, Nevada Reno, Nevada Las Vegas, the Chargers former San Diego stadium, Alamo Dome-San Antonio.
While I no longer root for the Raiders, I am intrigued by that team being "homeless" for 2019. Do you think they will try to sign a one year deal for Stanford Stadium ?

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

Are subjects not truly related to Stanford permitted here ? If not, please delete this thread.

Originally I had been a lifelong 49er fan and season ticket holder, but when the York's announced they were vacating SF, I became an Oakland season ticket holder.
Two years ago, when  the NFL owners voted approval of the Raiders move to Las Vegas, I signed on as a Stanford season ticket holder. Rooting for the Cardinal has been a great experience, including the stadium which I like very much.
Now there is litigation between the city of Oakland and, or, Alameda County against the NFL (for vacating Oakland-Alameda) and the Raiders have rescinded their offer to play at the Oakland Coliseum one final year.
Possible "home field" options for the 2019 Raiders, I guess are Levis-Santa Clara, Stanford, Cal, Nevada Reno, Nevada Las Vegas, the Chargers former San Diego stadium, Alamo Dome-San Antonio.
While I no longer root for the Raiders, I am intrigued by that team being "homeless" for 2019. Do you think they will try to sign a one year deal for Stanford Stadium ?

[Redrum]

Hard for me to believe Stanford would even seriously consider a deal like that.  Aside from the unseemly appearance to the public of a us being a rent-a-venue, the natural grass field would look like pictures of WWI battlefields by mid-season.  Of course, I also thought water polo was the silliest sport I'd ever heard of and now it might be the backbone of Stanford's Sears/Learfield Cup hegemony,  so there's that.

[Redrum]

Hard for me to believe Stanford would even seriously consider a deal like that.  Aside from the unseemly appearance to the public of a us being a rent-a-venue, the natural grass field would look like pictures of WWI battlefields by mid-season.  Of course, I also thought water polo was the silliest sport I'd ever heard of and now it might be the backbone of Stanford's Sears/Learfield Cup hegemony,  so there's that.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

Hard for me to believe Stanford would even seriously consider a deal like that.  Aside from the unseemly appearance to the public of a us being a  rent-a-venue, the natural grass field would look like pictures of WWI battlefields by mid-season.  Of course, I also thought water polo was the silliest sport I'd ever heard of and now it might be the backbone of Stanford's Sears/Learfield Cup hegemony,  so there's that.

I agree it is highly improbable that Stanford would consider renting its football stadium to the Raiders.
Financially, I've read that the Raiders were (previously) willing to pay $7.5 million to play its 2019  home schedule at the Oakland Coliseum. And I've read that the likely rent the 49ers would charge the Raiders (to play at Levis) is $15 million.
UNLV has a football stadium and it seems to me that playing there for 2019 may be the most sensible decision for the Raiders. 

Sam Boyd Stadium:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Boyd_Stadium

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

Hard for me to believe Stanford would even seriously consider a deal like that.  Aside from the unseemly appearance to the public of a us being a  rent-a-venue, the natural grass field would look like pictures of WWI battlefields by mid-season.  Of course, I also thought water polo was the silliest sport I'd ever heard of and now it might be the backbone of Stanford's Sears/Learfield Cup hegemony,  so there's that.

I agree it is highly improbable that Stanford would consider renting its football stadium to the Raiders.
Financially, I've read that the Raiders were (previously) willing to pay $7.5 million to play its 2019  home schedule at the Oakland Coliseum. And I've read that the likely rent the 49ers would charge the Raiders (to play at Levis) is $15 million.
UNLV has a football stadium and it seems to me that playing there for 2019 may be the most sensible decision for the Raiders. 

Sam Boyd Stadium:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Boyd_Stadium

[82lsju]

Possible "home field" options for the 2019 Raiders, I guess are Levis-Santa Clara, Stanford, Cal, Nevada Reno, Nevada Las Vegas, the Chargers former San Diego stadium, Alamo Dome-San Antonio.
While I no longer root for the Raiders, I am intrigued by that team being "homeless" for 2019. Do you think they will try to sign a one year deal for Stanford Stadium ?

I'd think that any venue that doesn't sell beer would be eliminated which takes out Cal and Stanford as possible locations.

[82lsju]

Possible "home field" options for the 2019 Raiders, I guess are Levis-Santa Clara, Stanford, Cal, Nevada Reno, Nevada Las Vegas, the Chargers former San Diego stadium, Alamo Dome-San Antonio.
While I no longer root for the Raiders, I am intrigued by that team being "homeless" for 2019. Do you think they will try to sign a one year deal for Stanford Stadium ?

I'd think that any venue that doesn't sell beer would be eliminated which takes out Cal and Stanford as possible locations.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

Possible "home field" options for the 2019 Raiders, I guess are Levis-Santa Clara, Stanford, Cal, Nevada Reno, Nevada Las Vegas, the Chargers former San Diego stadium, Alamo Dome-San Antonio.
While I no longer root for the Raiders, I am intrigued by that team being "homeless" for 2019. Do you think they will try to sign a one year deal for Stanford Stadium ?

I'd think that any venue that doesn't sell beer would be eliminated which takes out Cal and Stanford as possible locations.

Excellent point regarding beer sales.
At UNLV's Sam Boyd Stadium, apparently beer is offered for sale. Here is a link to some consumer reviews of that stadium, and what I am reading has me thinking it may be a good fit for the Raiders. Actually, I am wondering why the site of the existing stadium was not chosen for the new stadium. For example, the existing stadium has plenty of parking but the one under construction has little to no available parking.

https://www.yelp.com/biz/sam-boyd-stadium-las-vegas

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

Possible "home field" options for the 2019 Raiders, I guess are Levis-Santa Clara, Stanford, Cal, Nevada Reno, Nevada Las Vegas, the Chargers former San Diego stadium, Alamo Dome-San Antonio.
While I no longer root for the Raiders, I am intrigued by that team being "homeless" for 2019. Do you think they will try to sign a one year deal for Stanford Stadium ?

I'd think that any venue that doesn't sell beer would be eliminated which takes out Cal and Stanford as possible locations.

Excellent point regarding beer sales.
At UNLV's Sam Boyd Stadium, apparently beer is offered for sale. Here is a link to some consumer reviews of that stadium, and what I am reading has me thinking it may be a good fit for the Raiders. Actually, I am wondering why the site of the existing stadium was not chosen for the new stadium. For example, the existing stadium has plenty of parking but the one under construction has little to no available parking.

https://www.yelp.com/biz/sam-boyd-stadium-las-vegas

[Redrum]

I wonder if having the Raiders in town will suck a brobdingnagian amount of the air out of the room for UNLV Rebels football.  UNLV [last winning season was yr. 2000] is already on a multi-year decline in attendance and is fighting back by re-casting football attendance as a hybrid all-you-can-eat food event with some mediocre (at best) football to occupy your eyes while you chew.  I could not make up something like this.  My next guess is we will hear all sorts of talk about "synergy" benefits for UNLV as Vegas becomes a "football town."

[Redrum]

I wonder if having the Raiders in town will suck a brobdingnagian amount of the air out of the room for UNLV Rebels football.  UNLV [last winning season was yr. 2000] is already on a multi-year decline in attendance and is fighting back by re-casting football attendance as a hybrid all-you-can-eat food event with some mediocre (at best) football to occupy your eyes while you chew.  I could not make up something like this.  My next guess is we will hear all sorts of talk about "synergy" benefits for UNLV as Vegas becomes a "football town."

[OutsiderFan]

I think the bigger question is will the Raiders being gone in any way have a residual impact on Stanford football ticket demand?

[OutsiderFan]

I think the bigger question is will the Raiders being gone in any way have a residual impact on Stanford football ticket demand?

