drummer
Footballguy
PERFECT
Full article: http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-san-francisco-nfl-4-9-million-20160120-column.htmlYouu could call it adding insult to injury: After the National Football League's49ers abandoned San Francisco for a new stadium in Santa Clara in 2014, the NFL threw its former franchise city the crumb of a week of branded events leading up to this year's Super Bowl, to be played at the new venue on Feb. 7.
San Francisco is now confronting the bill for hosting those events. They'll cost more than $4.8 million in public services, almost none of which will be reimbursed. The tally prompted the city's budget and legislative analyst to draft an anguished complaint to city leaders, noting that the costs of three major public events during the pre-game week had been largely a civic secret.
"This fact represents a nondisclosure to the Board of Supervisors of significant expenditures," reported Severin Campbell, the city analyst, "and represents a disservice to the Board of Supervisors."
The report prompted three supervisors to draft an emergency resolution requiring the city to recoup the money from the NFL or the Super Bowl 50 host committee, but it may be too late. That's because there is no written agreement between the city and the league or host committee requiring reimbursement.
Indeed, in bidding to host the pre-game parties, the city committed to not ask for repayment of its fire, police or emergency services. In doing so, Campbell observed, San Francisco proved to be dumber than Santa Clara, which extracted an agreement from the host committee requiring reimbursement for all city expenses connected with the game, including police, fire and emergency services, a bill that's expected to reach $3.6 million.
The issue with the costs to San Francisco isn't merely the size of the bill. The $4.8 million in costs is a minuscule proportion of the city's $8.9-billion budget. But the city is already facing a budget deficit of $100 million for the fiscal year beginning July 1, and a projected shortfall of $240 million for the year after that. Mayor Ed Lee has ordered city departments to cut costs by 3% over the next two years.
Then there's the thought of being taken for a ride by the NFL, which collects $10 billion in revenue a year, making it a larger economic entity than the city itself. "Santa Clara got the Super Bowl, and San Francisco's getting the traffic and gridlock," Supervisor Jane Kim told the San Francisco Chronicle.
Of course, this is typical of the NFL's relationship with communities that it pretends to be playing for partners but really plays for suckers. The league banks on municipalities bending over backward to grab a bit of reflected glory from its events, especially the big annual championship game. (Are you listening, Inglewood?)
Local supporters of the deal have essentially told the critics to quit bellyaching. They argue that the pre-game events are expected to bring a million visitors into the city, as though it's all gravy.
"Super Bowl 50 is coming, and with it all the usual naysaying from the usual sources about city money being used to host a 'corporate event,'" former Mayor Willie Brown wrote in the Chronicle. "You bet it's a corporate event. It's being put on by the NFL which, when it comes to capturing the American psyche, is probably the most powerful corporation around. ... Everyone is going to make a killing, including the private citizens who are smart enough to schedule a vacation paid for by Airbnb'ing their homes."
They might set a record in sacks this season with either QB, especially with Gabbert. They don't have the offensive line, and last season they were one of the worst in the league according to most metrics. Kelley is an odd hire. It's almost a complete disconnect to the FO philosophy, going on McBoozin' to Baalke/Marathe. Of course Jed has to be the guy behind this. He doesn't know anything about football. He thinks he knows Social Media, and he sucks at that too.I don't trust Gabbart at all. They need to commit to Kaepernick and fix his issues. Coach him up. With the right system - and this could be it - he can be a great QB.
Or a coach who is going to put an unusual amount of pressure on him? This would be an absolutely terrible gig to take as a first time DC. They will have to find someone who has been around awhile and is desperate for another shot at a coordinating gig.Vrabel apparently a pretty smart guy
Why would anyone want to come work with this front office and owner?
The defense is gonna have enough pressure with all the offense's three and outs.thecatch said:Or a coach who is going to put an unusual amount of pressure on him? This would be an absolutely terrible gig to take as a first time DC. They will have to find someone who has been around awhile and is desperate for another shot at a coordinating gig.fantasycurse42 said:Vrabel apparently a pretty smart guy
Why would anyone want to come work with this front office and owner?
