|
Post by aardvark on Jul 30, 2015 8:15:03 GMT -8
Its the Chargers.. They really want to be in LA unfortunately cheap owner dont survive in LALA land. There puppet Mark Fabiani will try to cloud the situation by having a lame excused that there fax machine wasnt working. That date will come and go... The Chargers are really competing against the Rams owner.. I dont see any incentive for the Rams owner to share his own NFL stadium. The Carson site is a complete joke. The only two options the chargers have is either share a stadium with the Rams (play second fiddle to the Rams) or come back to SD. The thing is that it is not really up to the Chargers since the NFL owners need to vote on it and they are going to vote for what is most profitable for them. Oakland has no stadium deal. The Rams and San Diego do. The Chargers cannot move without the Raiders and the Rams have the best stadium deal. Plus LA don't really want the Chargers, the want the Rams and Raiders. So if I were the owners I would vote for Rams or Rams and Raiders to LA. Plus, I think the Chargers still want to stay in SD no matter what they indicate publicly. I think they want to push the NFL to LA back a year to give them more time to make a deal in SD for a downtown location. To be more precise, the cities of St Louis and San Diego are working on stadium plans--the teams that play in those cities are not involved. Even without league approval, it has been said that Kroenke will move the Rams to Inglewood. There won't be 3 teams in LA. IMO, the Raiders end up in St Louis, and the Chargers...they really only have 2 options--play in Inglewood as a tenant in KroenkeWorld, or stay here.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jul 30, 2015 8:19:27 GMT -8
Even without league approval, it has been said that Kroenke will move the Rams to Inglewood. Just clarifying... there is no such thing as relocation "without league approval."
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jul 30, 2015 15:38:08 GMT -8
Even without league approval, it has been said that Kroenke will move the Rams to Inglewood. Just clarifying... there is no such thing as relocation "without league approval." Kroenke, with his billions (since after all, money is the name of the game in the NFL), might just force the issue.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jul 30, 2015 18:23:00 GMT -8
Just clarifying... there is no such thing as relocation "without league approval." Kroenke, with his billions (since after all, money is the name of the game in the NFL), might just force the issue. He can force the issue, but he would, literally, have to buy votes. There will be a vote (or multiple votes) and that/those vote(s) will determine who relocates where. Rumor has it that Kroenke isn't all that popular with the other owners. Despite being the "right" choice of a team to move to LA with the greatest chance of success, that doesn't guarantee the Rams would get the votes. A LOT is still up in the air.
|
|
|
Post by sleepy on Jul 30, 2015 19:48:30 GMT -8
Keep this in mind...
When Georgia Frontiere originally asked to move the Rams to St. Louis, the league voted no. It wasn't until she ponied up some more cash to line the coffers of the various franchise owners that those no votes turned to "Yes" a few days later.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jul 30, 2015 20:53:33 GMT -8
Keep this in mind... When Georgia Frontiere originally asked to move the Rams to St. Louis, the league voted no. It wasn't until she ponied up some more cash to line the coffers of the various franchise owners that those no votes turned to "Yes" a few days later. ...and I think that Kroenke has a little more cash than Georgia had. I think in the long run, the league will see it Kroenke's way.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jul 30, 2015 21:46:06 GMT -8
Keep this in mind... When Georgia Frontiere originally asked to move the Rams to St. Louis, the league voted no. It wasn't until she ponied up some more cash to line the coffers of the various franchise owners that those no votes turned to "Yes" a few days later. ^^ This is why Spanos has no chance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2015 7:37:18 GMT -8
So who's ready for San Diego State Football to be the ONLY game in town? I know i am. Sure hope Hirschman & Sterk are. You are wrong. USD Football is up and coming. A two team city now. That's why SDSU scheduled a showcase game at Petco Park with the Torero's. I think ESPN is going to carry it. Gonna be a great game. Hope Aztecs can somehow pull it out. Charger attendance is going to plummet this NFL season.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jul 31, 2015 9:23:54 GMT -8
So who's ready for San Diego State Football to be the ONLY game in town? I know i am. Sure hope Hirschman & Sterk are. You are wrong. USD Football is up and coming. A two team city now. That's why SDSU scheduled a showcase game at Petco Park with the Torero's. I think ESPN is going to carry it. Gonna be a great game. Hope Aztecs can somehow pull it out. Charger attendance is going to plummet this NFL season. We can all make light of it but Rocky said on Scott & BR the other day that although he was opposed to playing USD, if it's a good game and attendance shows fans enjoy seeing the two teams play that it could become an annual event as with basketball. (Hearing that almost makes me want to stay home.) Also, Fred Rogan had a Bay Area sports guy on his show a couple days ago. Rogan, who seems to be the only L.A. radio host who cares in the slightest about covering the NFL's return to the city, asked the guy what's up with the Raiders. Among other things, the answer was that there are rumblings up there that Mark Davis would consider selling a portion of the team if it would provide the impetus to build a new stadium. Contrary to the Spanoi, Davis hasn't been running around threatening to move to L.A. and you have to wonder whether he really has any interest in doing so. Hell, the Raiders didn't even send a representative to Carson's stupid lunchtime PR deal that Rogan was asked to host. Or to put it another way, it sure looks from here as though the Raiders don't view Carson as anything more than a last resort. Nanna, nanna, nanna Fibiani. Hope your boss enjoys playing second fiddle to Kroenke.
