Pavelski2112
Bold as Boognish
It's simple, really
San Jose > San Francisco
Pretty much this. SF is full of yuppies (well, moreso than SJ) and is just crowded and way too expensive to do pretty much anything.
It's simple, really
San Jose > San Francisco
Only if culture (the arts, fine restaurants, sights, etc.) is optional.
Make sure to check out New York City next time you're vacationing in Hoboken.
(Just joking. Not comparing Hoboken to SJ. Exaggeration to make a point.)
That's a laughable opinion. SF is perhaps the prettiest city in the world. San Jose is a fine enough city,but it doesn't even come close.
It would be like the Rangers opting for Brooklyn over Manhattan
SF is only pretty from 30 miles out. The city is a complete ****hole/dump.
SF is only pretty from 30 miles out. The city is a complete ****hole/dump.
It's simple, really
San Jose > San Francisco
No no no don't apologize. You are on to something.
By the way San Jose (who's hockey team is legit and its fans are exceptionally dedicated so nothing against them from a hockey standpoint) is an armpit of a city. I have been going there since the late 70's to visit family and while it has gotten bigger it certainly hasn't gotten better. That place is to San Francisco as Riverside is to Los Angeles. The two just don't compare. SF wouldn't work as a hockey town imo and SJ does but as far as the comparison of the two places it isn't even close.
Only if culture (the arts, fine restaurants, sights, etc.) is optional.
Make sure to check out New York City next time you're vacationing in Hoboken.
(Just joking. Not comparing Hoboken to SJ. Exaggeration to make a point.)
No no no don't apologize. You are on to something.
By the way San Jose (who's hockey team is legit and its fans are exceptionally dedicated so nothing against them from a hockey standpoint) is an armpit of a city. I have been going there since the late 70's to visit family and while it has gotten bigger it certainly hasn't gotten better. That place is to San Francisco as Riverside is to Los Angeles. The two just don't compare. SF wouldn't work as a hockey town imo and SJ does but as far as the comparison of the two places it isn't even close.
I would compare it more to Orange County. The distance is also about right.Wrong.
Have you been to downtown Mountain View? Downtown Campbell? Downtown Willow Glen? Los Gatos?
Sure they aren't SJ proper, but nothing really is. Even downtown SJ recently has had a massive facelift, especially near San Pedro square.
Far, far from an armpit. Riverside... nice try![]()
SJ has tons of culture, fine restaurants, breweries, 25 mins from a real beach...
The south bay is a great place and has been for a long time. SF is awesome too (I've lived there twice) but it has its cons as well.
Unfortunately just because a city sells more postcards does not automatically make it a better sports market.
Wrong.
Have you been to downtown Mountain View? Downtown Campbell? Downtown Willow Glen? Los Gatos?
Sure they aren't SJ proper, but nothing really is. Even downtown SJ recently has had a massive facelift, especially near San Pedro square.
Far, far from an armpit. Riverside... nice try![]()
Really? I thought SF was the nice city and Oakland was the dump.
(I've never been to either, this is just what I've generally heard over the years)
You should go to Atherton next time you are up there.I actually have and am in the SJ area very often and I stand by what I said. Aside from you having a great hockey team and fanbase there isn't much that I would say compares to San Francisco and I think that it compares closely with Ontario (I meant Ontario not Riverside). Very closely.
Oakland is California's best kept secret. Given there are areas I will not come close to. SF is great but certainly has some dirty ****hole neighborhoods too.
Basically comes down to SJ and Silicon Valley as a whole with tons of $$$ and greater population, with no competition to other major sports teams. Who knows if the Sharks would have the strong fan base and support they have if they stayed in SF.
Very simple. You get the San Francisco crowd and the Oakland crowd without the risk of alienating either one.
I don't support the main proposition of this thread, but there is a problem in the Bay Area where (putting aside any issues with the people supporting hockey in general) people see the Sharks as the South Bay's team, and not the entire Bay Area's NHL team.
It's a big beef of mine, because support for the Sharks in SF and Oakland should be much, much bigger than it is. Again, putting aside any people's issues with hockey itself, there is a whole complex between SF vs. SJ (not as much Oak v. SJ, but still support in Oakland is not as big as it could be, although Sharks Ice @ Oakland helps I'm sure).