|
Post by hoobs on Aug 26, 2014 18:23:39 GMT -8
The core mission is to provide a quality, LOW COST education to the citizens of the San Diego region. Ok, I think I see the problem. I strongly disagree with this statement. I don't want SDSU to be "low cost" or merely for the benefit of the citizens of the SD region. I want SDSU to continue to evolve and grow into an elite, world-class university... or at least as close as we can get to that. So my vision (that I believe to be shared by a fair number of other folks) aims for a scenario that brings maximum benefit to SDSU with far lesser regard for other SD institutions (Chargers, the city itself, etc.) To your credit, you care about all things San Diego and you're looking for the ideal compromise. I don't want a compromise. I want maximum value for SDSU.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 19:08:01 GMT -8
The core mission is to provide a quality, LOW COST education to the citizens of the San Diego region. Ok, I think I see the problem. I strongly disagree with this statement. I don't want SDSU to be "low cost" or merely for the benefit of the citizens of the SD region. I want SDSU to continue to evolve and grow into an elite, world-class university... or at least as close as we can get to that. So my vision (that I believe to be shared by a fair number of other folks) aims for a scenario that brings maximum benefit to SDSU with far lesser regard for other SD institutions (Chargers, the city itself, etc.) To your credit, you care about all things San Diego and you're looking for the ideal compromise. I don't want a compromise. I want maximum value for SDSU. The way to maximize SDSU is not a stadium, it's chairs and grad schools. Spending resources on a box makes maximizing the university harder, not easier. Opportunity cost.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 19:13:59 GMT -8
Ok, I think I see the problem. I strongly disagree with this statement. I don't want SDSU to be "low cost" or merely for the benefit of the citizens of the SD region. I want SDSU to continue to evolve and grow into an elite, world-class university... or at least as close as we can get to that. So my vision (that I believe to be shared by a fair number of other folks) aims for a scenario that brings maximum benefit to SDSU with far lesser regard for other SD institutions (Chargers, the city itself, etc.) To your credit, you care about all things San Diego and you're looking for the ideal compromise. I don't want a compromise. I want maximum value for SDSU. The way to maximize SDSU is not a stadium, it's chairs and grad schools. Spending resources on a box makes maximizing the university harder, not easier. Opportunity cost. Not if you get a 25 to 45 mil a year pay bump. But go ahead, continue, even though you said you were finished. When did you graduate from SDSU?
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 26, 2014 19:14:33 GMT -8
These cases are entirely different. To put it simply ... SDSU is buying 166 acres of property to expand its campus. That land just happens to have a stadium on it (taking up about 15 acres). SDSU is an economic engine for San Diego. SDSU would be increasing it's campus size from 225 acres to 391 acres ... allowing an increase in students, faculty and programs offered and more skilled workers to the city, county and state. The Chargers are not a major economic factor in San Diego, their contribution could be replaced by a couple of Walmarts and a Costco. Like it or not, the Chargers are one of the very few things in this town that has the ability to bring everyone together, regardless of age, race sex or economic status. A sad commentary to be sure but it is a reality. I am not so willing to discount this fact. I disagree. If SDSU football or basketball were to win a National Championship they too would bring the city of San Diego together in a similar fashion.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 26, 2014 19:43:42 GMT -8
Charges game is blacked out ... they're really pulling this community together and have tons of support, or are you going to blame the blackout on the stadium? Maybe they should reduce the capacity of the stadium ... Convention Center Expansion has been fought by the Chargers regardless of the funding issue, odd that the Chargers want to get their hands on that same $350M from those same hotels ... guess those funds were being directed at them, they'd have no issue with those same hotel owners "volunteering" to pay the tax. The Convention Center, like SDSU is an economic engine of the city. The "canard" is that the Chargers want to move from away from a multi-purpose stadium like the Q, to a multi-purpose convention center /sports arena /football stadium. The SDSU and the Aztecs have more ties to the city and county than the Chargers do. You can try to confine SDSU to just the football team ... but we offer so much more than that for the city and county to unite behind. How fast do you think the Chargers would be forgotten if