Scot McGloughan, former VP of personnel to then former GM of the 49ers, who resigned weeks before the 2010 draft because of boozin' issues. He is now GM of the Redskins after a consulting gig with the Seahawks. He is credited for his scouting report there that sold them on Russell Wilson, and is a darn good talent evaluator. Most of the pro-bowl roster the 49ers had were all his doing. Now, they are all gone.Who is mcboozin??
man I thought when Kaep was rolling that was a fun team to watch. Good defense, Run the ball, Kaep making big plays.Looking forward to the new look 9ers, seems like forever since SF had a watchable much less fun offense. Good luck with Kelly.
You guys have more hope than I. But I stopped being a fan of this team after they getting rid of Harbaugh. That front office won't produce anything watchable other than a train wreck. Now, I just have fun kicking dirt on Jed's face.man I thought when Kaep was rolling that was a fun team to watch. Good defense, Run the ball, Kaep making big playsLooking forward to the new look 9ers, seems like forever since SF had a watchable much less fun offense. Good luck with Kelly.
Last time I saw a game there was around 1982. Don't remember who they played, we used to go to a couple of games a year there.Looking at getting tix for the 49ers vs. Rams at the old LA Mausoleum. Last time I saw a game there: 1985, Pats vs. LA Raiders, division playoff game. Marcus Allen fumbles the ball near the goal line. Raiders lose, mayhem in the stands lol. Fights breaking out all game long. Saw cops tumble down the seats with the fans who were fighting each other. Joints being passed around. Good times.
Other than the non parking (we had to park in someones front lawn for 5 bucks), and it being in the 'hood, it wasn't that bad except for Raider fan. But Raider fan is Raider fan, so wherever they go, shenanigans follow. Although Ninaz fan is right there with them now.Last time I saw a game there was around 1982. Don't remember who they played, we used to go to a couple of games a year there.Looking at getting tix for the 49ers vs. Rams at the old LA Mausoleum. Last time I saw a game there: 1985, Pats vs. LA Raiders, division playoff game. Marcus Allen fumbles the ball near the goal line. Raiders lose, mayhem in the stands lol. Fights breaking out all game long. Saw cops tumble down the seats with the fans who were fighting each other. Joints being passed around. Good times.
Glad to have you back drummer. However, SF is one of the greatest cities and fastest ( though not all good growth IMO) growing in the world. Comparing SF to Jax...dude...plumb stupid.In Other News:
Full article: http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-san-francisco-nfl-4-9-million-20160120-column.htmlYouu could call it adding insult to injury: After the National Football League's49ers abandoned San Francisco for a new stadium in Santa Clara in 2014, the NFL threw its former franchise city the crumb of a week of branded events leading up to this year's Super Bowl, to be played at the new venue on Feb. 7.
San Francisco is now confronting the bill for hosting those events. They'll cost more than $4.8 million in public services, almost none of which will be reimbursed. The tally prompted the city's budget and legislative analyst to draft an anguished complaint to city leaders, noting that the costs of three major public events during the pre-game week had been largely a civic secret.
"This fact represents a nondisclosure to the Board of Supervisors of significant expenditures," reported Severin Campbell, the city analyst, "and represents a disservice to the Board of Supervisors."
The report prompted three supervisors to draft an emergency resolution requiring the city to recoup the money from the NFL or the Super Bowl 50 host committee, but it may be too late. That's because there is no written agreement between the city and the league or host committee requiring reimbursement.
Indeed, in bidding to host the pre-game parties, the city committed to not ask for repayment of its fire, police or emergency services. In doing so, Campbell observed, San Francisco proved to be dumber than Santa Clara, which extracted an agreement from the host committee requiring reimbursement for all city expenses connected with the game, including police, fire and emergency services, a bill that's expected to reach $3.6 million.
The issue with the costs to San Francisco isn't merely the size of the bill. The $4.8 million in costs is a minuscule proportion of the city's $8.9-billion budget. But the city is already facing a budget deficit of $100 million for the fiscal year beginning July 1, and a projected shortfall of $240 million for the year after that. Mayor Ed Lee has ordered city departments to cut costs by 3% over the next two years.
Then there's the thought of being taken for a ride by the NFL, which collects $10 billion in revenue a year, making it a larger economic entity than the city itself. "Santa Clara got the Super Bowl, and San Francisco's getting the traffic and gridlock," Supervisor Jane Kim told the San Francisco Chronicle.
