|
Post by aardvark on Jun 14, 2015 18:40:07 GMT -8
Whether they really want to be here or not, no one knows. What we do know right now is that they have no where to go. And there's probably a better chance of them moving to South Africa over Carson right now. Inglewood is getting built. You're probably right about Inglewood, but until we see a shovel in the ground... It wouldn't be the first stadium that was going to get built that didn't.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 14, 2015 19:27:00 GMT -8
Whether they really want to be here or not, no one knows. What we do know right now is that they have no where to go. And there's probably a better chance of them moving to South Africa over Carson right now. Inglewood is getting built. You're probably right about Inglewood, but until we see a shovel in the ground... It wouldn't be the first stadium that was going to get built that didn't. That's a good point. I wouldn't be completely shocked if Inglewood doesn't get built based on previous LA stadium proposals failing but I would be shocked if Carson does.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Jun 14, 2015 19:30:48 GMT -8
You're probably right about Inglewood, but until we see a shovel in the ground... It wouldn't be the first stadium that was going to get built that didn't. That's a good point. I wouldn't be completely shocked if Inglewood doesn't get built based on previous LA stadium proposals failing but I would be shocked if Carson does. Comparing all the stadiums previously conceived by develpers (middle men) with the stadium deals on the table by franchises who own land in LA is comparing apples and oranges.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 14, 2015 21:10:12 GMT -8
That's a good point. I wouldn't be completely shocked if Inglewood doesn't get built based on previous LA stadium proposals failing but I would be shocked if Carson does. Comparing all the stadiums previously conceived by develpers (middle men) with the stadium deals on the table by franchises who own land in LA is comparing apples and oranges. I don't know ... I will agree that until a shovel actually hits dirt and the building that is constructed is actually a stadium, I'll be among those who will believe it when it happens and not before -- too many variables, politics and lawsuits to clear even when a franchise is involved.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jun 14, 2015 21:14:56 GMT -8
Of the 3 teams wanting to move to LA the Rams are far and away the furthest ahead with regards to getting a new stadium built in their home city.
Both Oakland and San Diego are not anywhere near getting a stadium built. And actually, if you can believe it, Oakland is in the worst position. At this point I would say that St. Louis gets a stadium built for the Rams and they stay. It doesn't appear that Oakland or San Diego will get a stadium built.
Thus, as it stands now, IMO the Raiders and the Chargers will be the teams moving to LA.
We will see how this plays out over the summer.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 14, 2015 21:15:01 GMT -8
That's a good point. I wouldn't be completely shocked if Inglewood doesn't get built based on previous LA stadium proposals failing but I would be shocked if Carson does. Comparing all the stadiums previously conceived by develpers (middle men) with the stadium deals on the table by franchises who own land in LA is comparing apples and oranges. Kroenke owns 60 acres, and he combined it with the Hollywood Park project developers, which I believe totals around 300 acres. I'm under the impression that the Chargers are leasing 157 acres from a Carson-controlled stadium authority, while the only land they actually own is a separate 11 acre site they plan to develop for parking--the leased land would be very easy for the Chargers to back out of if need be, since it would stay under the control of Carson. If I had to choose between the two sites, Inglewood is the pick. Whether or not anyone plays there besides the Rams, I have no idea. IMO, the Raiders or Chargers will move to San Antonio before a stadium is built in Carson.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 14, 2015 21:16:55 GMT -8
Of the 3 teams wanting to move to LA the Rams are far and away the furthest ahead with regards to getting a new stadium built in their home city. Both Oakland and San Diego are not anywhere near getting a stadium built. And actually, if you can believe it, Oakland is in the worst position. At this point I would say that St. Louis gets a stadium built for the Rams and they stay. It doesn't appear that Oakland or San Diego will get a stadium built. Thus, as it stands now, IMO the Raiders and the Chargers will be the teams moving to LA. We will see how this plays out over the summer. St Louis is definitely ahead in that the lawsuits are already flying in regards to the financing plan for the new proposed stadium. San Diego doesn't have any lawsuits. Yet.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jun 15, 2015 7:27:19 GMT -8
Comparing all the stadiums previously conceived by develpers (middle men) with the stadium deals on the table by franchises who own land in LA is comparing apples and oranges. Kroenke owns 60 acres, and he combined it with the Hollywood Park project developers, which I believe totals around 300 acres. I'm under the impression that the Chargers are leasing 157 acres from a Carson-controlled stadium authority, while the only land they actually own is a separate 11 acre site they plan to develop for parking--the leased land would be very easy for the Chargers to back out of if need be, since it would stay under the control of Carson. If I had to choose between the two sites, Inglewood is the pick. Whether or not anyone plays there besides the Rams, I have no idea. IMO, the Raiders or Chargers will move to San Antonio before a stadium is built in Carson. Although Fibiani has often said the Chargers have a lot of fans in L.A., as a resident of the city with dozens of friends and acquaintances who are football fans, I can say that's absolutely not the case. If they move to Inglewood rather than Carson, I don't see how that will lessen the tendency of San Diegans to attend games since Inglewood is only about 15 miles farther from SD. And Inglewood is a much better location for a stadium because of its close proximity to LAX and other things to do in Hollywood and downtown. If there's anything whatsoever to do in Carson or thereabouts, I've never heard of it. Bottom line is if Kroenke decides not to move the Rams to Inglewood and the Chargers and Raiders both decide to move back to L.A., they would be nuts not to attempt to purchase the Inglewood property and build a stadium there rather than Carson. Of course, neither Davis II nor the Spanoi have shown themselves to be rocket scientists.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jun 15, 2015 8:11:12 GMT -8
Kroenke owns 60 acres, and he combined it with the Hollywood Park project developers, which I believe totals around 300 acres. I'm under the impression that the Chargers are leasing 157 acres from a Carson-controlled stadium authority, while the only land they actually own is a separate 11 acre site they plan to develop for parking--the leased land would be very easy for the Chargers to back out of if need be, since it would stay under the control of Carson. If I had to choose between the two sites, Inglewood is the pick. Whether or not anyone plays there besides the Rams, I have no idea. IMO, the Raiders or Chargers will move to San Antonio before a stadium is built in Carson. Although Fibiani has often said the Chargers have a lot of fans in L.A., as a resident of the city with dozens of friends and acquaintances who are football fans, I can say that's absolutely not the case. If they move to Inglewood rather than Carson, I don't see how that will lessen the tendency of San Diegans to attend games since Inglewood is only about 15 miles farther from SD. And Inglewood is a much better location for a stadium because of its close proximity to LAX and other things to do in Hollywood and downtown. If there's anything whatsoever to do in Carson or thereabouts, I've never heard of it. Bottom line is if Kroenke decides not to move the Rams to Inglewood and the Chargers and Raiders both decide to move back to L.A., they would be nuts not to attempt to purchase the Inglewood property and build a stadium there rather than Carson. Of course, neither Davis II nor the Spanoi have shown themselves to be rocket scientists. Agreed. To the vast, VAST majority of residents living anywhere north of Camp Pendleton, San Diego is simply a quaint village. A quiet place to which one can escape for a day or two, but not take seriously, in business, or any other way. And most assuredly they have ZERO interest in anything we call sports, if it's based here.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 15, 2015 8:56:07 GMT -8
Of the 3 teams wanting to move to LA the Rams are far and away the furthest ahead with regards to getting a new stadium built in their home city. Both Oakland and San Diego are not anywhere near getting a stadium built. And actually, if you can believe it, Oakland is in the worst position. At this point I would say that St. Louis gets a stadium built for the Rams and they stay. It doesn't appear that Oakland or San Diego will get a stadium built. Thus, as it stands now, IMO the Raiders and the Chargers will be the teams moving to LA. We will see how this plays out over the summer. Lol, you, Fabiani, Carmen Policy and Jason Cole are probably the only people on the planet who believe Carson will get done over Inglewood. It's actually the best for the Chargers for the Rams to stay in St. Louis because that would kill the "race to LA" and the Chargers and the City could go back to focusing on downtown, which is what the Chargers want. But ultimately, I don't think it really matters what happens to the Rams. If the Rams do go to LA and somehow Kroenke and Spanos kiss and make up and work out a deal to move in, it wouldn't be until at least 5 years down the road. That's plenty of time to continue working on a stadium deal here and do everything right, downtown, CEQA, whatever. Remember, Carson is all in response to Inglewood, which even Fabiani admitted. While the Chargers ultimately want a new stadium here, they have a sweetheart deal right now and can continue living with that while working on a new stadium deal.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 15, 2015 9:07:07 GMT -8