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

I wonder if having the Raiders in town will suck a of immense proportions amount of  the air out of the room for UNLV Rebels football.  UNLV [last winning season was yr. 2000] is already on a multi-year decline in attendance and is fighting back by re-casting football attendance as a hybrid all-you-can-eat food event with some mediocre (at best) football to occupy your eyes while you chew.  I could not make up something like this.  My next guess is we will hear all sorts of talk about "synergy" benefits for UNLV as Vegas becomes a "football town."

UNLV will be playing its home games at the new Las Vegas Stadium, so at the very least I think this will help the Rebels recruiting efforts.
On a separate subject, I am curious to learn which corporation will pay for the new stadium's naming rights.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

I wonder if having the Raiders in town will suck a of immense proportions amount of  the air out of the room for UNLV Rebels football.  UNLV [last winning season was yr. 2000] is already on a multi-year decline in attendance and is fighting back by re-casting football attendance as a hybrid all-you-can-eat food event with some mediocre (at best) football to occupy your eyes while you chew.  I could not make up something like this.  My next guess is we will hear all sorts of talk about "synergy" benefits for UNLV as Vegas becomes a "football town."

UNLV will be playing its home games at the new Las Vegas Stadium, so at the very least I think this will help the Rebels recruiting efforts.
On a separate subject, I am curious to learn which corporation will pay for the new stadium's naming rights.

[troyc]

The Raiders are not considering Sam Boyd Stadium for two reasons:

*  the place apparently needs sizable upgrades to be NFL-ready
*  they want their first game in Las Vegas to be played in their new stadium

So, as of now, UNLV is off the table. As for their other reported options if they leave town?

Stanford: I'd be very surprised if the University signed off on this, mostly because the University's image and the Raiders fans' image are, shall we say, not compatible

Cal: Memorial Stadium is arguably the best place to watch a game in the Pac-12. But if you want to do anything else -- literally anything else! -- it's impossible. Plus, half the stadium still uses port-a-potties. But the real reason this will never happen: in 1974, the city of Berkeley enacted a 10% tax on the gross receipts of any pro team that plays a game within city limits. (that came months after the Raiders hosted the Dolphins in Berkeley the previous fall. Coincidence?)

Levi's Stadium: Mark Davis has said he doesn't like the ingress/egress of the stadium. Loosely translated, that means his pride would be wounded if his team has to crash on the 49ers' couch. And the 49ers likely wouldn't give him any break on rent.

San Diego: of the non-northern California options, this makes the most sense to me. Crappy stadium, to be sure, but it's probably on par with what they're playing in now. Plus they already have the fanbase in southern California.

San Antonio: Mark Davis doesn't like the turf at the Alamodome. Plus, in all likelihood, the Raiders will still train at their Alameda facility next season. OAK-to-SAT is an awfully long round-trip flight to make ten times in one season for "home" games

Glendale, AZ: the only real reason why this may be a consideration is that it's the best facility they can probably play in next year. Besides that, I'm having trouble thinking of reasons why this would be a viable option

Reno: No.

Troy C

[troyc]

The Raiders are not considering Sam Boyd Stadium for two reasons:

*  the place apparently needs sizable upgrades to be NFL-ready
*  they want their first game in Las Vegas to be played in their new stadium

So, as of now, UNLV is off the table. As for their other reported options if they leave town?

Stanford: I'd be very surprised if the University signed off on this, mostly because the University's image and the Raiders fans' image are, shall we say, not compatible

Cal: Memorial Stadium is arguably the best place to watch a game in the Pac-12. But if you want to do anything else -- literally anything else! -- it's impossible. Plus, half the stadium still uses port-a-potties. But the real reason this will never happen: in 1974, the city of Berkeley enacted a 10% tax on the gross receipts of any pro team that plays a game within city limits. (that came months after the Raiders hosted the Dolphins in Berkeley the previous fall. Coincidence?)

Levi's Stadium: Mark Davis has said he doesn't like the ingress/egress of the stadium. Loosely translated, that means his pride would be wounded if his team has to crash on the 49ers' couch. And the 49ers likely wouldn't give him any break on rent.

