Sure, I’d be sad to see them go; they offer a shared
language with others and are often good conversation starters. On the other
hand, I see the point of those who fear their taxes would go up to keep them
here, and that this could cut into city funding for basic social services that
are already underfunded, and we could employ more people and create a better,
more democratic and interactive sense of Oakland culture if we reopened the
Kaiser auditorium to high-quality local talent rather than letting our money
drain to the Corporate Clearchannel colonizers or the MLB and NFL.
Yet, the more I think about it, the more I feel the terms
and the debate that is set on the news and sports stations and locker rooms of
Oakland are not necessarily opposed to each other, that yes there are ways we
can have more funding for social services, more homegrown local culture, and yet
still keep both the Raiders and the As.
The ultimatum that the teams will leave town if the city
does not help fund them assumes that a new half-billion dollar stadium is a
necessity. There’s a conventional wisdom that the Oakland Coliseum (which is
not yet called the Oracle Coliseum) is a laughing stock of the NFL and even MLB
teams. Why? Because it’s old. Old means born in 1968. Generation X. Decrepit.
Surely this structure was built to last at least as long as the average life
expectancy of a human being…And, yes, people live in 600 year old buildings in
Venice (which, by the way, is more of a tourist destination than Oakland). But
this is America, land of conspicuous consumption and planned obsolescence. And
more today (despite all the talk of “green sustainability”) than it was in
1968.
But the age of the building is not the only justification
for the construction of a half-billion dollar new stadium or, more ambitiously,
with an adjoining business-residential complex fit for the new silicon valley
colonists. The necessity of a new stadium is justified on the grounds that the
Raiders and the As are practically in the stone age----not because of Billy
Beane’s mismanagement that fails to take team chemistry into account, but
because the Raiders and the As share a
stadium!
This of course used to be more the rule in cities that have
both a MLB and NFL team (Mets & Jets & Beatles at Shea Stadium), but
today it is the exception. The sad exception. The sore exception. It sticks out
like a sore thumb! How embarrassing for the football teams to have to line up
on the infield dirt! The kicker might slip, but so might the other team’s
kicker. And, besides, it’s only for one or two games. More likely one, given
the As likelihood to go deep in the playoffs in the Billy Beane regime.
But what if we take pride in the efficiency of a dual-use
stadium, a defiant efficiency, thrifty (relatively speaking) jam econo working
class Old (sic) multi-purpose stadium? Perhaps you have to be born rich, or
have bought into the American dream of salvation through acquisitiveness (he
who dies with the most toys wins) to understand why we “need” two separate
stadiums for football and for baseball? Isn’t that an example of the same kind
of American waste, decadence, that brought us blockbusters like shock and awe?
Is it a developer’s scheme to seize more land at our expense and give us, what,
some temporary construction jobs and then a distraction from being
un(der)employed afterwards?
Is it not possible that the additional money wasted on two
stadiums could house every homeless person in Oakland? And that that could be a
great ballot initiaitive choice….
In the meantime, I believe that Raiders fans could tell the
team owner’s---WE DON’T NEED A NEW STADIUM. WE LOVE THE OLD ONE! THE BLACK
HOLE! RAIDER NATION! COMMITMENT TO
EXCELLENCE! JUST WIN BABY! WE’LL KEEP FILLING IT UP IF YOU PUT GREAT PRODUCT ON
THE FIELD….a level playing field (and thank god for the NFL’s salary cap rule).
The “ragged old” stadium has character, history, ghosts of all the
hall-of-famers from the Madden era, etc. Of course, WE DON’T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT
HOW FANCY THE CUP IS IF THE DRINK QUENCHES OUR THIRST (you could lower the
prices of your beer though)….we don’t mind if there’s a few cracks in the walls
of the bathrooms…..besides, look at how bad the 49ers got the second they
abandoned Candlestick for their shiny high-tech Levi’s stadium in Santa Clara
(do you really think that’s an accident?)…
So, why not make a virtue of necessity? Is a new stadium
really a necessity? You won’t hear that on the corporate stations (maybe say
earlier…)
Now, I’m no student of economics so I’m not going to get
into a whether paying a higher tax would in the long term actually help our
economy more than not—though I’m skeptical…
