|
Post by aardvark on Aug 4, 2015 22:47:53 GMT -8
And the same holds true for the Chargers. It should be quite interesting as to what the NFL decides. True. So long as the Chargers move off the Q site for downtown or out of town I don't care what they do. Preferably out of town. And the sooner the better. Well, they aren't going downtown for years, if ever. So they are stuck in the Q, unless the league allows them to go to the Coliseum next season. In the meantime, the Rams have had even less conversations with St Louis than the Chargers have had with San Diego, and the Raiders--well, who the hell knows. I still see the Rams moving to LA next year, especially if Kroenke actually breaks ground on his stadium in December of this year as they have said they would.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 4, 2015 22:51:49 GMT -8
This does create an interesting dynamic. Let's just assume there is only 1 venue for an NFL team to play temporarily in LA. It would seem that whatever team was approved to move to LA by the NFL would be using the facility (in this case the Coliseum). Assuming the NFL approved the Chargers and not the Rams they would be in LA first. Unless Stan plans on playing at a High School or Community College he would be forced to stay in St. Louis while he builds his stadium. There is no way the NFL will allow a lame duck team to play in their current city. With no venue willing to open up to the NFL aside from the Coliseum, it's almost certain that it's going to be one team or no team in LA next year. Two teams at once, never really made any sense anyway. They may have no choice in regards to having lame-duck teams. They may end up with two--but the NFL will spin it, saying the teams are still working to find a solution in their current market, or some other BS story.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 5, 2015 8:00:51 GMT -8
There is no way the NFL will allow a lame duck team to play in their current city. With no venue willing to open up to the NFL aside from the Coliseum, it's almost certain that it's going to be one team or no team in LA next year. Two teams at once, never really made any sense anyway. They may have no choice in regards to having lame-duck teams. They may end up with two--but the NFL will spin it, saying the teams are still working to find a solution in their current market, or some other BS story. Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium are still viable options at this point.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 5, 2015 8:41:41 GMT -8
They may have no choice in regards to having lame-duck teams. They may end up with two--but the NFL will spin it, saying the teams are still working to find a solution in their current market, or some other BS story. Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium are still viable options at this point. Options, in that they haven't officially said no yet, but not very likely. Both Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium are continuing to talk to the NFL, but are not submitting proposals as the NFL requested by the deadline today. Let the bidding war begin--not by the venues, but by the NFL.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 5, 2015 9:45:22 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 5, 2015 10:36:49 GMT -8
Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium are still viable options at this point. Options, in that they haven't officially said no yet, but not very likely. Both Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium are continuing to talk to the NFL, but are not submitting proposals as the NFL requested by the deadline today. Let the bidding war begin--not by the venues, but by the NFL. Let the laws of supply and demand take over.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Aug 5, 2015 11:58:42 GMT -8
I hope Carmen Policy doesn't miss his flight to Chicago, like he (allegedly) missed his flight to LA last month for the last big meeting in Carson. What aardvark said. And the problem with articles like that from the OC Register is the conclusion that just because St. Louis is going full bore toward building a new stadium that the Rams will therefore not move to L.A. Hello! Kroenke isn't just displeased with his current stadium, he's not happy in St. Louis. He's a multi-billionaire who wants to both maximize his profits and to enhance his standing among league owners. The keys to that lie in L.A., not St. Louis.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 5, 2015 12:29:01 GMT -8
Options, in that they haven't officially said no yet, but not very likely. Both Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium are continuing to talk to the NFL, but are not submitting proposals as the NFL requested by the deadline today. Let the bidding war begin--not by the venues, but by the NFL. Let the laws of supply and demand take over. Like to be a fly on the wall during those negotiations.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 5, 2015 16:49:16 GMT -8
I hope Carmen Policy doesn't miss his flight to Chicago, like he (allegedly) missed his flight to LA last month for the last big meeting in Carson. What aardvark said. And the problem with articles like that from the OC Register is the conclusion that just because St. Louis is going full bore toward building a new stadium that the Rams will therefore not move to L.A. Hello! Kroenke isn't just displeased with his current stadium, he's not happy in St. Louis. He's a multi-billionaire who wants to both maximize his profits and to enhance his standing among league owners. The keys to that lie in L.A., not St. Louis. The more both St. Louis and San Diego move to get things done, the more their owners go into hiding because they're both going full bore for LA. The only guy who is out there is Mark Davis because I think he knows Carson is falling apart and he's beyond desperate right now for any solution. The most prudent thing might be for the NFL to push this back one more year. Yes, I know they have said otherwise but what do you expect them to say? They have to keep the pressure on all the cities out there. It's all part of the game.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 5, 2015 17:35:18 GMT -8