San Diego: of the non-northern California options, this makes the most sense to me. Crappy stadium, to be sure, but it's probably on par with what they're playing in now. Plus they already have the fanbase in southern California.

San Antonio: Mark Davis doesn't like the turf at the Alamodome. Plus, in all likelihood, the Raiders will still train at their Alameda facility next season. OAK-to-SAT is an awfully long round-trip flight to make ten times in one season for "home" games

Glendale, AZ: the only real reason why this may be a consideration is that it's the best facility they can probably play in next year. Besides that, I'm having trouble thinking of reasons why this would be a viable option

Reno: No.

Troy C

[stupac2]

I think the bigger question is will the Raiders being gone in any way have a residual impact on Stanford football ticket demand?

Seems unlikely to me, although we do have a sample of N=1 with OP. Perhaps there are a few others in his shoes who would consider it, but I think most east-bayers would pick Cal before Stanford. After all, it's a lot easier to get to Cal from Oakland, and it's the flagship university for the state.

[stupac2]

I think the bigger question is will the Raiders being gone in any way have a residual impact on Stanford football ticket demand?

Seems unlikely to me, although we do have a sample of N=1 with OP. Perhaps there are a few others in his shoes who would consider it, but I think most east-bayers would pick Cal before Stanford. After all, it's a lot easier to get to Cal from Oakland, and it's the flagship university for the state.

[Phogge]

Yes the Raider home crowd is different than Stanford’s. But guys those fans are much more devoted and vociferous boosters. What a home field advantage Stanford would have with fans like the Raider Nation’s. And the fans are quite peaceful these days.

[Phogge]

Yes the Raider home crowd is different than Stanford’s. But guys those fans are much more devoted and vociferous boosters. What a home field advantage Stanford would have with fans like the Raider Nation’s. And the fans are quite peaceful these days.

[Mick]

Are subjects not truly related to Stanford permitted here ? If not, please delete this thread.

Originally I had been a lifelong 49er fan and season ticket holder, but when the York's announced they were vacating SF, I became an Oakland season ticket holder.
Two years ago, when  the NFL owners voted approval of the Raiders move to Las Vegas, I signed on as a Stanford season ticket holder. Rooting for the Cardinal has been a great experience, including the stadium which I like very much.
Now there is litigation between the city of Oakland and, or, Alameda County against the NFL (for vacating Oakland-Alameda) and the Raiders have rescinded their offer to play at the Oakland Coliseum one final year.
Possible "home field" options for the 2019 Raiders, I guess are Levis-Santa Clara, Stanford, Cal, Nevada Reno, Nevada Las Vegas, the Chargers former San Diego stadium, Alamo Dome-San Antonio.
While I no longer root for the Raiders, I am intrigued by that team being "homeless" for 2019. Do you think they will try to sign a one year deal for Stanford Stadium ?

Given Berkeley's desperate need for revenues and presence in the East Bay, I would imagine that Memorial Stadium would be a more attractive temporary home for the ursines.

[Mick]

Are subjects not truly related to Stanford permitted here ? If not, please delete this thread.

Originally I had been a lifelong 49er fan and season ticket holder, but when the York's announced they were vacating SF, I became an Oakland season ticket holder.
Two years ago, when  the NFL owners voted approval of the Raiders move to Las Vegas, I signed on as a Stanford season ticket holder. Rooting for the Cardinal has been a great experience, including the stadium which I like very much.
Now there is litigation between the city of Oakland and, or, Alameda County against the NFL (for vacating Oakland-Alameda) and the Raiders have rescinded their offer to play at the Oakland Coliseum one final year.
Possible "home field" options for the 2019 Raiders, I guess are Levis-Santa Clara, Stanford, Cal, Nevada Reno, Nevada Las Vegas, the Chargers former San Diego stadium, Alamo Dome-San Antonio.
While I no longer root for the Raiders, I am intrigued by that team being "homeless" for 2019. Do you think they will try to sign a one year deal for Stanford Stadium ?