Kroenke owns 60 acres, and he combined it with the Hollywood Park project developers, which I believe totals around 300 acres. I'm under the impression that the Chargers are leasing 157 acres from a Carson-controlled stadium authority, while the only land they actually own is a separate 11 acre site they plan to develop for parking--the leased land would be very easy for the Chargers to back out of if need be, since it would stay under the control of Carson. If I had to choose between the two sites, Inglewood is the pick. Whether or not anyone plays there besides the Rams, I have no idea. IMO, the Raiders or Chargers will move to San Antonio before a stadium is built in Carson. Although Fibiani has often said the Chargers have a lot of fans in L.A., as a resident of the city with dozens of friends and acquaintances who are football fans, I can say that's absolutely not the case. If they move to Inglewood rather than Carson, I don't see how that will lessen the tendency of San Diegans to attend games since Inglewood is only about 15 miles farther from SD. And Inglewood is a much better location for a stadium because of its close proximity to LAX and other things to do in Hollywood and downtown. If there's anything whatsoever to do in Carson or thereabouts, I've never heard of it. Bottom line is if Kroenke decides not to move the Rams to Inglewood and the Chargers and Raiders both decide to move back to L.A., they would be nuts not to attempt to purchase the Inglewood property and build a stadium there rather than Carson. Of course, neither Davis II nor the Spanoi have shown themselves to be rocket scientists. With what money? Reportedly the Chargers have already mortgaged their soul to Goldman Sachs for the $1.7B for Carson deal, of which they own 11 acres and will lease the rest from a Carson-controlled stadium authority. I can imagine a huge round of musical chairs in which Kroenke sells the Rams so they can stay in St. Louis -- and buys the Chargers from the Spanoi. Stan moves the Chargers to his new stadium in Inglewood. Flush with cash, Dean makes an offer to buy either part or all of the Raiders and moves them to Inglewood with the Chargers (now owned by Kroenke). Kroenke hangs on to the Chargers until he can successfully acquire the Broncos, completing his dream.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 15, 2015 9:25:00 GMT -8
Although Fibiani has often said the Chargers have a lot of fans in L.A., as a resident of the city with dozens of friends and acquaintances who are football fans, I can say that's absolutely not the case. If they move to Inglewood rather than Carson, I don't see how that will lessen the tendency of San Diegans to attend games since Inglewood is only about 15 miles farther from SD. And Inglewood is a much better location for a stadium because of its close proximity to LAX and other things to do in Hollywood and downtown. If there's anything whatsoever to do in Carson or thereabouts, I've never heard of it. Bottom line is if Kroenke decides not to move the Rams to Inglewood and the Chargers and Raiders both decide to move back to L.A., they would be nuts not to attempt to purchase the Inglewood property and build a stadium there rather than Carson. Of course, neither Davis II nor the Spanoi have shown themselves to be rocket scientists. With what money? Reportedly the Chargers have already mortgaged their soul to Goldman Sachs for the $1.7B for Carson deal, of which they own 11 acres and will lease the rest from a Carson-controlled stadium authority. I can imagine a huge round of musical chairs in which Kroenke sells the Rams so they can stay in St. Louis -- and buys the Chargers from the Spanoi. Stan moves the Chargers to his new stadium in Inglewood. Flush with cash, Dean makes an offer to buy either part or all of the Raiders and moves them to Inglewood with the Chargers (now owned by Kroenke). Kroenke hangs on to the Chargers until he can successfully acquire the Broncos, completing his dream. You have a very vivid imagination.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 15, 2015 9:45:49 GMT -8
With what money? Reportedly the Chargers have already mortgaged their soul to Goldman Sachs for the $1.7B for Carson deal, of which they own 11 acres and will lease the rest from a Carson-controlled stadium authority. I can imagine a huge round of musical chairs in which Kroenke sells the Rams so they can stay in St. Louis -- and buys the Chargers from the Spanoi. Stan moves the Chargers to his new stadium in Inglewood. Flush with cash, Dean makes an offer to buy either part or all of the Raiders and moves them to Inglewood with the Chargers (now owned by Kroenke). Kroenke hangs on to the Chargers until he can successfully acquire the Broncos, completing his dream. You have a very vivid imagination. Meh ... we know a few things for certain: Davis is too poor to own the Raiders, and the NFL would be happier if he'd sell Spanos is a poor owner as well (though not as poor as Davis) and with better ownership, the Chargers could actually get somewhere Kroenke is the NFL owner ideal ... his goal is to own the Broncos -- everything else is just business, and he's really good at business It's the off-season and pretty slow at work today -- so I will use my talent for separating what is possible, from it's probability of occurrence (otherwise known as imagination or creativity) for a bit of entertainment
