|
Post by Den60 on Aug 26, 2014 21:00:59 GMT -8
And, IIRC correctly the Chargers proposal was for them to put up $400M (not $500M) in which half would be from the Chargers and half from a loan from the NFL (which would be repaid).
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 26, 2014 21:01:51 GMT -8
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. I am under no delusion that SDSU will win a National Championship in football. However, they did win their conference in 2012. And I did say IF.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2014 21:02:00 GMT -8
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. •$350 million from the hotel room tax approved by hoteliers. The court ruled this tax has to be approved by voters as well. • $500 million from the NFL as part of its loan program for new stadiums. • $150 million from naming rights of the new facilities — far more than the $18 million Qualcomm paid to rebrand San Diego Jack Murphy Stadium when it was enlarged for Super Bowl purposes in the 1990s. • $100 million from new hotels’ tourist taxes near the convention center, such as the 500-room Hilton Bayfront expansion and $180 million from JMI Realty’s possible 1,500 room hotel at the foot of Park Boulevard. The revenue would presumably be used to help finance construction bonds for the convention center, stadium or both. •The final piece: $300 million from the sale of Qualcomm Stadium land to SDSU. if the $750 million is so accessible ($500M from NFL, $150M naming rights & $100M new tourist taxes beyond the $350M already needing a vote) & the City and County have already agreed on the provide the downtown site ... why don't the Chargers build a $750M stadium?
leave the $350M tax approved by hoteliers to the convention center ... and the Q site can be purchased by SDSU / Aztecs and that money can go into the City's general fund for other, more pressing needs.
EDIT: Why don't they? Because they don't want to be stuck as the only tenant in their grand stadium that will only be used 10-12 times a year and would have to pay that loan back from ticket sales and merchandise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 21:03:50 GMT -8
And, IIRC correctly the Chargers proposal was for them to put up $400M (not $500M) in which half would be from the Chargers and half from a loan from the NFL (which would be repaid). Chargers? Who are they?
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 26, 2014 21:12:37 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. I have yet to read an article, listened to an interview or had a conversation with SDSU officials stating that the Chargers and Aztecs are working together on a stadium issue and wish to be partners on a future endeavor. Have you? If so, then please enlighten all of us here on AztecMesa and post the article/link.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Aug 26, 2014 21:17:56 GMT -8
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. Den60, we won the conference title in football a year ago. Good to see you are up to speed as usual. I bet you could name the back up center from the Chargers 1974 squad though. Honk honk.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2014 21:58:48 GMT -8
And, IIRC correctly the Chargers proposal was for them to put up $400M (not $500M) in which half would be from the Chargers and half from a loan from the NFL (which would be repaid). here's the article: www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/aug/24/peace-qualcomm-stadium-sdsu-convention-downtown/you can take up the numbers with him ... but you know what he did not include in any of his numbers? Any money from the Chargers.
Maybe it's included with the $500M from the NFL -- but he broke down every other source and even buried an additional $180M that was possible from a JMI project still being planned, so if you want to reduce the NFL contribution to $400M, that reduction could be replaced with with the $180M from the JMI hotel at the base of Park Blvd (1,500 rooms) and raise the amount available to this project to $830M & the land being provided by the City and CountyThat $830M is without stealing the Convention Center Expansion Funds ($350M) or the funds that the City could collect for selling the 166 acres of the Qualcomm Stadium Complex to SDSU and the Aztecs (those funds can be used for watershed projects or other more pressing needs) This also leaves the Sports Arena untouched.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Aug 27, 2014 2:32:13 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. I agree, and that is 100% my priority in why SDSU needs to take over the Q site. But there will still be plenty of room left over for a new, bespoke stadium for the Aztecs (that can be shared with an MLS team once they expand further and award a franchise to SD).
|
|
|
Post by badfish on Aug 27, 2014 8:11:10 GMT -8
It's funny that so many Aztec fans watched what a proper venue and coach did for BB(for both attendance and performance) but can't connect the dots for football. I cited the case of Louisville earlier in the thread which was conspicously ignored. 8 seasons after building their own stadium they were in a BCS conference...without a huge market or rich recruiting grounds(not to mention they rank behind State academically). Now, they are in the ACC, never mind they are 7 or 8 spots behind us in academic ratings. We need fan commitment, we need success, and we need facilties. Guess what, there is a damn good chance the first 2 will fall into our lap if we take care of the third bit. And for the Rocky haters, guess what, having our own digs means finding that replacement you've been fantizing about since CRL was announced as HC, will be that much easier. University of Houston just got their new stadium done, they are next IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 27, 2014 15:47:22 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. I have yet to read an article, listened to an interview or had a conversation with SDSU officials stating that the Chargers and Aztecs are working together on a stadium issue and wish to be partners on a future endeavor. Have you? If so, then please enlighten all of us here on AztecMesa and post the article/link. You didn't read the part where I said that both parties have a shared interest in getting a stadium built and that they should be "working together" to get something done. The Chargers have been talking with a lot of parties to get something done so I tend to think that is is the university that seems to be willing to sit by and see what happens. But since the prevailing belief on here is that the university can buy the Q (and operate it at a loss) or has the funds to build their own stadium then why are they waiting? They can annex the Hardy Elementary school site (it is nearly 60 years old) and have more than enough room to build a stadium West of the track. Or they could get really creative and build the stadium north of Viejas and tie it in with the trolley line to have a station (open on event days only) that would allow fans to disembark right into the stadium. Wouldn't that be cool? Then, when the Chargers leave town they could then buy the entire Q site and use it like the way Peace seems to want it to be used which, if you read his proposal, doesn't include a stadium on the site. And, finally, they had an on-campus stadium once called Aztec Bowl. It was reportedly expandable to 45,000 seats (part of the original plan in fact) and yet they decided they didn't want it for football. Why is that? They could have found somewhere else on campus to build a BB arena (though that would likely have increased the cost) and probably wouldn't have needed the Hardy site to do so. Using Stanford's stadium renovation as a model they probably could have done something with Aztec bowl for something like $120-$150M or so.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 27, 2014 16:06:05 GMT -8
And, IIRC correctly the Chargers proposal was for them to put up $400M (not $500M) in which half would be from the Chargers and half from a loan from the NFL (which would be repaid). here's the article: www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/aug/24/peace-qualcomm-stadium-sdsu-convention-downtown/you can take up the numbers with him ... but you know what he did not include in any of his numbers? Any money from the Chargers.
Maybe it's included with the $500M from the NFL -- but he broke down every other source and even buried an additional $180M that was possible from a JMI project still being planned, so if you want to reduce the NFL contribution to $400M, that reduction could be replaced with with the $180M from the JMI hotel at the base of Park Blvd (1,500 rooms) and raise the amount available to this project to $830M & the land being provided by the City and CountyThat $830M is without stealing the Convention Center Expansion Funds ($350M) or the funds that the City could collect for selling the 166 acres of the Qualcomm Stadium Complex to SDSU and the Aztecs (those funds can be used for watershed projects or other more pressing needs) This also leaves the Sports Arena untouched. I hate to throw facts in your face (OK, I'm lying) but read this: www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/may/01/chargers-stadium-fabiani-proposal/The relevant part is this: "The Chargers would put up $400 million, including a $200 million loan from the National Football League, Fabiani said." I doubt Steve Peace even knows where the NFL league office is much less has a contact there. He is pulling numbers out of his a$$ but what do you expect from a politician. As far as any hotel taxes (and any other transient taxes and fees) all I can say is they city cannot promise that because it is subject to a public vote. This is where $450M of his financing comes from. That is kinda funny since if the Chargers are such a liability to the city (a prevalent view here) how is it that they can generate $450 million in new hotel taxes? Though I can say that saving the Sports Arena is a worthy cause. It is one of the region's jewels.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Aug 27, 2014 16:24:07 GMT -8
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. Den60, we won the conference title in football a year ago. Good to see you are up to speed as usual. I bet you could name the back up center from the Chargers 1974 squad though. Honk honk. How many conference titles won since being in the WAC or MWC? Two since 1978, and the one MWC chapionship was a tie with BSU and FSU. That isn't exactly dominance, is it? How many seasons during this period were they just, plain bad? Now, if the Aztecs can keep winning more than they lose each year (and our conference has gotten weaker which makes this easier to do) then they can continue to creep up in terms of respectability. But too many on here have an overstated opinion of the program's stature.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 16:24:27 GMT -8
more nonsense
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 16:26:02 GMT -8
Den60, we won the conference title in football a year ago. Good to see you are up to speed as usual. I bet you could name the back up center from the Chargers 1974 squad though. Honk honk. How many conference titles won since being in the WAC or MWC? Two since 1978, and the one MWC chapionship was a tie with BSU and FSU. That isn't exactly dominance, is it? How many seasons during this period were they just, plain bad? Now, if the Aztecs can keep winning more than they lose each year (and our conference has gotten weaker which makes this easier to do) then they can continue to creep up in terms of respectability. But too many on here have an overstated opinion of the program's stature. Save it non-Aztec fan. You exposed yourself for what you are, a hardcore Charger fan with little to no knowledge of Aztec football without access to google... Nothing wrong with being a Charger fan first, however this is not the place for you.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 27, 2014 17:23:49 GMT -8
here's the article: www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/aug/24/peace-qualcomm-stadium-sdsu-convention-downtown/you can take up the numbers with him ... but you know what he did not include in any of his numbers? Any money from the Chargers.
Maybe it's included with the $500M from the NFL -- but he broke down every other source and even buried an additional $180M that was possible from a JMI project still being planned, so if you want to reduce the NFL contribution to $400M, that reduction could be replaced with with the $180M from the JMI hotel at the base of Park Blvd (1,500 rooms) and raise the amount available to this project to $830M & the land being provided by the City and CountyThat $830M is without stealing the Convention Center Expansion Funds ($350M) or the funds that the City could collect for selling the 166 acres of the Qualcomm Stadium Complex to SDSU and the Aztecs (those funds can be used for watershed projects or other more pressing needs) This also leaves the Sports Arena untouched. I hate to throw facts in your face (OK, I'm lying) but read this: www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/may/01/chargers-stadium-fabiani-proposal/The relevant part is this: "The Chargers would put up $400 million, including a $200 million loan from the National Football League, Fabiani said." I doubt Steve Peace even knows where the NFL league office is much less has a contact there. He is pulling numbers out of his a$$ but what do you expect from a politician. As far as any hotel taxes (and any other transient taxes and fees) all I can say is they city cannot promise that because it is subject to a public vote. This is where $450M of his financing comes from. That is kinda funny since if the Chargers are such a liability to the city (a prevalent view here) how is it that they can generate $450 million in new hotel taxes? Though I can say that saving the Sports Arena is a worthy cause. It is one of the region's jewels. "Facts" seem to be fluid in this case ... you cite a May 01 article, and this thread references an Aug 24 article from the same publication. You chose the numbers that fit whatever your argument is and disparage the author of the other article. Whether the total for Chargers & NFL is $400M or $500M & you add $150M in naming rights (for comparison, SF raised $500 million in naming rights of which Levi-Strauss paid $220 million for the "title" naming rights). The City and County are combining to provide the land for the Stadium (which is valued at much more than the $300M that SDSU and the City are discussing for that site in Mission Valley). Leaving any of the tax measures out of it for now ... why aren't the Chargers out there raising money like the San Diego Library and the 49'ers did to complete their projects? What are the Chargers afraid of?Here is a fact for you ... it doesn't matter how much money the Chargers have to spend on a new stadium ... if the convention center gets its' contiguous expansion, SDSU /Aztecs get Qualcomm as their home, and the Sports Arena remains in operation -- the Chargers will have a lot of competition for events to help them pay for their stadium and they'd have to pay back any loans with their own money. I can see why the City is hesitant to commit any tax payer funds to this downtown stadium project and may instead commit more effort to the economic engines that are the convention center and San Diego State.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 27, 2014 18:46:49 GMT -8
I have yet to read an article, listened to an interview or had a conversation with SDSU officials stating that the Chargers and Aztecs are working together on a stadium issue and wish to be partners on a future endeavor. Have you? If so, then please enlighten all of us here on AztecMesa and post the article/link. You didn't read the part where I said that both parties have a shared interest in getting a stadium built and that they should be "working together" to get something done. The Chargers have been talking with a lot of parties to get something done so I tend to think that is is the university that seems to be willing to sit by and see what happens. But since the prevailing belief on here is that the university can buy the Q (and operate it at a loss) or has the funds to build their own stadium then why are they waiting? They can annex the Hardy Elementary school site (it is nearly 60 years old) and have more than enough room to build a stadium West of the track. Or they could get really creative and build the stadium north of Viejas and tie it in with the trolley line to have a station (open on event days only) that would allow fans to disembark right into the stadium. Wouldn't that be cool? Then, when the Chargers leave town they could then buy the entire Q site and use it like the way Peace seems to want it to be used which, if you read his proposal, doesn't include a stadium on the site. And, finally, they had an on-campus stadium once called Aztec Bowl. It was reportedly expandable to 45,000 seats (part of the original plan in fact) and yet they decided they didn't want it for football. Why is that? They could have found somewhere else on campus to build a BB arena (though that would likely have increased the cost) and probably wouldn't have needed the Hardy site to do so. Using Stanford's stadium renovation as a model they probably could have done something with Aztec bowl for something like $120-$150M or so. I don't disagree that the Chargers & Aztecs have a shared interest in getting a stadium built. I don't believe that they want to share the same stadium. I have never read or heard this idea from anyone from either the Charger or Aztec organizations. I do know that SDSU will not play downtown. If you understand that then you can forget the idea of a shared downtown stadium. Certainly SDSU's biggest mistake was building Viejas on Aztec Bowl. They could have built a basketball arena on any number of locations on campus and expanded Aztec Bowl to 40,000 seats as it was intended. But as Rocky Long says, "no use crying over spilled milk." Indeed, studies have indicated there are a couple of locations on campus where an OCS could be built for approximately $250 million. However, I believe that estimate to be low. It makes more sense to purchase the Q site for $300 million and make some changes to the Q so it is more user friendly for SDSU. The Aztecs would continue playing there and begin an Aztec Warrior Stadium fund raising campaign for several years all while using the CSU/SDSU general fund to begin the long term transformation of SDSU West Campus. Possibly 10 years (or sooner) from now SDSU may actually get invited to a P5 league (something that acquiring & developing the Q site would only help with) and with it the increased TV revenue (at least $20 million/year not including the bump in ticket sales). This would allow SDSU to privately fund a new Stadium to be built either on the Q site or one of the locations on the main campus. So, in the long term acquisition & development of the Q site, SDSU would increase its footprint by 166 acres, increase student population by about 10,000 students, significantly increase research at SDSU, offer more areas of study, turn SDSU into a nationally recognized research university and get a new football stadium built that consequently could support an MLS team as well. Not a bad deal! Granted this is a best case scenario but certainly possible.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Aug 28, 2014 5:13:45 GMT -8
I don't disagree that the Chargers & Aztecs have a shared interest in getting a stadium built. I don't believe that they want to share the same stadium. I have never read or heard this idea from anyone from either the Charger or Aztec organizations. I do know that SDSU will not play downtown. If you understand that then you can forget the idea of a shared downtown stadium. Certainly SDSU's biggest mistake was building Viejas on Aztec Bowl. They could have built a basketball arena on any number of locations on campus and expanded Aztec Bowl to 40,000 seats as it was intended. But as Rocky Long says, "no use crying over spilled milk." Indeed, studies have indicated there are a couple of locations on campus where an OCS could be built for approximately $250 million. However, I believe that estimate to be low. It makes more sense to purchase the Q site for $300 million and make some changes to the Q so it is more user friendly for SDSU. The Aztecs would continue playing there and begin an Aztec Warrior Stadium fund raising campaign for several years all while using the CSU/SDSU general fund to begin the long term transformation of SDSU West Campus. Possibly 10 years (or sooner) from now SDSU may actually get invited to a P5 league (something that acquiring & developing the Q site would only help with) and with it the increased TV revenue (at least $20 million/year not including the bump in ticket sales). This would allow SDSU to privately fund a new Stadium to be built either on the Q site or one of the locations on the main campus. So, in the long term acquisition & development of the Q site, SDSU would increase its footprint by 166 acres, increase student population by about 10,000 students, significantly increase research at SDSU, offer more areas of study, turn SDSU into a nationally recognized research university and get a new football stadium built that consequently could support an MLS team as well. Not a bad deal! Granted this is a best case scenario but certainly possible. Winner, winner... chicken dinner.
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Aug 28, 2014 6:38:00 GMT -8
A most interesting thread. As I've mentioned, State pretty much shot it's wad when it chose to build a basketball arena over a football stadium. So now it's pretty much catch as catch can.
As this project is interesting, I continue to be baffled as to where all the money is going to come from. We're talking land, facilities and throw in a stadium, (maybe), closing in on a billion dollars. That's going to require some serious buy in.
On the other hand, a leveler, a developer, a builder and some serious private investment and we're talking Hazard Center Far East on a much grander scale. (Currently town homes in Hazard Center are going for between 300 and 500 thousand dollars. It would be a lot simpler).
But the real calculus will involve attendance this Saturday night. I would love nothing better to see an attendance of around 45,000 bringing back the glory days when I was a student and giving the young ones a new experience. The future relevancy of Aztec football may hang in the balance based solely on attendance.
And for those that want to play the schedule card, here in dumpwater a distressed Utah football team with a HC on the clock will open with a pathetic Big Sky opponent. Be interesting to compare attendance numbers.
San Diego needs to get real. What does the city actually want??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 8:39:45 GMT -8
A most interesting thread. As I've mentioned, State pretty much shot it's wad when it chose to build a basketball arena over a football stadium. So now it's pretty much catch as catch can. As this project is interesting, I continue to be baffled as to where all the money is going to come from. We're talking land, facilities and throw in a stadium, (maybe), closing in on a billion dollars. That's going to require some serious buy in. On the other hand, a leveler, a developer, a builder and some serious private investment and we're talking Hazard Center Far East on a much grander scale. (Currently town homes in Hazard Center are going for between 300 and 500 thousand dollars. It would be a lot simpler). But the real calculus will involve attendance this Saturday night. I would love nothing better to see an attendance of around 45,000 bringing back the glory days when I was a student and giving the young ones a new experience. The future relevancy of Aztec football may hang in the balance based solely on attendance. And for those that want to play the schedule card, here in dumpwater a distressed Utah football team with a HC on the clock will open with a pathetic Big Sky opponent. Be interesting to compare attendance numbers. San Diego needs to get real. What does the city actually want?? The city is entirely focused on the Convention Center and the Chargers. Outside of this forum, nobody discusses the needs of SDSU athletics. There's a built in assumption that the Aztecs will play where the Chargers play.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 28, 2014 8:49:52 GMT -8
A most interesting thread. As I've mentioned, State pretty much shot it's wad when it chose to build a basketball arena over a football stadium. So now it's pretty much catch as catch can. As this project is interesting, I continue to be baffled as to where all the money is going to come from. We're talking land, facilities and throw in a stadium, (maybe), closing in on a billion dollars. That's going to require some serious buy in. On the other hand, a leveler, a developer, a builder and some serious private investment and we're talking Hazard Center Far East on a much grander scale. (Currently town homes in Hazard Center are going for between 300 and 500 thousand dollars. It would be a lot simpler). But the real calculus will involve attendance this Saturday night. I would love nothing better to see an attendance of around 45,000 bringing back the glory days when I was a student and giving the young ones a new experience. The future relevancy of Aztec football may hang in the balance based solely on attendance. And for those that want to play the schedule card, here in dumpwater a distressed Utah football team with a HC on the clock will open with a pathetic Big Sky opponent. Be interesting to compare attendance numbers. San Diego needs to get real. What does the city actually want?? The city is entirely focused on the Convention Center and the Chargers. Outside of this forum, nobody discusses the needs of SDSU athletics. There's a built in assumption that the Aztecs will play where the Chargers play. Lol! Interesting that there have been plenty of radio interviews on 1090 and articles written in the UT on the needs of SDSU athletics with regards to facilities. I can tell you that the administration at SDSU does not "assume" that the Aztecs will play where the Chargers play.
|
|