|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 6, 2015 15:43:19 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 6, 2015 17:47:50 GMT -8
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... At Del Mar today. Did the Dodgers officially announce they are interested in hosting a team?
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 6, 2015 18:39:26 GMT -8
Certainly looks like it will be the Coliseum and Dodger Stadium. Now, for the teams. Drumroll please... At Del Mar today. Did the Dodgers officially announce they are interested in hosting a team? Nothing official... Yet. "A Times source says that both Angel and Dodger stadiums are "continuing a dialogue with the NFL but won't participate in the traditional proposal request process," though the Angels have said it would be "very difficult" for them to accommodate a team. Reps for Dodger Stadium— which was maybe working on a plan for permanent football stadium as recently as March—were mum. The NFL doesn't seem too worried about any of this. "We've really just begun," says the NFL's vice president and "point man" on LA, adding that "Other, more complex opportunities could very well present themselves as the picture becomes clearer." m.la.curbed.com/archives/2015/08/nfl_los_angeles_coliseum_dodger_stadium_maybe.phpBut those two venues appear to be the NFL targets.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 6, 2015 20:00:39 GMT -8
At Del Mar today. Did the Dodgers officially announce they are interested in hosting a team? Nothing official... Yet. "A Times source says that both Angel and Dodger stadiums are "continuing a dialogue with the NFL but won't participate in the traditional proposal request process," though the Angels have said it would be "very difficult" for them to accommodate a team. Reps for Dodger Stadium— which was maybe working on a plan for permanent football stadium as recently as March—were mum. The NFL doesn't seem too worried about any of this. "We've really just begun," says the NFL's vice president and "point man" on LA, adding that "Other, more complex opportunities could very well present themselves as the picture becomes clearer." m.la.curbed.com/archives/2015/08/nfl_los_angeles_coliseum_dodger_stadium_maybe.phpBut those two venues appear to be the NFL targets. I can't believe the Dodgers would go for it. Guess the NFL and it's $$$ could help the Dodgers make up their mind. Whichever team is left out of the mix won't be too happy.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 6, 2015 20:52:01 GMT -8
Nothing official... Yet. "A Times source says that both Angel and Dodger stadiums are "continuing a dialogue with the NFL but won't participate in the traditional proposal request process," though the Angels have said it would be "very difficult" for them to accommodate a team. Reps for Dodger Stadium— which was maybe working on a plan for permanent football stadium as recently as March—were mum. The NFL doesn't seem too worried about any of this. "We've really just begun," says the NFL's vice president and "point man" on LA, adding that "Other, more complex opportunities could very well present themselves as the picture becomes clearer." m.la.curbed.com/archives/2015/08/nfl_los_angeles_coliseum_dodger_stadium_maybe.phpBut those two venues appear to be the NFL targets. I can't believe the Dodgers would go for it. Guess the NFL and it's $$$ could help the Dodgers make up their mind. Whichever team is left out of the mix won't be too happy. I believe there will be 2 teams in LA in 2016 (as do members of the NFL relocation committee). The Chargers will be one of those teams. The Rams or the Raiders will be the other.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 6, 2015 21:27:18 GMT -8
I can't believe the Dodgers would go for it. Guess the NFL and it's $$$ could help the Dodgers make up their mind. Whichever team is left out of the mix won't be too happy. I believe there will be 2 teams in LA in 2016 (as do members of the NFL relocation committee). The Chargers will be one of those teams. The Rams or the Raiders will be the other. I agree that there will be at least 1 team in LA, but which team(s) it will be is where we disagree. And I am not "honking" for the Chargers--I just don't think it's a shoe-in that they will be one of the teams.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 7, 2015 0:28:07 GMT -8
For as successful as the NFL is, they sure manage to f up just about everything in the past few years. Let's see, let's sell tickets for a team that no one knows who it will be, at a venue no one knows where it will be. That's like buying tickets to a concert that could feature your favorite band or could feature Britney Spears. Has the NFL completely lost its mind? Mark Cuban was right.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 7, 2015 1:25:34 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 7, 2015 10:09:51 GMT -8
I'm no Charger/NFL fan but that was disrespectful. I just don't understand how people can embrace the NFL with their completely unethical and corrupt business practices with little regard for the well being their cities, players and fans. I guess passionate fans are willing to overlook those points.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 7, 2015 18:01:49 GMT -8
I'm no Charger/NFL fan but that was disrespectful. I just don't understand how people can embrace the NFL with their completely unethical and corrupt business practices with little regard for the well being their cities, players and fans. I guess passionate fans are willing to overlook those points. It's because the NFL as a whole has no morals. They don't care about how the fans feel. They don't care about their ex-players. They don't care about their current players. And Roger Goodell is a incompetent commissioner who has shown in the past few years that he can't make a correct decision to save his life and continues to piss off fans time and time again with his ignorance, yet the owners love him and refuse to get rid of him because he is their puppet and he's good at sucking every last penny out of anyone with a pulse.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 7, 2015 18:14:39 GMT -8
Chargers Prep to Blow the City’s Crucial Deadline "The mayor and his allies also presented a sort of deadline. For their plan to work — for a public vote to be possible in January, in time to inform the NFL before it decides which team gets to move to Los Angeles — the San Diego City Council would need to begin talking about it in mid-September. And the mayor has said he won’t go forward with that unless the Chargers are on board. Thus, the Chargers would have to be on board by then. The team would have to be fully invested in the effort. A successful campaign in that short of a time frame would require the team’s money as well. The Chargers will not be on board by then, though. The moment the team signals that it is 100 percent committed to getting the mayor’s plan done and passed through voters, Carson leaders will likely drop their push. What’s more, NFL staff is not allowed to work with a city like Carson if a team isn’t leading. The team would essentially have to give up its push for Los Angeles in about a month. All based on the promise in that slideshow that a majority of San Diegans is willing to support the mayor’s plan. Were voters to reject that plan at the ballot box, the Chargers would be left without a stadium in Los Angeles and without a new stadium in San Diego. Perhaps the team’s owners can console themselves with their riches, but it’s pretty clear this isn’t a risk they’re going to take." www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/chargers-prep-to-blow-the-citys-crucial-deadline/So, in a nutshell, assuming the NFL approves the Chargers request for relocation to LA (which they will), this will be the Chargers final season in San Diego. The only way this doesn't happen is in the unlikely event the NFL extends the deadline for relocation another year. The Chargers will allow September 11th to come and go without participating at the bargaining table. 4 weeks to go... Adios Chargers.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 7, 2015 20:24:39 GMT -8
The September 11th deadline is meaningless. There was never going to be a stadium vote in January anyway. The city is jumping through all these hoops put up by the NFL to buy more time.