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jun 15, 2015 9:54:57 GMT -8
Of the 3 teams wanting to move to LA the Rams are far and away the furthest ahead with regards to getting a new stadium built in their home city. Both Oakland and San Diego are not anywhere near getting a stadium built. And actually, if you can believe it, Oakland is in the worst position. At this point I would say that St. Louis gets a stadium built for the Rams and they stay. It doesn't appear that Oakland or San Diego will get a stadium built. Thus, as it stands now, IMO the Raiders and the Chargers will be the teams moving to LA. We will see how this plays out over the summer. Lol, you, Fabiani, Carmen Policy and Jason Cole are probably the only people on the planet who believe Carson will get done over Inglewood. It's actually the best for the Chargers for the Rams to stay in St. Louis because that would kill the "race to LA" and the Chargers and the City could go back to focusing on downtown, which is what the Chargers want. But ultimately, I don't think it really matters what happens to the Rams. If the Rams do go to LA and somehow Kroenke and Spanos kiss and make up and work out a deal to move in, it wouldn't be until at least 5 years down the road. That's plenty of time to continue working on a stadium deal here and do everything right, downtown, CEQA, whatever. Remember, Carson is all in response to Inglewood, which even Fabiani admitted. While the Chargers ultimately want a new stadium here, they have a sweetheart deal right now and can continue living with that while working on a new stadium deal. I didn't say Carson or Inglewood; I said LA. If the Chargers move to downtown San Diego that's fine with me; so long as they pay for the majority of the financing and are able to convince the hoteliers to go along with a TOT tax to pay for it. Just move off the Q site.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jun 15, 2015 9:56:57 GMT -8
The assertion by some that the NFL never wants another team in L.A. because the various owners like to use L.A. for leverage to get new stadiums where they are is just silly. Maybe that's true of a few losers like Spanos but every single one of the movers and shakers want at least one team in L.A. if not two. What they ideally want is a state of the art stadium which can host Super Bowls 2-3 times per decade. If it takes two loser organizations like the Chargers and Raiders to get that done, so be it. As to where Spanos would come up with the $$, a stadium in Inglewood would be a much, much better investment for Goldman Sachs than a stadium in Carson. Among examples is all the investment in the area of Baldwin Hills that Magic Johnson has been the point man for. For those unfamiliar with the area, Baldwin Hills is an upper middle class primarily African American community only like 15 minutes north of Inglewood. In contrast, Carson is a primarily LOWER middle class or even just lower class primarily white and Hispanic community. Carson is home to the Goodyear blimp. If there's any other "there" there, I'll be damned if I've ever seen it.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jun 15, 2015 10:00:21 GMT -8
The assertion by some that the NFL never wants another team in L.A. because the various owners like to use L.A. for leverage to get new stadiums where they are is just silly. Maybe that's true of a few losers like Spanos but every single one of the movers and shakers want at least one team in L.A. if not two. What they ideally want is a state of the art stadium which can host Super Bowls 2-3 times per decade. If it takes two loser organizations like the Chargers and Raiders to get that done, so be it. As to where Spanos would come up with the $$, a stadium in Inglewood would be a much, much better investment for Goldman Sachs than a stadium in Carson. Among examples is all the investment in the area of Baldwin Hills that Magic Johnson has been the point man for. For those unfamiliar with the area, Baldwin Hills is an upper middle class primarily African American community only like 15 minutes north of Inglewood. In contrast, Carson is a primarily LOWER middle class or even just lower class primarily white and Hispanic community. Carson is home to the Goodyear blimp. If there's any other "there" there, I'll be damned if I've ever seen it. Well, it does have a nice bend in the freeway.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 15, 2015 10:10:26 GMT -8
