|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 25, 2015 8:28:15 GMT -8
It’s Over: The Chargers Are Done With San Diego www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/opinion/its-over-the-chargers-are-done-with-san-diego/"Got your checklist? The Chargers will move to LA unless we give the team a plan to subsidize the stadium with at least $500 million in public money without the risk involved in waiting for a real estate development to come together and it has to be fully approved much sooner than ever imagined. A vote will have to be called and approved before teams start officially vying for Los Angeles. Or the mayor has to change course and renege on his pledge to let the people vote on a plan. Maybe send a letter to the NFL apologizing for taking so long with its billion dollars. That’s just to make the Chargers happy. Laugh out loud. Maybe the mayor could not satisfy the team at all and this was all a folly — an elegant trap he’s stumbled into. Or maybe the Chargers really would have gone along with a downtown plan. Though if time and risk are intolerable for Mission Valley, it’s hard to see how they would have been better downtown. Regardless, it’s done. Unless plans in LA fall apart, the Chargers are breaking up with the city. The mayor just might have to decide if he wants to dump them first." |
|
|
|
Post by goaztecs on Apr 25, 2015 8:42:25 GMT -8
Probably the best scenario for SDSU as we will now take over the Q lot and be able to use public money. Seems to me like the LA deal is way better for the Chargers and makes much more sense for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by obboy13 on Apr 25, 2015 8:55:47 GMT -8
Yawn.
|
|
|
|
Post by sleepy on Apr 25, 2015 8:55:51 GMT -8
From VOSD's lips to God's ears. As a recently-licensed bookie with the Great State of California, I'm setting odds that the Chargers remain at 1:10. But it's that "1" that worries me as an Aztec football fan.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 25, 2015 9:41:43 GMT -8
lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Frantic on Apr 25, 2015 10:16:20 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by smoothcat on Apr 25, 2015 10:19:01 GMT -8
At this point, I don't care that much. Even if they stay, the Spanos family has destroyed any goodwill in the city and honestly I don't want to put any money in their pockets personally.
|
|
|
|
Post by momoney on Apr 25, 2015 10:20:15 GMT -8
The Chargers better win if they move to LA. LA wont accept the Spanos family being cheapskates and not bringing in stars or winning for very long as San Diego has.
|
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 25, 2015 10:23:09 GMT -8
Okay ... here's a possible solution the Chargers will hate:
The City sells everything except the 20 acres for the River Park and the space needed for a new City-owned stadium in the Northwest corner of the Mission Valley site (let's say 20-40 acres) To SDSU. (Vote of the people not required)
SDSU uses 100 acres to expand the campus, and leases out the other 20 acres to create a "mainstreet-esque" development of hotels, restaurants, retail & parking to separate the campus from the stadium & service both.
When the Chargers "Bolt" from San Diego to LA ...(be it now, sometime in the next 20 years) the city will negotiate with SDSU to take over management of the stadium, similar to what USC has with the Coliseum in LA.
The plans for the City owned stadium are scaled back from the $1.7B plan to something more in the $1B range ...
$200M Chargers, $200M NFL, $200M, Naming Rights / PSL, $200M Sale of 100 acres to SDSU, $100M from the City, $100M from the County
EDIT: if the Chargers leave and take $500M with them (Chargers, NFL & half the Naming Rights / PSL) the city & county could work with the Aztecs on a smaller better TEDCU type stadium that is publicly owned and expandable should it be needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Apr 25, 2015 10:25:48 GMT -8
The Chargers are going to do what ever is best for them financially . Be it Carson , with the Rams in LA or staying in San Diego . Work the best deal they can get . They are going to make money at any of the choices.. NFL has said they only want 2 teams in LA . So 3 does not work . If the Rams are in . Can only 1 in Carson work ? Report shows they need 2. If Chargers join the Rams , they are a tenant, money ?. Would the Raiders joins the Rams or move to St Louis or San Diego ?
they could even say they will play games at Carson but train and have office here in San Diego . Could work for Rivers and other employees . Keep some fans here .
