Last Days of the Raiders 

When the team's lease at McAfee Coliseum expires in 2010, will the Raiders follow the Athletics in the search for a new home?

At least it's not 1979. On April 17 of that year, the Oakland A's set the record for the lowest attendance in modern baseball history with just 653 fans at a single game. But it's close enough. In fact, this may be perhaps the lowest point in the history of professional sports at McAfee Coliseum, even surpassing the early 1980s. The Oakland A's are limping toward the end of a truly disappointing year, and the Raiders aren't expected to rise far above their last few years of mediocrity, humiliation, and low morale. Even for a city used to bad news, the news is dismal.

Take the A's, the Coliseum's only bright spot in recent years. It's not just that the rebuilding team is setting new records for most consecutive series losses and hovers around twenty games behind the division leader. More depressing is the dispiritingly low attendance, fueled by the almost inevitable prospect that its owners will move the franchise out of Oakland sometime in the next four years. There comes a time when a team is clearly going to leave a city — the 1994 season of the Los Angeles Rams come to mind — and the last games become a death spiral of bitter fans and lackluster performance. This may be one of those moments.

Meanwhile, Al Davis can't be happy with his Raiders. It's not just that his team has been a mess on the field for the past five years. Last year, Forbes magazine estimated that the Raiders were the fifth-least valuable team in the NFL, and that's actually an improvement over previous years. Davis was apparently so hard up for cash ten months ago that he sold a 20 percent stake in the team to some silent partners, reportedly including former Dallas Cowboys quarterback Troy Aikman, according to County Supervisor Scott Haggerty, who sits on the Coliseum Joint Powers Authority.

What do the five most valuable NFL teams have in common? New stadiums, where owners can rent luxury boxes, sign sponsorship deals, and draw sell-out crowds for television advertising dollars. The shabby concrete ugliness of the Coliseum has been a running joke for years, but this summer, two media outlets exposed its flaws to a national audience, bringing a fresh sting to the usual humiliation. First, Portfolio magazine dubbed the Coliseum the second-filthiest baseball park in the country, citing 493 health code violations, including dirt, rodents, vermin, and chemical contamination. Then ESPN's Anna Katherine Clemmons wrote up a walking tour she took of the facility during an Athletics game. Clemmons found a sparse and dismal tailgate scene, a hallway the color of jaundice, and fans who admitted they couldn't even care that the A's were moving to Fremont. The only bright spot was the stadium's "all you can eat" section where, for $35, fans can nurture their heart disease with hot dogs and nachos.

Readers who don't follow sports too closely may imagine that Oakland and Alameda County brought the Raiders back for good in 1995 by spending $300 million to renovate the Arena and Coliseum. But in fact, the Raiders could be gone once again as soon as their lease expires in 2010. After all, the team's latest tenure in Oakland has been marred by bitter lawsuits, the personal seat license fiasco, and surprisingly indifferent fans. Al Davis has already demonstrated a willingness to move his team to cities that offered him a subsidy, having left both Oakland and then Los Angeles in pursuit of public cash. And just last January, representatives from the Raiders personally approached the mayor of Dublin with a proposal to build a new stadium there.

In short, by 2012, Oakland could go from being the home of three major sports teams to just one, and the Coliseum could be hosting neither baseball nor football. McAfee Coliseum would be nothing but a vast, empty cipher, and Oakland and Alameda County taxpayers would still owe $22 million a year to retire the debt. By 2012, it's entirely possible that debt will be all we have at the Coliseum.

How likely is this doomsday scenario? What are the odds that the Athletics and Raiders will both leave, and what, if anything, can and should our civic leaders do to stop them? Finally, what will we do with an empty, debt-ridden Coliseum?


Don't imagine that Oakland and Alameda County need either team around for the money. The amount of cash the teams provide is negligible. The Athletics pay for all game-day operations and keep the revenue; the only money the Coliseum Authority sees is rent, which works out to just under $1 million a year. The Raiders lease is a little more complicated, with the authority paying for game-day operations and splitting some of the proceeds, but the city and county come out just a little ahead. Proceeds from football and baseball don't come close to paying off the Coliseum Authority's debt, which currently stands at $164.9 million. All we get is the joy of watching 89 games of professional sports a year, 81 of which are baseball. Which is why Oakland's decision to spend millions luring back the Raiders, infuriating the owners of the Athletics and doing nothing to keep their team in town is so mystifying; city officials sacrificed 81 days of baseball for eight days of football.

But despite a history of snubbing the Athletics over and over, some city leaders still say there's a chance Oakland can keep them. When Athletics co-owner Lew Wolff recently told a reporter how frustrated he was by the delays in moving to Fremont, Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums declared — completely out of the blue — that his city might be able to retain the team. City Council President Ignacio De la Fuente, who sits on the Coliseum Authority Board and has negotiated with the Athletics for years, agrees that Oakland's not out of the picture just yet.