The assertion by some that the NFL never wants another team in L.A. because the various owners like to use L.A. for leverage to get new stadiums where they are is just silly. Maybe that's true of a few losers like Spanos but every single one of the movers and shakers want at least one team in L.A. if not two. What they ideally want is a state of the art stadium which can host Super Bowls 2-3 times per decade. If it takes two loser organizations like the Chargers and Raiders to get that done, so be it. As to where Spanos would come up with the $$, a stadium in Inglewood would be a much, much better investment for Goldman Sachs than a stadium in Carson. Among examples is all the investment in the area of Baldwin Hills that Magic Johnson has been the point man for. For those unfamiliar with the area, Baldwin Hills is an upper middle class primarily African American community only like 15 minutes north of Inglewood. In contrast, Carson is a primarily LOWER middle class or even just lower class primarily white and Hispanic community. Carson is home to the Goodyear blimp. If there's any other "there" there, I'll be damned if I've ever seen it. My only question is how much more would GS "lend" to the Chargers to buy and build the Inglewood site over what they have already made available for the Carson site -- at some point, Spanos should just sign the team over to Goldman Sachs for as much debt and financing costs as the Chargers will undoubtedly incur.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 15, 2015 10:26:03 GMT -8
Lol, you, Fabiani, Carmen Policy and Jason Cole are probably the only people on the planet who believe Carson will get done over Inglewood. It's actually the best for the Chargers for the Rams to stay in St. Louis because that would kill the "race to LA" and the Chargers and the City could go back to focusing on downtown, which is what the Chargers want. But ultimately, I don't think it really matters what happens to the Rams. If the Rams do go to LA and somehow Kroenke and Spanos kiss and make up and work out a deal to move in, it wouldn't be until at least 5 years down the road. That's plenty of time to continue working on a stadium deal here and do everything right, downtown, CEQA, whatever. Remember, Carson is all in response to Inglewood, which even Fabiani admitted. While the Chargers ultimately want a new stadium here, they have a sweetheart deal right now and can continue living with that while working on a new stadium deal. I didn't say Carson or Inglewood; I said LA. If the Chargers move to downtown San Diego that's fine with me; so long as they pay for the majority of the financing and are able to convince the hoteliers to go along with a TOT tax to pay for it. Just move off the Q site. Carson or Inglewood is "LA". What else could you mean by "LA"? The problem is, the Rams are the lock for LA right now, not the Chargers or Raiders. Carson isn't shovel ready right not but Inglewood is. Carson still needs 6-12 months of final cleanup and that's before any lawsuits would emerge there. That means the only way the Chargers go to LA is by renting from Kroenke, which is very unlikely and that probably wouldn't happen until past 2020. Why would Spanos wait that long just to move in as a tenant of Kroenke? I think downtown is the best choice for the Chargers however it also presents more challenges than MV and will take a lot more time. If they want to do MV right, they should get the CEQA done and from my understanding that would take a year to get done at least so that pushes things back until mid-late 2016 at the earliest before a vote could happen so who knows when construction would ever start. This is why I predict they'll still be playing at Qualcomm in 2020 because it's going to take time to get either MV or downtown done. The Chargers need to start working with the city to get things moving faster but we have to sit through all this race to LA BS probably until 2016 if not longer. The longer they play this Carson charade, the longer it delays getting stuff done here. We could be starting the CEQA for MV right now.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 15, 2015 10:31:09 GMT -8
Based on Fabiani's comments last week, I think it's clear that they want downtown so they're putting on this act of good faith with the city right now with MV but it's not going to get done. This Dec 15th vote will never happen. We'll just have to wait until it finally comes out that the negotiations have shifted to downtown.
I just don't know why the Chargers kept saying that they're fine with either downtown or MV when it's clear now that they aren't. They talk about the city wasting time with CSAG but they're the ones wasting time by not being upfront about their feelings about downtown.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jun 15, 2015 11:44:00 GMT -8
Chargers in Downtown is absolutely fine by me... as stated, anywhere but the Q site is all I care about for what it means to SDSU.
As far as the Rams being in the driver's seat... while that was certainly the conventional wisdom for quite a while, recent rumors from the NFL meetings suggest otherwise. Only time will tell, however.
|
|