What aardvark said. And the problem with articles like that from the OC Register is the conclusion that just because St. Louis is going full bore toward building a new stadium that the Rams will therefore not move to L.A. Hello! Kroenke isn't just displeased with his current stadium, he's not happy in St. Louis. He's a multi-billionaire who wants to both maximize his profits and to enhance his standing among league owners. The keys to that lie in L.A., not St. Louis. The more both St. Louis and San Diego move to get things done, the more their owners go into hiding because they're both going full bore for LA. The only guy who is out there is Mark Davis because I think he knows Carson is falling apart and he's beyond desperate right now for any solution. The most prudent thing might be for the NFL to push this back one more year. Yes, I know they have said otherwise but what do you expect them to say? They have to keep the pressure on all the cities out there. It's all part of the game. Which puts the league in the unenviable position of having up to 3 lame duck franchises.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Aug 6, 2015 5:56:53 GMT -8
Per Jason Cole on Twitter:
"Talked to a source in #Dodgers organization. Team would be willing to host #NFL team temporarily."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2015 6:52:39 GMT -8
Per Jason Cole on Twitter: "Talked to a source in #Dodgers organization. Team would be willing to host #NFL team temporarily." Exactly. Holding out hope that the NFL can't find a venue for a team so your's can stay smells of last ditch desperation. The NFL WILL get it done. I'm POSITIVE of it.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 6, 2015 7:01:54 GMT -8
Per Jason Cole on Twitter: "Talked to a source in #Dodgers organization. Team would be willing to host #NFL team temporarily." The NFL will have to wave lots of cash at any baseball facility to have them even consider hosting an NFL team temporarily. Than again, the NFL does have a lot of cash. But when you're the 7th highest payroll (Angels) or highest payroll (Dodgers), it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have your fields torn up by an NFL team. It would just break my heart (well, not really) if either team lost a playoff game, or even lost a chance at the post season, if they lost a game due to a bad hop on their home field. IIRC, the next football game at Dodger Stadium would be the first one ever played there.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Aug 6, 2015 9:29:00 GMT -8
But when you're the 7th highest payroll (Angels) or highest payroll (Dodgers), it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have your fields torn up by an NFL team. It would just break my heart (well, not really) if either team lost a playoff game, or even lost a chance at the post season, if they lost a game due to a bad hop on their home field. IIRC, the next football game at Dodger Stadium would be the first one ever played there. I'm missing a bunch of the hurdles but we've come a long way: -The Chargers don’t want to go to LA -The Chargers have nowhere to go in LA -The Chargers have options but want to stay in San Diego -CSAG Taskforce stadium plan will keep Chargers in San Diego -Rams are only team that will move to LA -Mayor’s effort will force NFL to keep Chargers in San Diego -No temporary options for Chargers in LA will keep Chargers in San Diego-Potential for bad hops in playoff game will keep Chargers in San Diego
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 6, 2015 10:15:41 GMT -8
But when you're the 7th highest payroll (Angels) or highest payroll (Dodgers), it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have your fields torn up by an NFL team. It would just break my heart (well, not really) if either team lost a playoff game, or even lost a chance at the post season, if they lost a game due to a bad hop on their home field. IIRC, the next football game at Dodger Stadium would be the first one ever played there. I'm missing a bunch of the hurdles but we've come a long way: -The Chargers don’t want to go to LA -The Chargers have nowhere to go in LA -The Chargers have options but want to stay in San Diego -CSAG Taskforce stadium plan will keep Chargers in San Diego -Rams are only team that will move to LA -Mayor’s effort will force NFL to keep Chargers in San Diego -No temporary options for Chargers in LA will keep Chargers in San Diego-Potential for bad hops in playoff game will keep Chargers in San Diego Nice effort--but as of now, no NFL team has a place to play in LA. Oops--except for the Coliseum.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Aug 6, 2015 14:30:10 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 6, 2015 15:18:37 GMT -8
For those of you who believe the Chargers in LA will have a problem selling tickets consider this…
There is a waiting list for season tickets for…
LA Dodgers LA Lakers LA Clippers LA Kings
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 6, 2015 15:20:01 GMT -8
I'm missing a bunch of the hurdles but we've come a long way: -The Chargers don’t want to go to LA -The Chargers have nowhere to go in LA -The Chargers have options but want to stay in San Diego -CSAG Taskforce stadium plan will keep Chargers in San Diego -Rams are only team that will move to LA -Mayor’s effort will force NFL to keep Chargers in San Diego -No temporary options for Chargers in LA will keep Chargers in San Diego-Potential for bad hops in playoff game will keep Chargers in San Diego Nice effort--but as of now, no NFL team has a place to play in LA. Certainly looks like it will be the Coliseum and Dodger Stadium. Now, for the teams. Drumroll please...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2015 15:24:07 GMT -8
there'll be no joy in mudville, mighty Spanos has struck out (to LA)
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 6, 2015 15:40:30 GMT -8
|
|