Comments (4) RSS

Showing 1-4 of 4

Add a comment

If you had a huge site adjacent to a major freeway and with convenient pedestrian access to one of the region's most important transit hubs -- with a major subway line, a train station served by 19 trains a day, and a funded plan for a people-mover with direct access to a major commercial airport -- wouldn't you find a way to make it a successful business and residential center, rather than blowing it on a money-losing stadium?

The Coliseum should be torn down, and participation solicited by major developers for a new "edge city" to take its place. It would bring tons of business to an area without much, and replace a dilapidated structure which, if we're not very lucky indeed, would fall down in the next earthquake.

I am tired of paying taxes to support money-making sports corporations in a city where we desperately need police and other vital public services.

Millions for redevelopment, not one cent for Al Davis!

Posted by aaron76de on September 3, 2008 at 11:00 AM | Report this comment

Work out a deal that will benefit the City and both team using the best land available - the parcel upon which the Stadium and Arena already stand!

Send the Warriors to HP Pavilion for a few years while a new football stadium is built in place of the Arena, then build a new arena where the Coliseum stands once the stadium is done.

The transportation infrastructure is there. No unconstitutional eminent domain b.s. or displacing of people otherwise. The land is already used for large events, so no PR campaign to quash resistance in bedroom communities and their elected officials.

In fact, jobs will be created and money will likely be spent for and by the workers and people of the Oakland. Some of the street punks there seem like they need a job, anyway.

***

Oh, and please give a better source if you're to be the first to report that Troy Aikman owns a piece of Raider pie.

I've not read that anywhere in the numerous stories on the sale since last October.

Oh, and the Raiders have seen attendance and season-ticket sales go up since taking over from OFMA.

Star players - acquired with money from that sale - and winning again will help bring attendance up with the League average.

Posted by THRO-slc on September 5, 2008 at 2:47 PM | Report this comment

It seems like the author of the article dismisses the possibility of the Raiders moving back to Los Angeles a bit to cavalierly.

The Raiders have never given a fig as to whether or not something benefits the NFL as a whole, and the the crux of the author's argument is that the NFL as a whole prefers a vacant Los Angeles Market.

The thing that (sadly) seals it in my mind (that the move back south is a done deal) is that the Raiders have never been able to sell all of their Luxury Suites since they've been in Oakland.

They will have no problem doing that in Los Angeles, with the myriad of corporate/mogul types down there, and Luxury Suite revenues do not have to be shared with the rest of the league as other revenues are.

I want them to stay. I cried when they left for LA in 1982. When they moved back in 95, I thought that the lease seemed to be a bit short, and here we are....

God, I hope I'm wrong...

Posted by plrraz on September 8, 2008 at 11:07 AM | Report this comment

The bottom line here is that spending that kind of money or around Oakland is not a good investment. If the oakland were to host a super bowl where the heck is anyone going to go to party or eat and have a good time for the week, sf is the one that will reap the benifits. Unless every one wants to eat at kwik ways and party at jeffries. Oakland has nothing to offer anymore, it is my bet that within the next few years the national guard will be running oakland. Should be now.

Posted by Alz Walker on September 23, 2008 at 5:24 PM | Report this comment

Latest in Feature

  • A Coach's Job Begins Off the Court

    Coach Joanne Boyle has built the Cal women's basketball program by treating team members as people as well as players.
    • Nov 18, 2009
  • Das Mann of Steel

    How a metalworker from Burning Man became the maestro of the huge American Steel artist complex.
    • Nov 11, 2009
  • Understanding North Korea

    For years, East Bay activists have been trying to influence US policy toward North Korea. Finally, Washington may be listening.
    • Nov 4, 2009
  • More»

Author Archives

Calendar

Submit an event

Most Popular Stories

  • You Don't Know Jack

    There's strong evidence that Marcel Diallo Jack, the self-styled "mayor of West Oakland," perpetrated a racist Internet fraud on a local activist.
  • A Troubled Rape Case

    The high-profile rape charges against Deputy District Attorney Michael Gressett are tainted by questionable facts, unorthodox prosecutorial conduct, and the unmistakable whiff of politics.
  • A Coach's Job Begins Off the Court

    Coach Joanne Boyle has built the Cal women's basketball program by treating team members as people as well as players.
  • Yelp and the Business of Extortion 2.0

    Local business owners say Yelp offers to hide negative customer reviews of their businesses on its web site ... for a price.
  • Understanding North Korea

    For years, East Bay activists have been trying to influence US policy toward North Korea. Finally, Washington may be listening.

© 2009 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved