San Dee-Ay-Go, make that Los An-Gel-Es, Super Chargers?

Is that because of weather or because of the facility itself?
I can understand not wanting to play games at 1 p.m. in the desert in early September, but maybe they could find a workaround for that. Put them on the road for the first two or three weeks, maybe even get creative and schedule them in the early window so they can play when it's a bit cooler at 10 a.m. instead of 1 p.m.
If it's just that they don't want to play in a smaller stadium for a year, that's ridiculous. Lots of teams (Oilers/Titans, Chargers, Bears, Vikings, Panthers, Rams) have played in temporary homes at some point in the past 30 years.

 

The Raiders say Sam Boyd doesn't meet NFL standards.

Raiders reportedly lose Las Vegas as possible option for 2019 before official relocation

 

It's just not capable of hosting an NFL team without major investment, even for a year. They'd have to rebuild locker rooms, replace turf, add a bunch of security measures... and no one is using the stadium once they're done. UNLV is moving into the new stadium with the Raiders.

 

1. The NFL owners learned their lesson. Since the USFL came and went, virtually every NFL franchise has rewritten its lease, and complete facility control is one of the league's primary demands.

In many if not most stadium-negotiation stories, the absolute-facility-control demand is usually presented as an "NFL requirement," non-negotiable, simply a fact of life.

2. Antitrust laws don't apply to billionaires such as NFL owners.

 

For one season, it sounds like that would work with minimal disruption, seeing as Cal has played there for getting on for a century now.

 

I was looking at the stadium where Burnley plays in the EPL on Google Earth yesterday and was surprised by how few parking spots the place has...the high school down the street from me has 10x and it's rather small and old itself. The locals must flock their on foot and public transportation.

 

Tell that to the neighbors. Or rather, tell that to the neighborhood association's lawyer.

 

From a Dec. 12 SF Chronicle article:

Stanford, UC Berkeley or San Jose State

There are major logistical challenges to the facilities, including parking, traffic and stadium capacity. UC Berkeley officials have not discussed the issue with the Raiders, Cal Athletics spokesman Herb Benenson said Wednesday. The campus also has an agreement with a neighborhood association prohibiting NFL games at Memorial Stadium.

https://www.sfgate.com/raiders/article/Where-will-the-Raiders-play-in-2019-20-if-not-in-13462132.php

 

This is why the Rose Bowl starts at 2 p.m. local time on New Year's Day come hell or high water, folks.

 

I used to go to a few Raiders games at Cal back in the day, mostly pre-season or during the 70s World Series. I don't know what the Raiders season ticket base is now, I'm guessing they wouldn't fill it. San Jose is much smaller. Stanford is about 50k.

 

Of the three, Stanford would be best but the comic value of them playing at Spartan Stadium would be too much to not have me root for it. That place is not equipped to handle a pro crowd and the fans are right on the field.

 

SJS is always in such dire straits financially, they would be the ones to do it. Been a while since I've been to see the alma mater, but are the end lines right up against the wall, still? Nice for the Raider version of Lambeau Leaps, hell on players going full speed if they don't pull up.