SDSU reached the Final Four or better, if Aztecs Baseball made it to the CWS? The Aztecs can entertain the city all year long ... in 16 different sports. The Padres play 162 games over a 6 month season, with roughly half those games at PetCo. There are many more opportunities for fans to catch a game and for fans in other cities to spend 3-5 days in San Diego for a weekday or weekend series. Padres games don't get blacked out locally. Chargers have a 16 game season, 8 or so at home over a 4 month period. We have no idea how many games will get blacked out locally or if anyone will step in to prevent it like they had to 3 times last year. I don't "blame" anyone for anything. Charger attendance is what it is. like all entertainment options, popularity ebbs and flows. And yes I absolutely draw distinction between the university, which provide immeasurable value to the community and the football team which provides effectively zero to the community,the university and alumni judging by interest and attendance. Of course the Chargers want the money directed towards them. This is some sort of revelation? rather them than the unelected, unaccountable king makers of the Port District in my opinion. Hotels don't pay that tax BTW, those that stay in the hotel pay them. As a frequent traveler, I can attest to that. Same with rental car fees. The convention center is a good thing. SDSU is a good thing. The the Chargers are a good thing. They all want something eerily similar; a big-ass empty building to use for <10-15 days/yr. The only difference is that two of them need a pasture and a couple of sticks stuck in the ground at each end, the other one doesn't. Given the relative simplicity of these fundamental needs, harmonizing the specific requirements of each to come with an acceptable single solution seems to be a dead simple engineering/design challenge. I'd allow a group of 6th graders a shot at it first. If they can't handle it, I'd bring in 8th graders. A good faith effort in this vein shows responsible,conscientious stewardship of PUBLIC monies. There is a major problem with your theory of a harmonious shared facility between the Chargers & Aztecs. The Chargers don't want to share with the Aztecs and I am pretty sure the feeling is mutual from SDSU's perspective. Even if the Chargers wanted to share a new stadium they would not allow the Aztecs to be equitable tenants. The two organizations have very different needs and certainly require different venues.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 19:45:49 GMT -8
The way to maximize SDSU is not a stadium, it's chairs and grad schools. Spending resources on a box makes maximizing the university harder, not easier. Opportunity cost. Not if you get a 25 to 45 mil a year pay bump. But go ahead, continue, even though you said you were finished. When did you graduate from SDSU? I didn’t. After flunking out, or transferring, it’s been so long I can’t remember, I enrolled in a small trade school in College Park MD where I studied small engine maintenance. After that, I hitchhiked to Pomona CA and enrolled at Harvey Mudd College, sort of a Wyo Tech without the girls to learn auto body repair. The whole thing turned out to be a big waste of time cuz it turns out these skills are unneeded in my chosen field of convenience store clerkery. Auto body guys get the best meth though so I did get a decent connect out of the deal. I guess you win the argument cuz yer True Aztec baby! I can’t possibly compete with that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 19:54:22 GMT -8
Like it or not, the Chargers are one of the very few things in this town that has the ability to bring everyone together, regardless of age, race sex or economic status. A sad commentary to be sure but it is a reality. I am not so willing to discount this fact. I disagree. If SDSU football or basketball were to win a National Championship they too would bring the city of San Diego together in a similar fashion. No doubt about it.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 26, 2014 19:56:05 GMT -8
As fun as this discussion has been, I think it's run it's course. I hear you guys but disagree and will never change my mind about the issue. SDSU does not need its own football stadium. Although it wouldn't change my love for the team and the university, I would be extremely disappointed in the leadership were they to ever decide to fritter away resources on such an endeavor. The core mission isn't football. The core mission is to provide a quality, LOW COST education to the citizens of the San Diego region. Spending 100's of millions of dollars on an empty fucXing box is the height of irresponsibility with the public purse especially when a perfectly acceptable, perhaps even superior alternative exists. I find sad quite frankly, the lack of vision and imagination this insistence upon a stand-alone edifice shows. This idea that what's needed in college towns is what's needed in a big, diverse world-class city is incomprehensible