|
|
|
Post by William L. Rupp on Jul 31, 2015 10:04:42 GMT -8
Wait, the subject isn't Aztec football, is it? Since the Chargers versus the city question has such crucial implications for Aztec football, we have allowed threads such as this one to be posted on this board.
WLR
|
|
|
Post by ab on Jul 31, 2015 10:18:56 GMT -8
So who's ready for San Diego State Football to be the ONLY game in town? I know i am. Sure hope Hirschman & Sterk are. You are wrong. USD Football is up and coming. A two team city now. That's why SDSU scheduled a showcase game at Petco Park with the Torero's. I think ESPN is going to carry it. Gonna be a great game. Hope Aztecs can somehow pull it out. Charger attendance is going to plummet this NFL season. I'd bet that your 4th line about Chargers attendance going down is WRONG. They've already stated season ticket sales are up. The team should be better this year with Denver a bit down so the Bolts should be fighting to win the Division. Only if they're not will attendance go down. 1,900 people at practice on Thursday. We had best beat the Blue Domers
|
|
|
Post by pbnative on Jul 31, 2015 10:46:14 GMT -8
You are wrong. USD Football is up and coming. A two team city now. That's why SDSU scheduled a showcase game at Petco Park with the Torero's. I think ESPN is going to carry it. Gonna be a great game. Hope Aztecs can somehow pull it out. Charger attendance is going to plummet this NFL season. I'd bet that your 4th line about Chargers attendance going down is WRONG. They've already stated season ticket sales are up. The team should be better this year with Denver a bit down so the Bolts should be fighting to win the Division. Only if they're not will attendance go down. 1,900 people at practice on Thursday. We had best beat the Blue Domers You forgot to finish your sentence. just under 1,900 people at practice Thursday, far less than the the over 3,000 that were there last year.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 31, 2015 11:04:37 GMT -8
You are wrong. USD Football is up and coming. A two team city now. That's why SDSU scheduled a showcase game at Petco Park with the Torero's. I think ESPN is going to carry it. Gonna be a great game. Hope Aztecs can somehow pull it out. Charger attendance is going to plummet this NFL season. We can all make light of it but Rocky said on Scott & BR the other day that although he was opposed to playing USD, if it's a good game and attendance shows fans enjoy seeing the two teams play that it could become an annual event as with basketball. (Hearing that almost makes me want to stay home.) Also, Fred Rogan had a Bay Area sports guy on his show a couple days ago. Rogan, who seems to be the only L.A. radio host who cares in the slightest about covering the NFL's return to the city, asked the guy what's up with the Raiders. Among other things, the answer was that there are rumblings up there that Mark Davis would consider selling a portion of the team if it would provide the impetus to build a new stadium. Contrary to the Spanoi, Davis hasn't been running around threatening to move to L.A. and you have to wonder whether he really has any interest in doing so. Hell, the Raiders didn't even send a representative to Carson's stupid lunchtime PR deal that Rogan was asked to host. Or to put it another way, it sure looks from here as though the Raiders don't view Carson as anything more than a last resort. Nanna, nanna, nanna Fibiani. Hope your boss enjoys playing second fiddle to Kroenke.