Of course, this is typical of the NFL's relationship with communities that it pretends to be playing for partners but really plays for suckers. The league banks on municipalities bending over backward to grab a bit of reflected glory from its events, especially the big annual championship game. (Are you listening, Inglewood?)
Local supporters of the deal have essentially told the critics to quit bellyaching. They argue that the pre-game events are expected to bring a million visitors into the city, as though it's all gravy.
"Super Bowl 50 is coming, and with it all the usual naysaying from the usual sources about city money being used to host a 'corporate event,'" former Mayor Willie Brown wrote in the Chronicle. "You bet it's a corporate event. It's being put on by the NFL which, when it comes to capturing the American psyche, is probably the most powerful corporation around. ... Everyone is going to make a killing, including the private citizens who are smart enough to schedule a vacation paid for by Airbnb'ing their homes."
Last time I was in SF two months ago, I was walking through Civic Center around 3am, post bar hopping and a late night meal. Walked past Bill Graham Civic Auditorium, saw what looked like people camping out there for a show, and decided to check it out. It wasn't people camping out for a show. The whole civic center, including the library area, was full of homeless, and there were needles from the hypes everywhere. SF is in a huge existential crisis, but the money is flowing there like crazy, and city just keeps selling itself out like a prostitute. This doesn't surprise me at all. Once the new LA stadium is built, SF will be just like Jacksonville in the SB rotation.
I lived in SF most of my adult life (may be back there for most of this year as well). I know that city like the back of my hand. What I mean here is that with LA in play, the West Coast host for the SB will likely be LA over Santa Clara. If you have ever been to Santa Clara, it's on par with Jacksonville lol.Glad to have you back drummer. However, SF is one of the greatest cities and fastest ( though not all good growth IMO) growing in the world. Comparing SF to Jax...dude...plumb stupid.In Other News:
Full article: http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-san-francisco-nfl-4-9-million-20160120-column.htmlYouu could call it adding insult to injury: After the National Football League's49ers abandoned San Francisco for a new stadium in Santa Clara in 2014, the NFL threw its former franchise city the crumb of a week of branded events leading up to this year's Super Bowl, to be played at the new venue on Feb. 7.
San Francisco is now confronting the bill for hosting those events. They'll cost more than $4.8 million in public services, almost none of which will be reimbursed. The tally prompted the city's budget and legislative analyst to draft an anguished complaint to city leaders, noting that the costs of three major public events during the pre-game week had been largely a civic secret.
"This fact represents a nondisclosure to the Board of Supervisors of significant expenditures," reported Severin Campbell, the city analyst, "and represents a disservice to the Board of Supervisors."
The report prompted three supervisors to draft an emergency resolution requiring the city to recoup the money from the NFL or the Super Bowl 50 host committee, but it may be too late. That's because there is no written agreement between the city and the league or host committee requiring reimbursement.
Indeed, in bidding to host the pre-game parties, the city committed to not ask for repayment of its fire, police or emergency services. In doing so, Campbell observed, San Francisco proved to be dumber than Santa Clara, which extracted an agreement from the host committee requiring reimbursement for all city expenses connected with the game, including police, fire and emergency services, a bill that's expected to reach $3.6 million.
The issue with the costs to San Francisco isn't merely the size of the bill. The $4.8 million in costs is a minuscule proportion of the city's $8.9-billion budget. But the city is already facing a budget deficit of $100 million for the fiscal year beginning July 1, and a projected shortfall of $240 million for the year after that. Mayor Ed Lee has ordered city departments to cut costs by 3% over the next two years.
Then there's the thought of being taken for a ride by the NFL, which collects $10 billion in revenue a year, making it a larger economic entity than the city itself. "Santa Clara got the Super Bowl, and San Francisco's getting the traffic and gridlock," Supervisor Jane Kim told the San Francisco Chronicle.
Of course, this is typical of the NFL's relationship with communities that it pretends to be playing for partners but really plays for suckers. The league banks on municipalities bending over backward to grab a bit of reflected glory from its events, especially the big annual championship game. (Are you listening, Inglewood?)
Local supporters of the deal have essentially told the critics to quit bellyaching. They argue that the pre-game events are expected to bring a million visitors into the city, as though it's all gravy.
