Glenn Dickey: S.F. is OK without Niners

Glenn Dickey, The Examiner
Read more by Glenn Dickey
Nov 14, 2006 2:00 AM (5 hrs ago)
Current rank: # 6 of 5,249 articles

SAN FRANCISCO - There are only two reasons, symbolic and economic, to
keep a pro football team within the city limits — and neither applies
to the politicians’ attempt to keep the 49ers in San Francisco.

The symbolism is important to a lesser city. Cities such as
Cincinnati, St. Louis and Kansas City would be virtually unknown if it
weren’t for the presence of Major League Baseball and NFL teams.

Once, San Francisco was in that category. Then, Mayor George
Christopher campaigned successfully to get the Giants to move from New
York to San Francisco in 1958 because a San Francisco dateline would
appear on baseball game stories nationally.

That is no longer necessary. San Francisco is well known nationally
and even internationally; for years, it has been known as the favorite
city of Europeans. Tourism is booming. The City was even the focus of
the political campaign this fall, as Republicans tried unsuccessfully
to scare voters about the “San Francisco values” that would surface if
Nancy Pelosi were to become speaker of the House. Name recognition is
not a problem for San Francisco.

Economically, there is a big difference in what baseball and football
bring to a city.

Baseball teams play 81 home games every year. Fans eat at restaurants
around the park. Some who come from areas of some distance stay in
hotels in the home city. New ballparks have revived dormant downtown
areas in Baltimore, Cleveland and Denver. San Francisco doesn’t need
that kind of help, but, even so, the Giants’ park has stimulated
economic activity in China Basin.

Football does not give a city that kind of economic boost. There are
only 10 games, regular season and exhibition, unless a team makes the
playoffs, which the 49ers haven’t since 2002. As the 49ers’
presentation in Santa Clara last week emphasized, the tailgating
experience is critical to the fans’ enjoyment. They don’t eat in local
restaurants and they seldom stay in local hotels.

There is one notable exception to this rule: Hosting the Super Bowl
can be a huge moneymaker for a city. Because relatively few tickets
are allotted to the home city, people come in from around the country,
staying in local hotels and eating in local restaurants. And the Super
Bowl is played at the one time of the year when San Francisco tourism
lags.

But guess what? It probably would make little difference to San
Francisco if the Super Bowl were played in Santa Clara or San
Francisco.

The money spent by visitors at that time is spent primarily in the
week leading up to the game. San Francisco prospered with the one
Super Bowl played in this area in January 1985 because visitors stayed
in San Francisco, going to Stanford only on game day. It was a
lose-lose situation for Stanford, which had to pay for extra police on
game day but got no economic benefit. It would be the same for Santa
Clara. Can you imagine visitors opting to stay in Santa Clara instead
of San Francisco during the week leading up to a game?

The 49ers may have started in San Francisco, but much of their fan
base has shifted to the Peninsula and South Bay. Mayor Gavin Newsom
should spend his time on more critical problems. San Francisco does
not need the 49ers.

Glenn Dickey has been covering Bay Area sports since 1963 and also
writes on www.GlennDickey.com. E-mail him at glenndickey@hotmail.com.