This general idea has been posted a number of times, but I don't really get it. Have the Clippers suffered by playing second banana to the Lakers all these years? I doubt it. Being second banana in LA is probably better from a financial point of view than being the only game in town in a small market city. And, let's be honest, San Diego is small time as compared with Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, and a few others. I suspect that the Chargers' bean counters have told the Spanoses that they are certain to make much more money in Los Angeles than here.
Another question that I have wondered about is whether the Spanoses would be willing to sell a part of the franchise if that would put it in better circumstances. Seems like most people say "no" to that question. On the other hand, I can see some advantages to be derived from such a sale. First, the family would get a huge bucket of cash as a result of such a sale. Second, if selling part of the franchise would put them in the big money resulting from a Los Angeles address, why not?
My guess is that moving to LA is the preferred alternative for the Spanoses. From their perspective, the worst outcome (short of throwing up their hands and selling the team) would be having to stay in San Diego and play in a crumbling Qualcomm Stadium. That last one would come with a very large serving of freshly baked crow. Hmmm. That last point makes me wonder whether selling the team might not be preferable to having to stay in SD without a new stadium.
And, notice, that I have not mentioned the implications for Aztec football stemming from the various possible scenarios being discussed.
AzWm
PS: Uh, oh! I have to get a hold of myself or I will exceed my self-imposed limit on posts!
AzWm
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2015 11:44:41 GMT -8
I'd bet that your 4th line about Chargers attendance going down is WRONG. They've already stated season ticket sales are up. The team should be better this year with Denver a bit down so the Bolts should be fighting to win the Division. Only if they're not will attendance go down. 1,900 people at practice on Thursday. We had best beat the Blue Domers You forgot to finish your sentence. just under 1,900 people at practice Thursday, and over 3,000 were there last year. Interesting. Thank You.
|
|
|
Post by 01aztecgrad on Jul 31, 2015 12:14:46 GMT -8
Even without league approval, it has been said that Kroenke will move the Rams to Inglewood. Just clarifying... there is no such thing as relocation "without league approval." There has only been one instance that I'm aware of in which a team moved without the NFL approving, and it ended up with the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission and the Raiders both winning millions in an Antitrust lawsuit against the NFL. The league hasn't been tested since, but I imagine if any owner really wants to move the League would make a deal rather than face losing another lawsuit. LA Times Raiders Lawsuit
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Jul 31, 2015 12:32:43 GMT -8
Silent Stan will end up staying in St. Louis and is playing them like a fiddle to get the best stadium deal possible.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 1, 2015 0:10:33 GMT -8
Silent Stan will end up staying in St. Louis and is playing them like a fiddle to get the best stadium deal possible. So Stan doesn't want to make more money? Why would Spanos go to LA to make more money but Stan would not?
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 1, 2015 7:44:39 GMT -8
Silent Stan will end up staying in St. Louis and is playing them like a fiddle to get the best stadium deal possible. So Stan doesn't want to make more money? Why would Spanos go to LA to make more money but Stan would not? Of course they all want to make money. The difference between the Rams and the Chargers is that it is unlikely (at this time) the NFL and its owners will approve relocation for the Rams. San Diego & Oakland will not get a stadium approved. Is the NFL more likely to approve relocation for two teams already in California with hopeless stadium prospects or a team who is not in California who will likely get stadium approval?
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 1, 2015 8:12:15 GMT -8
So Stan doesn't want to make more money? Why would Spanos go to LA to make more money but Stan would not? Of course they all want to make money. The difference between the Rams and the Chargers is that it is unlikely (at this time) the NFL and its owners will approve relocation for the Rams. San Diego & Oakland will not get a stadium approved. Is the NFL more likely to approve relocation for two teams already in California with hopeless stadium prospects or a team who is not in California who will likely get stadium approval? IMO, the "hopeless stadium prospects" for the Chargers and Raiders also include the Carson "plan".
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Aug 1, 2015 8:35:13 GMT -8
Of course they all want to make money. The difference between the Rams and the Chargers is that it is unlikely (at this time) the NFL and its owners will approve relocation for the Rams. San Diego & Oakland will not get a stadium approved. Is the NFL more likely to approve relocation for two teams already in California with hopeless stadium prospects or a team who is not in California who will likely get stadium approval? IMO, the "hopeless stadium prospects" for the Chargers and Raiders also include the Carson "plan". Why do you say that?
|
|