to me. The way forward, TO ME, is to embrace the difference and turn it into a positive. We'll never have ivy covered walls. We'll never have crisp Autumn days. Touchdown Jesus doesn't live here. People will never flock back to the old college town to re-live the good old days for a few hours on a Saturday. That's not who we are. That's not what San Diego is. We're west coast. we're different. We play our games at night. In a few years we'll be sharing a state of the art world class stadium in the very heart of a world class city surrounded by world class entertainment options pre and post game. Man-freakin-hatten KS cannot compete with that. Nobody can IF you believe it, sell it and make it happen. This seems to me to be the path to bigger and better. Creating San Diegoville complete with wholesome refreshments and sensible bleachers in the middle of one of the most beautiful cities on planet earth is just silly to me. If this offends you, get over it. Keep selling it! You better be one hell of a salesman though because nobody's buying what you and the Chargers are selling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 20:00:42 GMT -8
I don't "blame" anyone for anything. Charger attendance is what it is. like all entertainment options, popularity ebbs and flows. And yes I absolutely draw distinction between the university, which provide immeasurable value to the community and the football team which provides effectively zero to the community,the university and alumni judging by interest and attendance. Of course the Chargers want the money directed towards them. This is some sort of revelation? rather them than the unelected, unaccountable king makers of the Port District in my opinion. Hotels don't pay that tax BTW, those that stay in the hotel pay them. As a frequent traveler, I can attest to that. Same with rental car fees. The convention center is a good thing. SDSU is a good thing. The the Chargers are a good thing. They all want something eerily similar; a big-ass empty building to use for <10-15 days/yr. The only difference is that two of them need a pasture and a couple of sticks stuck in the ground at each end, the other one doesn't. Given the relative simplicity of these fundamental needs, harmonizing the specific requirements of each to come with an acceptable single solution seems to be a dead simple engineering/design challenge. I'd allow a group of 6th graders a shot at it first. If they can't handle it, I'd bring in 8th graders. A good faith effort in this vein shows responsible,conscientious stewardship of PUBLIC monies. There is a major problem with your theory of a harmonious shared facility between the Chargers & Aztecs. The Chargers don't want to share with the Aztecs and I am pretty sure the feeling is mutual from SDSU's perspective. Even if the Chargers wanted to share a new stadium they would not allow the Aztecs to be equitable tenants. The two organizations have very different needs and certainly require different venues. In a world of the finite, sometimes we all have to compromise. I gave the same speech to my 4 year old grandson just the other day. He asked me what finite means.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 20:02:36 GMT -8
There is nothing in the Q that cannot be fixed by a few hundred pounds of C4. As I have said, I have no issues with building a new stadium to serve both teams, I don't think the Aztecs can afford one on their own. Do you want to follow the Cal plan of creative financing that got them a stadium that will likely bankrupt them? How many on here are willing to plunk down $40K-$250K for a 50 year seat license for a premium seat? Yeah, neither did those Berkeley pukes. What I have said is that taking over the stadium is a bad idea. If you do nothing you have costs of around $15M/year just to maintain it. That alone puts our athletic department solidly in the red. And that doesn't deal with the $70M or so in deferred maintenance. Trying to make it an actual football stadium would likely cost as much as building a new one and you would likely end up with something still not right. Again, you cannot move the fans closer to the field and if you want to delete the obstructive view seats you have to move them farther from the action. The stadium is the wrong design, it is old and falling apart, and anyone who thinks it is a viable venue for the Aztecs down the road is just, simply, naive. Here's an idea:Let the Chargers build their own stadium downtown with their own money on land provided by the City & County of San Diego (upon approval by a vote of the people) ANDLet San Diego State buy the 166 acre Qualcomm site and the stadium already built on it with their own money (upon approval of the sale by a vote of the people) -- and they can develop the site as they see fit. No problem. But why do they need the Q site to build their own stadium? The Chargers have a lease with the city for the site for many years so why wait if they are so flush with money? Just go and do it, right?
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 20:10:00 GMT -8
It depends on whether the win. That's what happens in a free market. It is also dependent on how well their opponent's fans travel. They get stuck in those seats where you can't see over the players along the sidelines for the most part. I was not a supporter of spending a bunch of money on a downtown library. I expect more people attend Charger games each year than will pass through those doors in a year. And building a central library and then closing local branches is just a stupid waste of taxpayer money but that makes the politicians happy. We will probably get a $1 Billion new city hall before we get a stadium built with TOT taxes in this city. Hell, they might get that before we even do a convention center expansion. Stupid is as stupid does. Now I will be accused as a Charger honk when I say that the Chargers have a stronger connection to this city than the Aztecs, you can look up attendance and TV ratings to find that I am right if you want. If that were the case the Aztecs would be putting at least as many butts in the Q than the Chargers do. They do less than half, though. There was a time in the 70s when they drew as many if not more than the Chargers but that was 40 years and many mistakes ago. There have been games since then when they didn't have enough fans in the stadium to fill Viejas. San Diego is rallying around Aztec BB because Fisher has done a tremendous job building a first rate program. It wins its conference and doesn't look like a high school JV team against the best team in the NCAA. People in San Diego like and support a winner and don't waste their time on losers. There is just too much competition for their time and dollars. Unfortunately, the SDSU football team has not been able to match the success of the MBB program. If you take out Marshall Faulk you would have to go back to the 70s to find a time when the Aztecs could actually brag about their football program. I'm sorry, but the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl ain't exactly filled with Roses and the University of Buffalo isn't Ohio State. I can remember when we entered the WAC and people around here were talking about how we would dominate in football because of all the great talent we have in Southern California. It never happened. Back in those days the motto was "Red & Black, Getting WAC'ed." The WAC wasn't a bad football conference at the time either. Then we moved into the MWC and still did nothing. TCU, Utah, BYU and Boise St sure didn't have an issue gaining national recognition though, despite the "lousy" conference they were in. Now were stuck looking down our noses at teams like Fresno State when, perhaps, we should actually beat them before telling them how much it stinks to play them. Just a thought. So let the Chargers put their money where your mouth is ... let them build their own stadium to their own specs with their own money -- if they have so much support, let them bank on that and not tax payers funds. But the plan that is the subject of this thread includes $750M of "public money." Did you miss that? And it doesn't include the cost of building an "on campus" stadium for the Aztecs.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 20:22:15 GMT -8
If the SDSU football team could compete in the MWC and against ranked out of conference opponents like the MBB team does then they would be putting butts in the seats regardless of how s#!++y the Q is. Just my personal opinion, but I disagree with this. (in part anyway). Obviously the team needs to do its part and win games. But all other things being equal, I believe a smaller stadium, with seating that is closer to the action, will draw more fans than playing in the 'Q'. What's the average attendance now, about 20,000 or so? I honestly believe that just by playing in a smaller, closer to the action stadium, that attendance would increase by 10,000 or so. I base this on what I saw with the women's basketball program. When Beth Burns was here the first time, her teams were playing in Peterson Gym. They were averaging 1000 people or more per game. (I know because I was there). It was fun and exciting and the fans showed up. Years later, coach Burns team was playing in beautiful Viejas arena. Her teams were better than what she had previously, and yet they'd be lucky to get 200 people to show up for a game. The difference? It was just more fun and exciting to watch the women play at Peterson, and therefor more fans showed up. Again, this is all strictly my opinion from what I observed first hand going to the games. That's why I believe an Aztec owned, made for football stadium would bring more fans to the games. Not to mention the crappy concessions we have to put up with at the 'Q'. One mans opinion. SDSU used to average something like 40K fans in the 70s (even after Coryell) in the very same stadium that they play in now. It ain't the stadium that is keeping the football program down. The football program barely makes enough to pay it's own expenses and certainly makes not enough to pay for the Title IX ramifications. To try to finance a stadium that would likely cost in the neighborhood of $200M (likely more) or so with the revenue the football team generates just doesn't make economical sense and would likely bankrupt the entire athletic program. As it stands now, they don't make enough to even pay "interest only" on such a project. I don't think the CSU system wants to get involved with financing non-academic facilities such as sports stadiums. SDSU would have to incur those costs in house. I am all for having SDSU football continue if possible when looking at the current trend in collegiate football. But, I would hate to see the entire athletic program suffer (or be eliminated) to make that happen.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 20:26:32 GMT -8
Who knows how many Chargers games will be blacked out this season ... I believe last year they were the ONLY NFL team to have a game blacked out during the season. I suggest you write to the Federal Government and have them demolish the Library of Congress, then you can write to the city of San Diego and have them sell the downtown library because the internet, ya know. Aztecs (and Men's Basketball in particular) have a stronger connection to the city than the Chargers. America loves a winner and the Aztecs are it for this city, a Final Four would just solidify that. It's not a mistake that more people in this city wear Aztec gear than Chargers gear. "Aztecs (and Men's Basketball in particular) have a stronger connection to the city than the Chargers." Slow your roll there turbo. Myopic comments undermine your arguments. I'm as big a fan of Aztec BB as there is but I would have to admit that your full of crap. Sorry, the NFL is still bigger than NCAABB and this is from someone who would rather watch a SDSU BB game than a Charger game. In fact, I decided to go to an Aztec BB game (I think it was against Washington) rather than the Charger game this year.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2014 20:29:07 GMT -8
So let the Chargers put their money where your mouth is ... let them build their own stadium to their own specs with their own money -- if they have so much support, let them bank on that and not tax payers funds. But the plan that is the subject of this thread includes $750M of "public money." Did you miss that? And it doesn't include the cost of building an "on campus" stadium for the Aztecs. pretty sure I got the drift of the Chargers funding scheme: aztecmesa.proboards.com/post/706448/threadas well as the value of SDSU to San Diego: aztecmesa.proboards.com/post/706614/thread
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2014 20:34:06 GMT -8
"Aztecs (and Men's Basketball in particular) have a stronger connection to the city than the Chargers." Slow your roll there turbo. Myopic comments undermine your arguments. I'm as big a fan of Aztec BB as there is but I would have to admit that your full of crap. Sorry, the NFL is still bigger than NCAABB and this is from someone who would rather watch a SDSU BB game than a Charger game. In fact, I decided to go to an Aztec BB game (I think it was against Washington) rather than the Charger game this year. This is the Value of SDSU, the Aztecs and everything in between: Annual spending related to San Diego State ($893 million) generates a total impact of $896 million on the regional economy, and more than $1.2 billion on the statewide economy. This impact sustains more than 9,000 jobs in the region and statewide more than 11,400 jobs. Per year, the impact generates more than $62 million in local and nearly $86.7 million in statewide tax revenue. Even greater—nearly $4.2 billion of the earnings by alumni from San Diego State are attributable to their CSU degrees, which creates an additional $6.5 billion of industry activity throughout the state.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 20:38:35 GMT -8
Like it or not, the Chargers are one of the very few things in this town that has the ability to bring everyone together, regardless of age, race sex or economic status. A sad commentary to be sure but it is a reality. I am not so willing to discount this fact. I disagree. If SDSU football or basketball were to win a National Championship they too would bring the city of San Diego together in a similar fashion. Yeah, they would. I think the MBB program has a much better chance of doing that than the football program does, though. And even that is a very tough row to hoe. But your argument is that SDSU needs to do something incredible (I would say, at the very least, very improbable when it comes to football, and improbable is a very, very kind term) in order to make your dreams come true. For someone to mention SDSU football and a national championship is so far out there that it is to be considered nonsense. Hell, at least they could do is actually win their conference before talking about a national title.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 20:48:17 GMT -8
I don't "blame" anyone for anything. Charger attendance is what it is. like all entertainment options, popularity ebbs and flows. And yes I absolutely draw distinction between the university, which provide immeasurable value to the community and the football team which provides effectively zero to the community,the university and alumni judging by interest and attendance. Of course the Chargers want the money directed towards them. This is some sort of revelation? rather them than the unelected, unaccountable king makers of the Port District in my opinion. Hotels don't pay that tax BTW, those that stay in the hotel pay them. As a frequent traveler, I can attest to that. Same with rental car fees. The convention center is a good thing. SDSU is a good thing. The the Chargers are a good thing. They all want something eerily similar; a big-ass empty building to use for <10-15 days/yr. The only difference is that two of them need a pasture and a couple of sticks stuck in the ground at each end, the other one doesn't. Given the relative simplicity of these fundamental needs, harmonizing the specific requirements of each to come with an acceptable single solution seems to be a dead simple engineering/design challenge. I'd allow a group of 6th graders a shot at it first. If they can't handle it, I'd bring in 8th graders. A good faith effort in this vein shows responsible,conscientious stewardship of PUBLIC monies. There is a major problem with your theory of a harmonious shared facility between the Chargers & Aztecs. The Chargers don't want to share with the Aztecs and I am pretty sure the feeling is mutual from SDSU's perspective. Even if the Chargers wanted to share a new stadium they would not allow the Aztecs to be equitable tenants. The two organizations have very different needs and certainly require different venues. And where are you getting these facts from? From what I've seen the Chargers have been going with any angle they can to get a new stadium built and I haven't heard squat from the university on it. I do think that both the Chargers and the university have a shared interest in getting something built and both parties should be working together to do so. If the Chargers do get a new stadium built and the university decides they want to hitch-hike on that deal then they pretty much end up with a s#!++y deal because they put nothing into it. If the university doesn't need the Chargers then why wait for years to build their own stadium with all the money people on here feel they're flush with? Hell, they can use eminent domain that people on here are proposing and get enough land to actually build the friggen thing on the actual friggen campus.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2014 20:51:37 GMT -8
There is a major problem with your theory of a harmonious shared facility between the Chargers & Aztecs. The Chargers don't want to share with the Aztecs and I am pretty sure the feeling is mutual from SDSU's perspective. Even if the Chargers wanted to share a new stadium they would not allow the Aztecs to be equitable tenants. The two organizations have very different needs and certainly require different venues. And where are you getting these facts from? From what I've seen the Chargers have been going with any angle they can to get a new stadium built and I haven't heard squat from the university on it. I do think that both the Chargers and the university have a shared interest in getting something built and both parties should be working together to do so. If the Chargers do get a new stadium built and the university decides they want to hitch-hike on that deal then they pretty much end up with a s#!++y deal because they put nothing into it. If the university doesn't need the Chargers then why wait for years to build their own stadium with all the money people on here feel they're flush with? Hell, they can use eminent domain that people on here are proposing and get enough land to actually build the friggen thing on the actual friggen campus. you need the qualifier ... everything they can do to build a stadium with anybody else's money but their own
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 20:52:04 GMT -8
Not if you get a 25 to 45 mil a year pay bump. But go ahead, continue, even though you said you were finished. When did you graduate from SDSU? I didn’t. After flunking out, or transferring, it’s been so long I can’t remember, I enrolled in a small trade school in College Park MD where I studied small engine maintenance. After that, I hitchhiked to Pomona CA and enrolled at Harvey Mudd College, sort of a Wyo Tech without the girls to learn auto body repair. The whole thing turned out to be a big waste of time cuz it turns out these skills are unneeded in my chosen field of convenience store clerkery. Auto body guys get the best meth though so I did get a decent connect out of the deal. I guess you win the argument cuz yer True Aztec baby! I can’t possibly compete with that. Wow, after reading that I can now say you're my hero. Gotta go now, they have a time limit here at Donvavan's at Otay Mesa.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 20:56:52 GMT -8
And where are you getting these facts from? From what I've seen the Chargers have been going with any angle they can to get a new stadium built and I haven't heard squat from the university on it. I do think that both the Chargers and the university have a shared interest in getting something built and both parties should be working together to do so. If the Chargers do get a new stadium built and the university decides they want to hitch-hike on that deal then they pretty much end up with a s#!++y deal because they put nothing into it. If the university doesn't need the Chargers then why wait for years to build their own stadium with all the money people on here feel they're flush with? Hell, they can use eminent domain that people on here are proposing and get enough land to actually build the friggen thing on the actual friggen campus. you need the qualifier ... everything they can do to build a stadium with anybody else's money but their own Not exactly true (all their proposals have included money from the organization, including the loan from the NFL that they would be forced to repay because, well, it is a loan) and if they could get the public money that Steve Peace is talking about they would be in the process of building it right now. Did you actually read the article? Reading crap likes this makes me worry about the academic state of the university.
|
|