Given Berkeley's desperate need for revenues and presence in the East Bay, I would imagine that Memorial Stadium would be a more attractive temporary home for the ursines.

[cctop]

Slightly off topic, but I thought this was a good column in the SF Chronicle: 

Has any pro team treated their fanbase worse than the Raiders have?

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...9e485c56f3

[cctop]

Slightly off topic, but I thought this was a good column in the SF Chronicle: 

Has any pro team treated their fanbase worse than the Raiders have?

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...9e485c56f3

[Phogge]

Berkeley has little parking near the Stadium. An absolute must for the tailgate frenzy of the nation.

[Phogge]

Berkeley has little parking near the Stadium. An absolute must for the tailgate frenzy of the nation.

[BostonCard]

Slightly off topic, but I thought this was a good column in the SF Chronicle: 

Has any pro team treated their fanbase worse than the Raiders have?

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...9e485c56f3

The Rams, who really screwed St. Louis over.

And for a different reason, the Browns.

BC

[BostonCard]

Slightly off topic, but I thought this was a good column in the SF Chronicle: 

Has any pro team treated their fanbase worse than the Raiders have?

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...9e485c56f3

The Rams, who really screwed St. Louis over.

And for a different reason, the Browns.

BC

[TreesAndBirds]

Slightly off topic, but I thought this was a good column in the SF Chronicle: 

Has any pro team treated their fanbase worse than the Raiders have?

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...9e485c56f3

The Rams, who really screwed St. Louis over.

And for a different reason, the Browns.

BC

The Colts. Sneaking out in dead of winter night.

A coach so bad Elway refused to play for him.

Robert Irsay as owner.

The issue with Oakland is a bit of “fooled me once, shame on you, fooled me twice, shame on me”. But yeah, the Raiders have screwed them. If a NY or LA gets screwed, they are a city with a lot going for it, but when it’s Oakland, St Louis, Cleveland, Baltimore...it’s worse.

[TreesAndBirds]

Slightly off topic, but I thought this was a good column in the SF Chronicle: 

Has any pro team treated their fanbase worse than the Raiders have?

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...9e485c56f3

The Rams, who really screwed St. Louis over.

And for a different reason, the Browns.

BC

The Colts. Sneaking out in dead of winter night.

A coach so bad Elway refused to play for him.

Robert Irsay as owner.

The issue with Oakland is a bit of “fooled me once, shame on you, fooled me twice, shame on me”. But yeah, the Raiders have screwed them. If a NY or LA gets screwed, they are a city with a lot going for it, but when it’s Oakland, St Louis, Cleveland, Baltimore...it’s worse.

[Embo]

Cal: Memorial Stadium is arguably the best place to watch a game in the Pac-12. But if you want to do anything else -- literally anything else! -- it's impossible. Plus, half the stadium still uses port-a-potties. But the real reason this will never happen: in 1974, the city of Berkeley enacted a 10% tax on the gross receipts of any pro team that plays a game within city limits. (that came months after the Raiders hosted the Dolphins in Berkeley the previous fall. Coincidence?)

Troy C

There are two other reasons you won't see Raiders in CMS.  Number one:  The Panoramic Hill Association.  Those are the residents living adjacent to the stadium.  They have absolutely opposed everything beyond the minimum number of Cal football games.  No way would they allow 8+ Raider games in their neighborhood.  I remember it was around the early 90's when a new network was doing Pac-10 games.  The network had to rent lights for night games, and they figured it was cheaper just to buy lights, so they donated permanent lights (cost:  $1 million per stadium) to all conference members.  It was a no-brainer for Cal to accept them, right?  Nope, the Panoramic Hill Association fought it, and Cal had to decline free lights.

Number two:  Think all those Raider fans are going to walk up that hill to get to the stadium?  Forget it.

[Embo]

Cal: Memorial Stadium is arguably the best place to watch a game in the Pac-12. But if you want to do anything else -- literally anything else! -- it's impossible. Plus, half the stadium still uses port-a-potties. But the real reason this will never happen: in 1974, the city of Berkeley enacted a 10% tax on the gross receipts of any pro team that plays a game within city limits. (that came months after the Raiders hosted the Dolphins in Berkeley the previous fall. Coincidence?)

Troy C

There are two other reasons you won't see Raiders in CMS.  Number one:  The Panoramic Hill Association.  Those are the residents living adjacent to the stadium.  They have absolutely opposed everything beyond the minimum number of Cal football games.  No way would they allow 8+ Raider games in their neighborhood.  I remember it was around the early 90's when a new network was doing Pac-10 games.  The network had to rent lights for night games, and they figured it was cheaper just to buy lights, so they donated permanent lights (cost:  $1 million per stadium) to all conference members.  It was a no-brainer for Cal to accept them, right?  Nope, the Panoramic Hill Association fought it, and Cal had to decline free lights.

Number two:  Think all those Raider fans are going to walk up that hill to get to the stadium?  Forget it.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

The Raiders are not considering Sam Boyd Stadium for two reasons:

*  the place apparently needs sizable upgrades to be NFL-ready
*  they want their first game in Las Vegas to be played in their new stadium

So, as of now, UNLV is off the table. As for their other reported options if they leave town?

Stanford: I'd be very surprised if the University signed off on this, mostly because the University's image and the Raiders fans' image are, shall we say, not compatible

Cal: Memorial Stadium is arguably the best place to watch a game in the Pac-12. But if you want to do anything else -- literally anything else! -- it's impossible. Plus, half the stadium still uses port-a-potties. But the real reason this will never happen: in 1974, the city of Berkeley enacted a 10% tax on the gross receipts of any pro team that plays a game within city limits. (that came months after the Raiders hosted the Dolphins in Berkeley the previous fall. Coincidence?)

Levi's Stadium: Mark Davis has said he doesn't like the ingress/egress of the stadium. Loosely translated, that means his pride would be wounded if his team has to crash on the 49ers' couch. And the 49ers likely wouldn't give him any break on rent.

San Diego: of the non-northern California options, this makes the most sense to me. Crappy stadium, to be sure, but it's probably on par with what they're playing in now. Plus they already have the fanbase in southern California.

San Antonio: Mark Davis doesn't like the turf at the Alamodome. Plus, in all likelihood, the Raiders will still train at their Alameda facility next season. OAK-to-SAT is an awfully long round-trip flight to make ten times in one season for "home" games

Glendale, AZ: the only real reason why this may be a consideration is that it's the best facility they can probably play in next year. Besides that, I'm having trouble thinking of reasons why this would be a viable option

Reno: No.

Troy C

Well, I guess if the Raiders seem some value or benefit to having their "first game in Las Vegas"  at the new stadium, then I guess Sam Boyd Stadium is a no go. Regarding Sam Boyd not being "NFL ready", I'm not sure what that means. It's only 8 to 10 games and the stadium has before served crowds of 40,000 plus.
I think the NFL is requiring that the Raiders make a decision about 2019 within the next few weeks.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

The Raiders are not considering Sam Boyd Stadium for two reasons:

*  the place apparently needs sizable upgrades to be NFL-ready
*  they want their first game in Las Vegas to be played in their new stadium

So, as of now, UNLV is off the table. As for their other reported options if they leave town?

Stanford: I'd be very surprised if the University signed off on this, mostly because the University's image and the Raiders fans' image are, shall we say, not compatible

Cal: Memorial Stadium is arguably the best place to watch a game in the Pac-12. But if you want to do anything else -- literally anything else! -- it's impossible. Plus, half the stadium still uses port-a-potties. But the real reason this will never happen: in 1974, the city of Berkeley enacted a 10% tax on the gross receipts of any pro team that plays a game within city limits. (that came months after the Raiders hosted the Dolphins in Berkeley the previous fall. Coincidence?)

Levi's Stadium: Mark Davis has said he doesn't like the ingress/egress of the stadium. Loosely translated, that means his pride would be wounded if his team has to crash on the 49ers' couch. And the 49ers likely wouldn't give him any break on rent.

