Skip to content

Soccer league files lawsuit over NFL occupancy for Super Bowl 50

Getty Images

The peeved parents of a youth soccer league in Santa Clara are seeking legal action after losing soccer fields for the next two months due to Super Bowl 50 at Levi’s Stadium.

According to Ramona Giwargis of the San Jose Mercury News, the Santa Clara Youth Soccer League filed a suit on Wednesday in hopes of stopping the NFL from taking over soccer fields adjacent to the stadium. The space is expected to used as a media village for the Super Bowl, a stipulation agreed upon by the city in bidding for the championship in 2013.

“We’re not trying to ruin the Super Bowl,” said Gautam Dutta, an attorney representing soccer league. “But we want to make sure the kids are provided for. And right now, time’s up. The fields could be paved over as early as Monday.”

The NFL would have access to the fields from January 4 to March 2. Afterward, the NFL has agreed to replace the fields, but that isn’t viewed as satisfactory by the soccer league, which will have displace up to 250 soccer games during the occupation.

Permalink 66 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill, San Francisco 49ers
66 Responses to “Soccer league files lawsuit over NFL occupancy for Super Bowl 50”
  1. allseeingone says: Dec 30, 2015 11:31 PM

    Play 60 somewhere else kids. The NFL takes what it wants and it wants your field.

  2. ajwill729 says: Dec 30, 2015 11:35 PM

    Rule #1. Don’t anger a rich California mom whose husband is likely a lawyer. You’ll always find yourself in court. It’s like an unwritten rule

  3. akaodoyle says: Dec 30, 2015 11:41 PM

    Do they know that soccer doesn’t matter?

  4. cranespy says: Dec 30, 2015 11:43 PM

    Not a fan of the NFL brass BUT the list of “give always” to secure SB50 would’ve been submitted waayyyy back. Sounds like either A. The soccer association was asleep at the wheel or B. The soccer association is attempting to strong arm the NFL into additional considerations. Sounds like something right in the wheelhouse of most attorneys.

  5. remstar10 says: Dec 30, 2015 11:48 PM

    Ah well none of those kids will be the next messi so screw em

  6. factman1000 says: Dec 30, 2015 11:48 PM

    Vote out the politicians that sold you out.

  7. trina16 says: Dec 30, 2015 11:51 PM

    Why would the No Fun League need those fields for 2 months?

  8. i10east says: Dec 30, 2015 11:53 PM

    The curse of Santa Clara strikes yet again…

  9. brawlkc says: Dec 30, 2015 11:54 PM

    You should take it up with the city and not the NFL. They’re (city) the ones who gave away your soccer fields.

  10. 33vikes says: Dec 30, 2015 11:57 PM

    Good luck with that one.

  11. chriskap11 says: Dec 31, 2015 12:07 AM

    The ultimate factor is simple, is this property private or civic? If it is civic then unfortunately these parents and children must realize for the betterment of the community and financial windfall their one season is going to be forfeited. It is a life lesson, not everything is always “fair” nor does it always benefit you directly but it is necessary. The blue participation awards will have to wait until next season

  12. donnymacjack says: Dec 31, 2015 12:07 AM

    Way to pick on the kids Roger!

  13. weepingjebus says: Dec 31, 2015 12:10 AM

    This is so Goodell I don’t even know where to start.

  14. ivanpavlov0000 says: Dec 31, 2015 12:11 AM

    Can the kids soccer teams share an LA stadium with the Raiders?

  15. viper0290 says: Dec 31, 2015 12:16 AM

    This is America. Nobody cares about soccer

  16. gioreeko says: Dec 31, 2015 12:17 AM

    They’re doing a favor by not letting the kids play soccer!!!!! What a stupid sport!!!

  17. jmd0722 says: Dec 31, 2015 12:24 AM

    What is with these people, the super bowl is lot more important that their soccer. Get real and get with the program, parents. We expect the field to be in primo condition and since there has been problems with this field, we don’t need a bunch of soccer players chewing it up.

  18. justintuckrule says: Dec 31, 2015 12:38 AM

    They won’t even buy end zone cameras for their own games. Can’t imagine what the soccer fields will look like when the NFL gives them back. Good for the soccer league.

  19. zswittman says: Dec 31, 2015 12:46 AM

    No one cares about the soccer league

  20. broncosaddict says: Dec 31, 2015 12:50 AM

    pretty sure they’ve known about this for a long time. sounds like poor planning and sour grapes on their part. i understand its for the kids and i feel for them, but this sounds like soccer league dropped the ball, not the nfl.