"Super Bowl 50 is coming, and with it all the usual naysaying from the usual sources about city money being used to host a 'corporate event,'" former Mayor Willie Brown wrote in the Chronicle. "You bet it's a corporate event. It's being put on by the NFL which, when it comes to capturing the American psyche, is probably the most powerful corporation around. ... Everyone is going to make a killing, including the private citizens who are smart enough to schedule a vacation paid for by Airbnb'ing their homes."
Last time I was in SF two months ago, I was walking through Civic Center around 3am, post bar hopping and a late night meal. Walked past Bill Graham Civic Auditorium, saw what looked like people camping out there for a show, and decided to check it out. It wasn't people camping out for a show. The whole civic center, including the library area, was full of homeless, and there were needles from the hypes everywhere. SF is in a huge existential crisis, but the money is flowing there like crazy, and city just keeps selling itself out like a prostitute. This doesn't surprise me at all. Once the new LA stadium is built, SF will be just like Jacksonville in the SB rotation.
10:29am: The offers for Kaepernick have not yet been good enough for the 49ers to make a deal, a source tells Matt Maiocco of CSNBayArea.com (on Twitter). In addition to the Broncos, the Jets and Browns are involved. The Broncos are still the frontrunners, Matt Barrows of The Sacramento Bee tweets.
10:24am: The Broncos are out in front trying to trade for Kaepernick, but two other teams are involved on the QB, Ian Rapoport of NFL.com tweets.
9:54am: Colin Kaepernick is the Broncos’ chief target at this time, according to Michael Silver of NFL.com (on Twitter), who believes that the Broncos will go after him via trade. The 49ers likely want a second-round pick while the Broncos may be willing to part with a third-round choice (link). Silver hears (link) that Kaepernick is likely willing to restructure his contract to the Broncos’ liking, though his deal is already somewhat team-friendly.
Was reading this too... Nothing surprising, two egomaniacs working for an even bigger egomaniac. Nothing to look forward to this season, maybe York can do us a favor and step down
Kelly took a 4-12 Eagles team to the playoffs in his first year as head coach. The idea that you'll get the #1 overall next year?I'm seeing possibilities of Tunsil slipping all the way to us... Any chance? Any chance we blow it if he does?
Tunsil this year, number one overall pick next year, possibly Watson? Not a bad reset right there.
We can start by going back to earlier in the thread, last year in March I set their O/U at 5, I'd say I nailed that.Kelly took a 4-12 Eagles team to the playoffs in his first year as head coach. The idea that you'll get the #1 overall next year?
So we'd move Kaep to jump from 37 to 31... I'm in the camp of take anything for the guy, so I wouldn't mind this - Doesn't sound like they're giving up much, I'd rather get their 2nd or 3rd straight up, but whatever, I'll take it.Reading a report that Denver and SF are discussing trading SF's 2nd + Kaep for Denver's 1st.
I'm a Kaep supporter so I don't like it. I guess they'd take Lynch at 7 in that scenario.
Guess we'll find out in a couple hours. They'd still have to address his contract though. Wasn't tha tone of the bigger hindrances for the trade from Denver's perspective?So we'd move Kaep to jump from 37 to 31... I'm in the camp of take anything for the guy, so I wouldn't mind this - Doesn't sound like they're giving up much, I'd rather get their 2nd or 3rd straight up, but whatever, I'll take it.
The Chip Kelly hate is ridiculous. Everyone says PHI is purging all of Chip's players.... I think some people are forgetting what that team looked like when he took over. The dumped a few bad contracts.Kelly took a 4-12 Eagles team to the playoffs in his first year as head coach. The idea that you'll get the #1 overall next year?
Yup! I would say it's unlikely he'll repeat his horrible-team-to-playoffs-in-first-year thing again, but people are comparing him to Harbaugh when the two actually have VASTLY different personalities. They might both have some ego problems - but they run things very differently.The Chip Kelly hate is ridiculous. Everyone says PHI is purging all of Chip's players.... I think some people are forgetting what that team looked like when he took over. The dumped a few bad contracts.
Update?Not a 49er fan, but I really think people are overstating JH's effect. I think this team is good and unless you hire someone completely inept, I could see the 49ers challenging for the division next year. Does JH not take any of the responsibility for the 8-8 record this year?
I think this would be the best job for any coach to walk into. You just had a team completely underperform and go 8-8. The new coach will look golden if the team plays up to its standard.