San Diego: of the non-northern California options, this makes the most sense to me. Crappy stadium, to be sure, but it's probably on par with what they're playing in now. Plus they already have the fanbase in southern California.

San Antonio: Mark Davis doesn't like the turf at the Alamodome. Plus, in all likelihood, the Raiders will still train at their Alameda facility next season. OAK-to-SAT is an awfully long round-trip flight to make ten times in one season for "home" games

Glendale, AZ: the only real reason why this may be a consideration is that it's the best facility they can probably play in next year. Besides that, I'm having trouble thinking of reasons why this would be a viable option

Reno: No.

Troy C

Well, I guess if the Raiders seem some value or benefit to having their "first game in Las Vegas"  at the new stadium, then I guess Sam Boyd Stadium is a no go. Regarding Sam Boyd not being "NFL ready", I'm not sure what that means. It's only 8 to 10 games and the stadium has before served crowds of 40,000 plus.
I think the NFL is requiring that the Raiders make a decision about 2019 within the next few weeks.

[lex24]

There is precedent for the Raiders playing at Memorial. 1973. I don’t know what was the issue with The Coliseum, but they played the Dolphins at Memorial. Beat them 12-7, ending their streak at 18. I went to the game.

I was a Raider fan until they moved to LA. Stayed a fan for Plunkett. When he retired they were another LA team and I couldnt stand them. I still can’t.

Oakland was stupid to take them back. They ruined a very nice baseball stadium.

Personally nothing would please me more than to see Gruden fail miserably.

[lex24]

There is precedent for the Raiders playing at Memorial. 1973. I don’t know what was the issue with The Coliseum, but they played the Dolphins at Memorial. Beat them 12-7, ending their streak at 18. I went to the game.

I was a Raider fan until they moved to LA. Stayed a fan for Plunkett. When he retired they were another LA team and I couldnt stand them. I still can’t.

Oakland was stupid to take them back. They ruined a very nice baseball stadium.

Personally nothing would please me more than to see Gruden fail miserably.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

Slightly off topic, but I thought this was a good column in the SF Chronicle: 

Has any pro team treated their fanbase worse than the Raiders have?

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...9e485c56f3

My observation is that the city of Oakland and Alameda County were harmed by the Raiders. Specifically, about 22 years ago Al Davis
demanded $150 million in renovations to the Oakland Coliseum (a ransom demand for the Raiders to return from Los Angeles). Oakland-Alameda used debt to finance same and still owes about $120 million.
As for the Raider fans, they seem to only have eyes for the Silver and Black, no matter how poorly the team plays and, or, where the team plays.

---

Berkeley has little parking near the Stadium. An absolute must for the tailgate frenzy of the nation.

It will be interesting to learn if tailgating is part of the Las Vegas Raiders scene, because I don't think the new stadium has attached parking lots.
A few years ago Mark Davis proclaimed that tailgating would be an essential part of any new Raiders Stadium, but I guess he forgot about that.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

Slightly off topic, but I thought this was a good column in the SF Chronicle: 

Has any pro team treated their fanbase worse than the Raiders have?

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...9e485c56f3

My observation is that the city of Oakland and Alameda County were harmed by the Raiders. Specifically, about 22 years ago Al Davis
demanded $150 million in renovations to the Oakland Coliseum (a ransom demand for the Raiders to return from Los Angeles). Oakland-Alameda used debt to finance same and still owes about $120 million.
As for the Raider fans, they seem to only have eyes for the Silver and Black, no matter how poorly the team plays and, or, where the team plays.

---

Berkeley has little parking near the Stadium. An absolute must for the tailgate frenzy of the nation.

It will be interesting to learn if tailgating is part of the Las Vegas Raiders scene, because I don't think the new stadium has attached parking lots.
A few years ago Mark Davis proclaimed that tailgating would be an essential part of any new Raiders Stadium, but I guess he forgot about that.