Warriors Put Plans For San Francisco on hold

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:21 am
Location: San Francisco
Poster Credit: 9
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2014 9:43 pm
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Go ... 11.hGolden State Warriors Put Plans for New San Francisco Waterfront Arena on Hold: Report
Warriors Put Plans for New SF Waterfront Arena on Hold

Design 3.0 of the Warriors' proposed new home at Piers 30/32 along The Embarcadero waterfront is now 125 feet high in the center and 110 feet along the perimete

There may be another speed bump in the plan to build the Golden State Warriors an arena along San Francisco’s waterfront.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the team is putting the goal of opening its proposed arena by 2017 on hold for a year or longer.

This latest hitch comes just a day before opponents of the stadium are expected to turn in over 15,000 signatures requiring developers to win voter approval before building anything that exceeds current height limits on the waterfront.

The Warrior’s lease at Oracle Arena expires at the end of the 2016 season.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Brisbane
Poster Credit: 31
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:26 pm
I don't believe that is correct that the Warriors lease ends in 2016.

I believe they have a get out clause in 2016.. There's a big difference.

Plus the article returned a error page for me.
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:21 am
Location: San Francisco
Poster Credit: 9
PostPosted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 8:26 am
They gonna build this thing or what? Lacob says they are moving full steam ahead, but on the radio he said, ''we're gonna do our best.'' I'm wondering what the future holds in 5 to 10 years, where the Dubs will be playing.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13539
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 53
PostPosted: Sun Feb 09, 2014 11:23 pm
Ratto's really busting out the tar and feathers for this one.

He called it, when they announced a 2017 date, that it wouldn't get done. Said there was WAY too much yellow tape to sift through. Now, he's saying there's no telling if it'll be an extra one year... ten years... or if it'll ever happen.

I started hearing a bunch of analysts talk about the Warrior staying in Oakland, long-term. I really don't care WHERE in the Bay they are, so long as they have a state of the art place to play, like we were promised. True, the SF commute is easier on me than the Oakland one, but I'm pretty much used to the East Bay route and if there's a chance they can reinvigorate an area like Jack London square with fresh wallets and money-droppers, I'm all for that. High tide raises all ships. When Oak Town runs hot, the Bay runs hot.

But yeah. I'm really disappointed, right off the bat.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:21 am
Location: San Francisco
Poster Credit: 9
PostPosted: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:24 am
http://bleacherreport.com/tb/dcA0T?utm_ ... e-warriors

Moderator
Posts: 5360
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:21 pm
Poster Credit: 21
PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:47 pm
I hope the team stays in Oakland. Its an easier ride for me, personally.

BTW, with the A's, Raiders, and Warriors all threatening to move, I would hope Oakland would be able to save one of those teams. Why not the dubs? I agree, a State of the Art Stadium would be great.
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:21 am
Location: San Francisco
Poster Credit: 9
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:23 am
I don't get why a city like SF can't have an NBA team. LA has 2, every major city has one.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Brisbane
Poster Credit: 31
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:15 am
Stairway Man wrote:I don't get why a city like SF can't have an NBA team. LA has 2, every major city has one.


It doesn't even have a football team no more.

They may be the San Francisco 49ers.... But they in Santa Clara now.

i don't get all the city guilt.. most of my A's fan friends are whinging little bitches not allowing my team to move to San Jose like as if they are hardcore season ticket holders trying to go to all 81 Athletic home games.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 2587
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:40 pm
Location: Eureka, CA - Humboldt
Poster Credit: 19
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:16 pm
Stairway Man wrote:I don't get why a city like SF can't have an NBA team. LA has 2, every major city has one.


A lot of major cities don't have NBA franchises. Actually, the NBA has teams in some cities that many wouldn't consider to be "major" like OKC, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Orlando, while not having teams in cities that are considered "major" in Seattle, San Diego, San Jose, St. Louis, etc.

NB4 anyone gets salty over my definition of "major", I consider it to define a large metro area that is of a high cultural/industrial/international importance, and is also recognized widely as a “major” city.

SF can have a team but it’s just all the restrictions place on the target location – mainly the height limitations, so a bunch of rich, snobby, wannabe-hipsters can have their view of… Oakland? Alameda? These people don’t care about having a NBA franchise because it hasn’t become a social fad of the middle-upper and upper class like going to a Giants game has become. Unfortunately, these people are the people with enough money to live in the area, and the same people with power and influence.