The mayor will do what is needed to get re elected . can say he tried with the Chargers , or maybe accept the plan if it does not need a vote or even . Set up a Mission Valley facility that would work for the Raiders or another possible NFL franchise doing what is best for San Diego / translation get him re elected . Do not think SDSU is his main priority .
|
|
|
|
Post by pbaztec17 on Apr 25, 2015 10:58:10 GMT -8
Well if the "voice of san diego" says it, it must be true
|
|
|
|
Post by azteclou on Apr 25, 2015 11:15:52 GMT -8
Typical doomsday scenario. VOSD makes valid points but it's all about an LA numbers game. The NFL doesn't want more than two teams in SoCal be it one LA one SD or two LA. The odds are with Kroenke that Inglewood stadium gets done. That means the Rams go to LA. All of a sudden you've got Rams in one stadium and Chargers/Raiders in another ? I don't think so. The Carson stadium than goes kaput because no way it gets built with just one tenant. That leaves Raiders in either Oakland or getting a sweet deal in St. Louis and the Chargers sharing a stadium with Rams in which they have no financial interest or staying here in SD with its own stadium. The Carson stadium will NEVER get built. I believe Chargers will choose the best of its two options and stay here.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 25, 2015 11:33:39 GMT -8
The Chargers are going to do what ever is best for them financially . Be it Carson , with the Rams in LA or staying in San Diego . Work the best deal they can get . They are going to make money at any of the choices.. NFL has said they only want 2 teams in LA . So 3 does not work . If the Rams are in . Can only 1 in Carson work ? Report shows they need 2. If Chargers join the Rams , they are a tenant, money ?. Would the Raiders joins the Rams or move to St Louis or San Diego ? they could even say they will play games at Carson but train and have office here in San Diego . Could work for Rivers and other employees . Keep some fans here . The mayor will do what is needed to get re elected . can say he tried with the Chargers , or maybe accept the plan if it does not need a vote or even . Set up a Mission Valley facility that would work for the Raiders or another possible NFL franchise doing what is best for San Diego / translation get him re elected . Do not think SDSU is his main priority . Carson isn't happening so we can scratch that from any realistic scenario. Environmental and AEG lawsuits are just chomping at the bit in Carson and the NFL has pretty much come out and said there's only going to be one stadium in LA. Kroenke has the money and is far ahead in the game. Secondly, Kroenke doesn't want to share his stadium and the market with anyone and just like everyone is saying that the NFL can't stop Kroenke from moving to LA, there's no way they can force him to take in a second team. Even if it did somehow happen, after relocation fees and whatever exuberant price Kroenke charges Spanos, where's the money to be made in a stadium that isn't yours? The Chargers would be better off just continuing to play in the Qualcomm dump. The Chargers aren't going to LA because the money just isn't there for the Chargers, like it would be for the Rams. The VoSD can dream all they want. It's obvious what their agenda is. There is absolutely no way the Chargers will be allowed to keep their facility here if the team moves, especially since the city owns it. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 25, 2015 11:35:43 GMT -8
Typical doomsday scenario. VOSD makes valid points but it's all about an LA numbers game. The NFL doesn't want more than two teams in SoCal be it one LA one SD or two LA. The odds are with Kroenke that Inglewood stadium gets done. That means the Rams go to LA. All of a sudden you've got Rams in one stadium and Chargers/Raiders in another ? I don't think so. The Carson stadium than goes kaput because no way it gets built with just one tenant. That leaves Raiders in either Oakland or getting a sweet deal in St. Louis and the Chargers sharing a stadium with Rams in which they have no financial interest or staying here in SD with its own stadium. The Carson stadium will NEVER get built. I believe Chargers will choose the best of its two options and stay here. I think this is the most likely scenario. It's the only thing that makes sense from the Chargers standpoint. Being Kroenke's tenant in a market that could care less about you would be financial suicide. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2015 11:48:02 GMT -8
Chargers have been pretty clear, they want downtown....they want to be SD's premier spots franchise. IMO if the city doesn't find a way to give them DT they will leave. This is a financial decision, and as the clippers should've taught everyone here. It's more lucrative to be LAs after thought than SD's half aszed first choice. I think a charger stadium DT would be awesome, could you imagine the overhead view of the city?
I actually want the bolts to stay, even though I also want what's best for SDSU. I just don't get why the convention center/hoteliers have such a hold on city hall. Can someone breakdown that relationship?
|
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 25, 2015 11:54:22 GMT -8
Typical doomsday scenario. VOSD makes valid points but it's all about an LA numbers game. The NFL doesn't want more than two teams in SoCal be it one LA one SD or two LA. The odds are with Kroenke that Inglewood stadium gets done. That means the Rams go to LA. All of a sudden you've got Rams in one stadium and Chargers/Raiders in another ? I don't think so. The Carson stadium than goes kaput because no way it gets built with just one tenant. That leaves Raiders in either Oakland or getting a sweet deal in St. Louis and the Chargers sharing a stadium with Rams in which they have no financial interest or staying here in SD with its own stadium. The Carson stadium will NEVER get built. I believe Chargers will choose the best of its two options and stay here. I think this is the most likely scenario. It's the only thing that makes sense from the Chargers standpoint. Being Kroenke's tenant in a market that could care less about you would be financial suicide. The problem is the way the Chargers are playing with the negotiations -- instead of being a partner and developing a plan with the city and the county ... they are being unnecessarily adversarial. If the Chargers worked with the City, the County, and SDSU on a plan that involved: $1B new stadium in the Northwest corner of the site 20 acre river park on the southern edge of the property below the trolley line restaurant, retail, hotel and parking structures along the north side of the trolley line A premium lot for tailgating & other lot-based functions (used car tent sale, legal street racing etc.) 60-80 acres for SDSU West Campus expansion on the remainder of the site would address many of the needs of the fans, and citizens alike Instead, the Chargers are trying to speed the process, kill a public vote and any chance of a logical plan that would satisfy any of the parties involved. |
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Apr 25, 2015 11:56:28 GMT -8
The Chargers better win if they move to LA. LA wont accept the Spanos family being cheapskates and not bringing in stars or winning for very long as San Diego has. I don't disagree, but it won't matter in the grand scheme of things. Look at how gawd awful the Clippers were for a quarter century yet they still made money. They did so because there are millions of sports fans in L.A. County who don't root for the home team but buy tickets to come out and support the team that matters to them when they come to L.A. As an SF Giants fan, I know because I've probably seen my team at Dodger Stadium about 100 times over the years. This is the scenario I envision. The Rams build their own stadium in Inglewood (with certain sales tax breaks that amount to zero direct public funding) and the Chargers become the Ram's tenant. Every year when the Chargers host the Raiders, literally 2/3 of the people in the seats will be rooting for the visiting team as was the case for years when the Clippers hosted the Celtics, the Spurs and the other top teams in the NBA. The same will be true when the Chargers occasionally host the Cowboys and 49ers. When the Chargers host such other western teams as the Seahawks and Cardinals, 1/3 of the stadium will be rooting for the visiting team as will be the case when they occasionally host the Steelers, Bears and Giants. Look, Dean Spanoas may not be as slimy as Donald Sterling but he hasn't shown himself to be any brighter and the ticket purchase guarantee he forced the city to agree to showed that his top priority isn't a winning team and good community relations but instead, making $$. Just like Sterling. |
|
|
|
Post by obboy13 on Apr 25, 2015 12:18:13 GMT -8
The Chargers better win if they move to LA. LA wont accept the Spanos family being cheapskates and not bringing in stars or winning for very long as San Diego has. I don't disagree, but it won't matter in the grand scheme of things. This is the scenario I envision. The Rams build their own stadium in Inglewood (with certain sales tax breaks that amount to zero direct public funding) and the Chargers become the Ram's tenant. Every year when the Chargers host the Raiders, literally 2/3 of the people in the seats will be rooting for the visiting team as was the case for years when the Clippers hosted the Celtics, the Spurs and the other top teams in the NBA. The same will be true when the Chargers occasionally host the Cowboys and 49ers. When the Chargers host such other western teams as the Seahawks and Cardinals, 1/3 of the stadium will be rooting for the visiting team as will be the case when they occasionally host the Steelers, Bears and Giants. You mean sorta like it's been here with the Padres and Chargers (when they weren't winning?) I agree, it's the way of losing teams in SoCal, and without the current QB, the LA Chargers won't be winning very often. However, as long as they make money the Spanos family won't mind playing second banana to the Rams for a few years. They've been playing second banana to Denver longer than that. |
|
|
|
Post by momoney on Apr 25, 2015 12:23:38 GMT -8
The Chargers better win if they move to LA. LA wont accept the Spanos family being cheapskates and not bringing in stars or winning for very long as San Diego has. I don't disagree, but it won't matter in the grand scheme of things. Look at how gawd awful the Clippers were for a quarter century yet they still made money. They did so because there are millions of sports fans in L.A. County who don't root for the home team but buy tickets to come out and support the team that matters to them when they come to L.A. As an SF Giants fan, I know because I've probably seen my team at Dodger Stadium about 100 times over the years. This is the scenario I envision. The Rams build their own stadium in Inglewood (with certain sales tax breaks that amount to zero direct public funding) and the Chargers become the Ram's tenant. Every year when the Chargers host the Raiders, literally 2/3 of the people in the seats will be rooting for the visiting team as was the case for years when the Clippers hosted the Celtics, the Spurs and the other top teams in the NBA. The same will be true when the Chargers occasionally host the Cowboys and 49ers. When the Chargers host such other western teams as the Seahawks and Cardinals, 1/3 of the stadium will be rooting for the visiting team as will be the case when they occasionally host the Steelers, Bears and Giants. Look, Dean Spanoas may not be as slimy as Donald Sterling but he hasn't shown himself to be any brighter and the ticket purchase guarantee he forced the city to agree to showed that his top priority isn't a winning team and good community relations but instead, making $$. Just like Sterling. you can't really compare it to basketball, the staples center seats 19,000 where as a football stadium seats over 60,000. Let's not forget when the clippers were bad it wasn't like they were selling out the place because they weren't. Plus add another team to LA like the Rams and I don't see the Chargers getting a lot of support there especially since a lot of LA people will still look at them as a San Diego team, at least initially. If it's true that Rivers won't sign a contract if there in LA, that means the Chargers will be a bad team for a while until they can get a franchise QB again, which means they would have already have made a bad impression on LA fans making it even harder to convert them to Chargers fans. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 25, 2015 13:11:45 GMT -8
I think this is the most likely scenario. It's the only thing that makes sense from the Chargers standpoint. Being Kroenke's tenant in a market that could care less about you would be financial suicide. The problem is the way the Chargers are playing with the negotiations -- instead of being a partner and developing a plan with the city and the county ... they are being unnecessarily adversarial. If the Chargers worked with the City, the County, and SDSU on a plan that involved: $1B new stadium in the Northwest corner of the site 20 acre river park on the southern edge of the property below the trolley line restaurant, retail, hotel and parking structures along the north side of the trolley line A premium lot for tailgating & other lot-based functions (used car tent sale, legal street racing etc.) 60-80 acres for SDSU West Campus expansion on the remainder of the site would address many of the needs of the fans, and citizens alike Instead, the Chargers are trying to speed the process, kill a public vote and any chance of a logical plan that would satisfy any of the parties involved. I agree with you. The way the Chargers are going about this seems wrong but in Fabiani Spanos trusts. |
|