  21. magnumpimustache says: Dec 31, 2015 12:55 AM

    I never like soccer but this is one match I hope soccer wins

  22. johngaltx says: Dec 31, 2015 1:01 AM

    Only thing that could ruin the Super Boul would be Chiefs vs. The Washington Football Team!

  23. crabwasheld says: Dec 31, 2015 1:02 AM

    Waaaa! The rich kids won’t be able to play on their fancy fields because the biggest event in the country is there! Find some other fields for a couple of months while the biggest event in the country needs the space… These spoiled rich computer nerds don’t live in reality.

  24. drakost says: Dec 31, 2015 1:09 AM

    An opportunity for the NFL to make a great stand and show some of that integrity that they constantly talk about… In other words they’ll botch it.

  25. Fake French Accent says: Dec 31, 2015 1:09 AM

    This is an extremely valuable lesson for these kids…

    …Nobody cares about Soccer.

  26. daytontriangles says: Dec 31, 2015 1:33 AM

    Perhaps the NFL can temporarily relocate the teams to Carson.

  27. randalpnaditch says: Dec 31, 2015 1:48 AM

    Once it is paved over it will be more useful than a soccer field

  28. sportnik2 says: Dec 31, 2015 1:48 AM

    With stuffed suits like Goodell leading the way, within one generation they will be paving over football fields for soccer stadiums.

    Goofell and his toadies have no love or appreciation for the on field product. They only care about maximizing profits. This indifference to the quality of the product results in a overly complex rulebook, inconsistent officiating, witch hunts directed at star performers, a push for An 18 game season, more playoff teams, games in London, etc. Goodell and his flunkies are too ignorant to realize that their long term profits are wholly dependent on the quality of their product.

  29. tyjmey says: Dec 31, 2015 1:50 AM

    ‘agreed upon by the city in 2013’. But lawsuit now? What took so long?

  30. keylimelight says: Dec 31, 2015 1:52 AM

    Soccer fields need a minimum of markings and have portable goals.

    I find it very hard to believe that there are not other fields that they could arrange to play on.

    If they crying over missed amenities at the current fields they need to grow up and do without.

    Crikey, drop the law suit and make other arrangements–it’s temporary.

  31. britishraven says: Dec 31, 2015 2:13 AM

    How can you file a lawsuit for this?????

  32. GrantRodgers says: Dec 31, 2015 2:21 AM

    Everything about everything Jed York has to do with has a catch to it.

  33. pppath says: Dec 31, 2015 2:21 AM

    Don’t like soccer. But I’m all for the soccer moms on this issue. Don’t bully the common people. Let the kids play. NFL, back off and come to a resolution that benefits the kids.

  34. kissbillsrings says: Dec 31, 2015 2:26 AM

    Sounds like an attempt at a money grab..locals trying to get a cash settlement but the are S O L ….the city agreed so it’s a done deal

  35. footballer4ever says: Dec 31, 2015 2:26 AM

    Youth football leagues, kick them eggballers to where it hurts them the most, money! Eggball league is a bully…so much hype for a boring senseless “sport”.

  36. wyrdawg says: Dec 31, 2015 2:38 AM

    “We’re not trying to ruin the Super Bowl,” said Gautam Dutta, an attorney representing soccer league. “But we want to make sure the kids are provided for. And right now, time’s up. The fields could be paved over as early as Monday.”

    Dude. That’s exactly what you’re doing.

    Did you ask Kyle’s Mom why she’s pissed off? That’s the ONLY place she can shoot selfies for her FB profile without Kyle’s Dad being there!

    Dude.. Kyle’s Dad is WATCHING THE NFL!

    Give me a break. Every city the NFL hosts a big game, they go all out for the kids. I lived in Atlanta during that SB game… I was blown away.

    The NFL took over an ENTIRE PARK in Chicago for last year’s NFL draft. Nobody complained. In fact, they went all out to make sure the kids were good to go.

    Reason #257 why California has too many NFL teams already.

  37. balaspackfan says: Dec 31, 2015 2:43 AM

    Wah frickin wah! Sue your city that agreed to it. We don’t need another reason to hate soccer.