I view myself as liberal, and most of my views align with that way of thinking, but this is ridiculous. If anything, adding an NBA franchise will enhance the neighborhood… wel, easy for me to say from 270 miles North. I just don’t see the cons here, and personally I loved the idea of having my MLB and NBA teams’ home field/floor within walking distance from each other.

Sadly though, it looks like this is never going to happen, at least not on Piers 30-32. Other fans feared the move would price diehards out, and it looks like they were right; the stadium is already over budget, and they’ve had to cut the capacity down to 18,000 so people living in high-rise condos can see that extra 100 ft of water, and others can stare at the beautiful cargo docks from across the bay (when the fog permits).

So we’re looking at Mission Bay now? Well, I guess it’s still within walking distance to AT&T Park, but it’s not nearly as nice as the former site. Either way, parking is going to be non-existent, so to anyone complaining about driving – lol! Maybe behind AT&T, but that’s all anyone is going to get. Hopefully if they move the build site to the shittier location, they’ll increase the capacity.

With all that said, I’ve always wanted the Warriors to return to the West Bay. No offense to Oakland, but it isn’t even a contest in terms of which is better. Oakland is more convenient , that is all.

PAWNO wrote:
Stairway Man wrote:I don't get why a city like SF can't have an NBA team. LA has 2, every major city has one.


It doesn't even have a football team no more.

They may be the San Francisco 49ers.... But they in Santa Clara now.

i don't get all the city guilt.. most of my A's fan friends are whinging little bitches not allowing my team to move to San Jose like as if they are hardcore season ticket holders trying to go to all 81 Athletic home games.


I’m so tired of this statement, almost as tired as I am replying with “NY Giants/Jets, anyone? Not even the right state!” It doesn’t matter, because the fact is that many teams don’t play in their home city’s area code.

Regarding the A’s stadium, I think they should move to SJ, but the Giants will never allow it. It might breathe some new life, and money, into that club so they can quit trading players for vending machines.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Brisbane
Poster Credit: 31
PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 3:13 am
PAWNO wrote:
Stairway Man wrote:I don't get why a city like SF can't have an NBA team. LA has 2, every major city has one.


It doesn't even have a football team no more.

They may be the San Francisco 49ers.... But they in Santa Clara now.

i don't get all the city guilt.. most of my A's fan friends are whinging little bitches not allowing my team to move to San Jose like as if they are hardcore season ticket holders trying to go to all 81 Athletic home games.


I’m so tired of this statement, almost as tired as I am replying with “NY Giants/Jets, anyone? Not even the right state!” It doesn’t matter, because the fact is that many teams don’t play in their home city’s area code.

Regarding the A’s stadium, I think they should move to SJ, but the Giants will never allow it. It might breathe some new life, and money, into that club so they can quit trading players for vending machines.[/quote]

Sorry bro. I think I was trying to prove the same point.

San Francisco has a basketball team.. It's the Golden State Warriors but they play in Oakland

Just like the NY Giants/Jets but they're in New Jersey.
User avatar
Role Player
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:21 am
Location: San Francisco
Poster Credit: 9
PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 8:32 am
U gotta realized that the arena is not just for b-ball, but for concerts and events. If people are going to go somewhere 200 times a year, I think SF would be the better centralized place.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Brisbane
Poster Credit: 31
PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:35 pm
Stairway Man wrote:U gotta realized that the arena is not just for b-ball, but for concerts and events. If people are going to go somewhere 200 times a year, I think SF would be the better centralized place.



San Francisco has the world famous FILMORE

Shut your trap. 8)
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:05 am
Location: Brisbane
Poster Credit: 31
PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:37 pm
But I do understand your gripe.

San Francisco needs a arena unless the area around Oakland Coliseum can be redeveloped into bars and restaurants ala Coliseum City.. but there's big doubts about that happening.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 2587
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:40 pm
Location: Eureka, CA - Humboldt
Poster Credit: 19
PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 5:05 pm
PAWNO wrote:
Sorry bro. I think I was trying to prove the same point.

San Francisco has a basketball team.. It's the Golden State Warriors but they play in Oakland

Just like the NY Giants/Jets but they're in New Jersey.

Gotcha, my bad. Although, I do think that the Warrior's situation is different. Golden State is an ambiguous name, and Oakland has some professional teams of their own, so I doubt many people view it as SF's team. The branding, "The Bay's Team", has taken steps towards furthering that ambiguity, but with the goal of making the SF move an easier transition while trying to not alienate their East Bay fans.

Oakland is also a much larger city than Santa Clara, so if the Warriors kept San Francisco in their name when they moved to Oakland, it would have been about as big of a WTF move as it would be to name the 9ers the Santa Clara 49ers.

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests