Oakland & San Francisco-Bay Area (non-Earthquakes) pro soccer.

That's more like a hash pipe dream.

 

Yeah but SF would be better than Sacramento. Not sure if it would be better for the Quakes and their fans although I think it would be great to commute to those games.

 

And where would they play, Falvo? And what do you mean by "not sure if it would be better for the Quakes and their fans?" It would be disastrous, and you know it.

SF got basketball and baseball. They good, OK? Let us have soccer and hockey, OK? Alright, everybody gets their fair share, OK?

SF don't need to get everything, OK? Is that alright with you Falvo?

 

No you don’t get it. It was a hypothetical and I don’t really think it will ever happen , nor am I sure if it would be all that great for the Quakes as a rule.

I do however , think though a team there would make for a much better commute than Sacramento for fans to travel up to SF for an afternoon 2-3 times a season. It would also be cool to see a SJ- San Francisco rivalry at one point. I mean I can care less about driving two hours to Sac and hanging out there after the game. I’d love to take a train or a car ride up to SF and spend a day in the city before and after the game as there is a lot more to do in SF than Sac.

I agree though that for as long as I remember , the city was never a hotbed for soccer and it’s been San Jose since 1974. There also is no place to build a stadium. I think there was plan to build something at Candlestick point after the stadium was torn down but that would be kind of a breezy location. It’s colder there in August at times than it is in November. I know the Dragons had big plans in Burlingame and then their big plans also went down the drain in a hurry. Just thinking back, the Victory and the Deltas only lasted a year.

 

Hypothetically, Oakland would be better for a team with a stronger soccer base, lack of anything but a baseball team (not really a sport anyway), and more surrounding areas for a stadium (relatively speaking). Not hypothetically, that would take away many SJ fans especially if the stadium were on the southern side of the city.

 

Well San Francisco is a better city than Oakland if you want to have fun as there is a lot more to do with shopping, restaurants and nightlife.

I mean , pre Covid, I never had any desire to go to Jack London Square. On the other hand I always loved going to the Embarcadero, Union Square, Fisherman's Wharf, Ghirardelli Square, Ferry Building Marketplace, Golden Gate Park ,Japanese Tea Garden, Chinatown , The Cannery, Fort Mason, Japan Town , Nob Hill, Russian Hill , Pacific Heights , Pier 39, North Beach, Lombard Street, the Marina, Alamo Square, San Francisco Botanical Garden and the De Young etc.

I am sure most people feel the same way too as everyone loves going to SF. Also, when you compare SF to Sac, what's there to do in Sac other than seeing the State Capitol and the Florin Towne Centre Mall? I never could get into it.

 

Just quit while you're behind, OK?

 

Nobody is arguing about what each city has on their tourist list. I'm not sure what those have to do with having a stadium, having fans, and fans going to a game other than going out before or after the game. Who would go to Lombard, De Young, Botanical Garden, etc before or after a game? The other places could be an hour away from a stadium if not in the same neighborhood. What has shown to matter is food & drink.

 

No the point is, having a team in San Francisco would be cool. It would be great for coaches, teams , opponents , players , hometown and opposing fans as well as international teams and domestic tourists.

It would a lot more fun than having stadium at Newhall and Wondo Way and only commuting to Valley Fair or Santana Row every game day.

 

Lots of things that would be cool aren't logical business decisions.

 

Sure but Reno wasn't that logical and never really made sense. Probably another reason why they folded after 4 years.

Monterey isn't really all that logical either.

 

My practice has been to explore cultural attractions of an unfamiliar city when traveling to see the Quakes. In Sacramento, when I've visited for Quakes games, I went to Sutter Fort and the Stanford Mansion, as well as Old Town. Likewise, I visited the local history museums in Charleston, South Carolina (Carolina Cup 2008), Guatemala City (Champions League 2013), and in Vancouver (2011), as well as the art museum and Negro Baseball museum (and others) in Kansas City (2012).

 

I don't know why you say Reno wasn't logical for a 2nd or 3rd division team, but that's a different story altogether.

Having one more cool thing to do in a city which is already loaded with such things (as you point out for SF) means more activities to compete against. And, yes, there are many factors here, but that part of your logic made no sense to me.

 

I would think that teams would first and foremost look at locals for season tickets. Hosting away fans, at least in my mind, is secondary. Nobody wants to be the Chargers.

 

KILA KALI

 

What do you mean? Reno is geographically located 5 hours away in the middle of nowhere in a desert. They don't have any soccer history and in fact folded. I never saw the lure of having a team in Reno as a opposed to a SF unless you are wanted to go to a casino and gamble. I knew they wouldn't last when they started up their franchise and they didn't.

I don't know if an SF team would work or not but as a fan, I'd much rather have a team there than in Reno. I'm sure a lot of people and fans for that matter, would.

 

They do have a cool outdoor bar don't they?

 

You asked, "Who would go to Lombard, De Young, Botanical Garden, etc before or after a game?" My response indicated that I am the sort of person who would, were I not already familiar with San Francisco and its cultural attractions.

Lombard's winding road is uninteresting to me, but I enjoy the DeYoung. Went to a 50th anniversary exhibit of the Summer of Love a few years back -- same year the Deltas won their league, though don't believe I visited Kezar and DeYoung on the same junket.

 

Of course many tourists and fans, international and domestic alike would love to go there or to one of the places I listed. Problem with the Victory and the Deltas was they were not playing in a viable leagues. They just weren't strong outfits. Kind of like comparing the USL Atlanta Silverbacks situation to MLS Atlanta United. Same with the USL Sounders to MLS version. MLS is a different animal and it could take off.

Now after this Covid pandemic, things have changed so much that I doubt it will ever happen. I still say though out of any other city in California, SF would be the most interesting to put a soccer team. Now that Sacramento is out, there aren't many other cities left unless you want to put one in Fresno but they folded as well.

 

The lure is that Reno is very quickly becoming the Portland of the Great Basin and a satellite city of Silicon Valley.

And Reno actually has a very long soccer history ... of pro and semi-pro soccer teams folding after a few years.

 

Reminds me that I visited the Oregon Historical Society during a Quakes junket to Portland in 2011. The same building Antifa recently trashed.

https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/10/...ith-widespread-condemnation-criminal-charges/