  38. tonytitan2015 says: Dec 31, 2015 2:47 AM

    Sorry kiddies, we know we say that you’re important to us and to go play for 60 everyday, but we’re much more important and we’re taking your play fields away…not only taking them but paving them over. Oh sure, we’ll replace them but it won’t be for some months before you can play on them again and truth be told…we the NFL, HATE that form of ‘football’ you’re playing. PFFFFTTT…using a round black and white ball….HA! We mock you. (End Sarcasm)

  39. theprocessoflosingmymind says: Dec 31, 2015 2:52 AM

    They’re nowhere else the kids can play soccer anywhere near Santa Clara? Really? The soccer league needs to spend their time and money on something else.

  40. nyneal says: Dec 31, 2015 3:38 AM

    I coached Little League and CYO basketball for quite a few years in our small town.
    Soccer started becoming a sport kids liked to play, which was fine. But then the soccer leagues starting playing it all year round, using the school gyms to play it indoors. That wasn’t fine. Because they took a lot of the kids who played the other sports away.
    I broached the subject to some of the soccer coaches and their answer to me was basically, “too bad, deal with it”.

    So, I couldn’t care less if they pave over every soccer field in the country.

  41. RavenzGunnerz says: Dec 31, 2015 3:39 AM

    Come on NFL. Haven’t u done enough already? Let the kids play.

  42. vdstrading says: Dec 31, 2015 3:57 AM

    NFL should have to find suitable replacement fields for the teams and leagues during the time they occupy the space. Otherwise, get some shuttles and have the media village somewhere else.

  43. waltmscott says: Dec 31, 2015 3:59 AM

    So let me get this right, you have known about this awardment for Super Bowl 50 since 2013 and you have waited till now to create a PR crisis for a bunch of soccer games that could literally be played anywhere. Hmm sounds like lawyer talk, procrastination on the youth league, or just ignorance. Just at the end of the day dad’s and mom’s don’t blame the NFL or the City for this. Blame the Santa Clara Youth Soccer League who should have known better and didn’t protect the children’s youth soccer sooner.

  44. browningsnagle says: Dec 31, 2015 4:16 AM

    It’s January and February… it’s not the end of the world

  45. dbq61537 says: Dec 31, 2015 6:15 AM

    Sorry to tell the parents and kids, who are part of this league but…the NFL could care, less about their little soccer group. And for that matter…the city doesn’t care either…the amount of 💵💰💵💰, about to made from the Super Bowl, far out weighs a youth sports league.

  46. progress2011 says: Dec 31, 2015 6:33 AM

    Appears their opportunistic lawsuit may be with the mayor, governor and officials that helped to win the Super Bowl bid.

    The article states – “The space is expected to used as a media village for the Super Bowl, a stipulation agreed upon by the city in bidding for the championship in 2013.”

  47. richcranium2112 says: Dec 31, 2015 6:41 AM


  48. blowfishes says: Dec 31, 2015 6:53 AM

    I’m assuming that thsee plans were given the green light soon after the awarding of the Superbowl. Whilst I appreciate that quite a lot of games will have been cancelled/postponed/moved, surely there has been enough time to rearrange fixtures.

  49. shadowman1433 says: Dec 31, 2015 6:56 AM

    Oh please, let’s stop the Super Bowl so mommy can watch little junior have soccer practice.

  50. kevjamm says: Dec 31, 2015 6:56 AM

    Oh I get it, agree to it and then right before modifications begin file a lawsuit pitting the “greedy” NFL against the poor little soccer players.

    I am sure the lawyers for the soccer mom’s see’s a nice opportunity to squeeze more money from the NFL (not that that is a bad thing).

    No doubt some extra $$$ from the NFL will make the soccer mom’s feel better.

  51. rjpats says: Dec 31, 2015 7:20 AM

    An outdoor soccer league…in January?

    Something isn’t adding up

  52. gints1017 says: Dec 31, 2015 7:30 AM

    No one cares about soccer

  53. dukeearl says: Dec 31, 2015 7:39 AM

    Day Late, dollar short, this should have been addressed in 2013.

  54. slizzyslizz says: Dec 31, 2015 8:19 AM

    Sounds like a Santa Clara problem, not the NFL’s. Sue the crook politicians for doing it. I don’t fault the NFL one bit for taking advantage of what’s offered to them.

    That said, I think the NFL has the biggest racket going with the Super Bowl. They pay nothing! That’s right, nothing to the host city for the super bowl. All expenses pertaining to it are picked up by the taxpayers. Security (tons of police OT), any planning, etc is provided to the NFL for free (from their side). Pretty sweet deal, right?

    As a constituent of NJ, I was appalled to hear that. Host your super bowl elsewhere and not on my dime!