All that matters is the vote in January by the NFL owners and no one knows what's going to happen. It could get delayed another year. But if not, there is one owner who has a better location, better plan, more money, bigger existing fan base, etc. All that translates to better chance of success and profits and he's the obvious choice to get the nod.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 7, 2015 21:05:27 GMT -8
The September 11th deadline is meaningless. There was never going to be a stadium vote in January anyway. The city is jumping through all these hoops put up by the NFL to buy more time. All that matters is the vote in January by the NFL owners and no one knows what's going to happen. It could get delayed another year. But if not, there is one owner who has a better location, better plan, more money, bigger existing fan base, etc. All that translates to better chance of success and profits and he's the obvious choice to get the nod. In terms of actuality, you're probably right and that date is probably not a barrier to some future negotiation ... In terms of perception, that date is huge, it lets the public at large know that the Chargers don't want to be here and don't care about San Diego ...
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 7, 2015 22:02:49 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2015 22:40:01 GMT -8
The September 11th deadline is meaningless. There was never going to be a stadium vote in January anyway. The city is jumping through all these hoops put up by the NFL to buy more time. All that matters is the vote in January by the NFL owners and no one knows what's going to happen. It could get delayed another year. But if not, there is one owner who has a better location, better plan, more money, bigger existing fan base, etc. All that translates to better chance of success and profits and he's the obvious choice to get the nod.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 8, 2015 6:56:49 GMT -8
The September 11th deadline is meaningless. There was never going to be a stadium vote in January anyway. The city is jumping through all these hoops put up by the NFL to buy more time. All that matters is the vote in January by the NFL owners and no one knows what's going to happen. It could get delayed another year. But if not, there is one owner who has a better location, better plan, more money, bigger existing fan base, etc. All that translates to better chance of success and profits and he's the obvious choice to get the nod. The vote of the people is the only vote that matters. If there is no vote or the public votes in opposition to stadium funding (likely) the NFL owners will not leave Spanos high and dry so to speak. The only hope Charger fans who want the Bolts to stay in San Diego have is for the NFL to extend the relocation deadline (unlikely).
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 8, 2015 7:01:41 GMT -8
The September 11th deadline is meaningless. There was never going to be a stadium vote in January anyway. The city is jumping through all these hoops put up by the NFL to buy more time. All that matters is the vote in January by the NFL owners and no one knows what's going to happen. It could get delayed another year. But if not, there is one owner who has a better location, better plan, more money, bigger existing fan base, etc. All that translates to better chance of success and profits and he's the obvious choice to get the nod. In terms of actuality, you're probably right and that date is probably not a barrier to some future negotiation ... In terms of perception, that date is huge, it lets the public at large know that the Chargers don't want to be here and don't care about San Diego ... The Chargers have already made this abundantly clear. Only hardcore Charger fans seem to be blind to this fact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 8:03:42 GMT -8
Talk about a polarizing poll. 77 yea 77 nay
|
|
|
Post by smoothcat on Aug 8, 2015 9:21:33 GMT -8
I want them to stay, but at this point it appears pretty clear they intend to leave.
It would be hard to be 100% behind them with Spanos still at the helm, I am not a fan of his but I do have a rooting interest in the team.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 8, 2015 9:59:39 GMT -8
The September 11th deadline is meaningless. There was never going to be a stadium vote in January anyway. The city is jumping through all these hoops put up by the NFL to buy more time. All that matters is the vote in January by the NFL owners and no one knows what's going to happen. It could get delayed another year. But if not, there is one owner who has a better location, better plan, more money, bigger existing fan base, etc. All that translates to better chance of success and profits and he's the obvious choice to get the nod. The vote of the people is the only vote that matters. If there is no vote or the public votes in opposition to stadium funding (likely) the NFL owners will not leave Spanos high and dry so to speak. The only hope Charger fans who want the Bolts to stay in San Diego have is for the NFL to extend the relocation deadline (unlikely). This makes no sense. There are three owners trying to get to LA. At most, two will get the nod. That means at least one owner is going to get left "high and dry", probably two. However I do agree that they don't want this situation which is why the best solution is to delay relocation until 2017. The NFL may not want to wait however so they may decide to relocation one team now and one in the future after the stadium is built. This also helps their temporary venue problem since they only have one possible venue and even now the Coliseum still hasn't confirmed. Also, what do you expect the NFL to say? Of course they're going to say they aren't going to extend relocation. Doing otherwise would release all the pressure they've been able to build on all the cities. No way they're going to do that until necessary.
|
|