Who should get the next Oakland stadium?

Who should get the next Oakland stadium?
October 17, 2012, 6:48 pm
Share This Post

When the Coliseum complex was designed in 1960, community leaders saw it as a magnet to lure professional sports franchises, in helping build a unique identity for the East Bay. By 1966, the Raiders had moved in. Two years later the A's relocated out west. And once the nomadic Warriors finally settled into the arena, it was a full house, and a mission accomplished beside the freshly paved Nimitz freeway.Coincidentally; here we are more than 40 years later, traffic on 880 is terrible, and all 3 teams are desperately planning their exit. The Warriors are clearly inspired to change area codes, but for the A's and Raiders, it's the primary need to replace an outdated facility. When you consider other multi-purpose stadiums of the same era, the Coliseum has outlasted all, and enjoyed a successful lifespan as the final remaining NFL-MLB venue.Shea Stadium: Opened 1964 - Closed 2008
Atlanta Fulton County Stadium: Opened 1965 - Closed 1997
Astrodome: Opened 1965 - Closed 1999
Oakland Coliseum: Opened 1966
Busch Memorial Stadium: Opened 1966 - Closed 2005
Riverfront Stadium: Opened 1970 - Closed 2002
Three Rivers Stadium: Opened 1970 - Closed 2000
Veterans Stadium: Opened 1971 - Closed 2003
Kingdome: Opened 1976 - Closed 2000At this week's NFL Fall Meeting in Chicago, Raiders Owner Mark Davis didn't hold back, calling the Coliseum's sightlines "absolutely terrible" for football and deeming the building beyond renovation. With exception to the the newer "Mount Davis" portion, there's not a whole lot of argument from me or anyone else on these points.NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell backed this up by saying: "I think there is a very strong recognition that they need a new stadium. That's going to be something they have to have in that community to be successful going forward." Sure was nice of the Commissioner to gain attention and grease some wheels at the political level. And again, I don't think you'll find too many folks in the 510, 707 or 925 who disagree.But herein lies the hypothetical question: if the City of Oakland is realistically only able to handle one stadium project at a time, who should get the priority... the A's or Raiders?The seniority card goes to the Raiders for being in Oakland first... but is probably taken away for the dozen years they left for Los Angeles.The inconvenience card definitely goes to the A's in dealing with the 1996 monstrosity of concrete that still lives beyond their outfield fence. The logistics card goes to the A's who would utilize a new venue approximately 71 more times per year than their football counterparts.Anyone can understand and respect the Raiders position, as they begin to wave a flag and get minds thinking about a new football venue. But the simultaneous nature of these needs should favor the A's. They have been gracious in sharing a home the majority of their Oakland existence, and deserve the first attention city government can give. Who do you think should get Oakland's next stadium? Log in, and add your comments below.

    More Team Talk