  55. romophobic says: Dec 31, 2015 8:24 AM

    Soccer players need to learn a valuable lesson at a young age: no one in this country cares about your sport. Football on the other hand, everyone cares about. Plus, soccer has more head injuries than football so look at it as a way to extend your lives for another few years.

  56. hgamatt says: Dec 31, 2015 8:39 AM

    If this was offered in the original bid, and PFT knows that the NFL has rights to the facility from January 4-March 2, it must have been communicated to the soccer league at some point. And if it wasn’t, their lawsuit should go against the facility.

    It seems like somebody failed to make a contingency plan and decided to schedule 250 games at a facility they couldnt use and are trying to save face.

  57. dolphinsrule65 says: Dec 31, 2015 8:49 AM

    Did the city and NFL not realize that 250 games would be affected by this?
    The arrogance of the city and NFL sometimes is beyond words.
    Nobody ever thought to talk to this group about this? Amazed that city’s sell there souls for a game, ONE game.

  58. jdmcg57 says: Dec 31, 2015 9:00 AM

    The city agreed to the terms of the NFL when they were awarded the game. It is too bad the soccer fields will be occupied during the preparation of the game and its aftermath. The NFL stated that they would replace the fields once they were finished using the facility. Anyone with complaints now should have made them back when the agreement was being ironed out. Not now. Little kids playing soccer should not in any way affect the game or anything surrounding it. It is a frivolous law suit….a waste of time.

  59. realityonetwo says: Dec 31, 2015 9:01 AM

    “We’re not trying to ruin the Super Bowl,” said Gautam Dutta,…

    That’s good. Because you’re about to be steamrollered.

  60. jason9696 says: Dec 31, 2015 9:30 AM

    Just not another Seattle-New England Super Bowl please. Yes it was a very entertaining game but it was my first time ever watching the Super Bowl that I wasn’t really cheering for either team. Although I did find myself cheering for the Patriots in the 4th quarter because to me they were the lesser of two evils.

  61. amaf21 says: Dec 31, 2015 10:10 AM

    The NFL will crush you.

  62. zswittman says: Dec 31, 2015 10:45 AM

    The field was givin to the NFL for that amount of time win Santa Clara won the bid for the super bowl so the city gave them the field and the field is owned by the city of Santa Clara so there is nothing the soccer league can do except cry about it

  63. intrafinesse says: Dec 31, 2015 11:10 AM

    What probably happened was the city agreed to give up the fields, and may not have informed the public, hoping to keep it quite till there was no time to do anything about it.

    The question I have for the NFL is – can you compromise a bit? Can you still get stuff done if you start a few weeks later? Thus reducing the cancelled Soccer games from 250 to 175 or something like that? As a gesture of good will?

  64. footballer4ever says: Dec 31, 2015 2:04 PM

    Some of you brain damaged comments are laughable as they are ignorant.

    Football, the only ootball, not that fake semi rugby looking version, is cared for in USA although some of you dinosaurs want to think and speak otherwise.

    American eggball is overhyped, borimg and senseless “sport” that one has to be brain damaged/washed to go thru 3-4 hrs of nothing.

  65. phyrman1 says: Jan 1, 2016 5:43 AM


    For all of those posting that the soccer league must have known about it for two years – nope. They were just told of this on December 15. The NFL and the City of Santa Clara deliberately hid details of the agreements until forced to release them then.

    This broke a major public meeting law, by the way – which technically may render the agreements between Santa Clara and the NFL invalid.

    Also, the city DID agree to find alternative fields – but the one single field they found not only isn’t a regulation field, but isn’t even available when most of the games need to be played.

    Finally, many of these kids aren’t “rich” Silicon Valley types, but inner-city kids for whom this is a huge issue. Some of these kids are good enough to hope for college scholarships, and some are scheduled to play these games in front of college scouts – games that now may be cancelled completely.

    At the end of the day, there is NO reason why this had to happen – either Santa Clara should have been able to find or create proper alternative fields, or they should have been far more open and given appropriate notice.

    And if the NFL says this problem may make it impossible for them to host the Super Bowl, then they’re either lying or have extremely poor planning – dealing with a minor problem such as this one outdoor area perhaps being unavailable should be an easy contingency to fix. If they don’t have contingency plans for something small like this, what happens if a much bigger issue comes up?

  66. noteamforlosangeles says: Jan 2, 2016 11:02 AM

    Just move the Super Bowl to Milpitas, Livermore, Pleasanton or Concord…It’s not like everyone knows where Santa Clara is anyway…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!