|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 16, 2016 15:20:35 GMT -8
SDSU has had plans in place for years. I know I've said this 20 times in this thread alone - but if you had a plan - it would have been executed. SDSU buying Mission Valley solves almost all the problems and the City and Chargers can piggy back off SDSU to build a brand new stadium for you guys in the process. I know you'll tell me you "want" a smaller 40K stadium. That's fine. But you'd do just fine in a bigger stadium and tarping off the upper deck. Having your own locker room - your own signage - it would be like your own stadium. Tell me the downside to this? And leave me being a Chargers fan out of this. I am not trying to figure out a way to save the Chargers in this question. I am simply curious what the downside to this is and why SDSU hasn't come forward?
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Feb 16, 2016 15:31:21 GMT -8
Anyone who has not read this article should do so now. (I was planning on commenting that the writer neglected to mention SDSU. That was before I got to the next to last sentence!) AzWm Thanks for the heads up. The column was worth it just to read the comment from Mark Reynolds who would rather have taxpayers build a football stadium than an airport which meets FAA regulations.
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Feb 16, 2016 16:31:30 GMT -8
I guess you assume that the many Aztec alumni and fans here (and elsewhere) would just shrug if the city even discussed the possibility of tearing down the Q with no replacement available for SDSU and our two bowl games. You believe that? Really? Seriously? How about talking to the Holiday and Poinsettia Bowl committee about that. I am willing to bet a considerable sum that they would give you more than a shrug as a response to the possibility of demolishing the Q with no replacement. Yes, it's not reasonable to believe that Qualcomm Stadium will stand as is for eternity. But the school, the bowl committee, and the city will have plenty of time to work out arrangements for a replacement stadium. Only if the most strenuous efforts in that regard fail will serious consideration to tearing down the stadium. AzWm Hilarious. You guys keep talking about the city subsidizing the Chargers, yet think the public is going to subsidize SDSU? My lord you can't be serious. I said if at the end of 2018 SDSU better have an actionable plan to move dirt or the public narrative to raze the money sucking dinosaur is going to get real loud. How anyone could possibly argue that is insane. San diy doesn't care about SDSU football. And to point out the obvious. The holiday bowl will move to Inglewood. The poinsettia bowl has no juice and espn will just create another one somewhere else. The bowls have the same lease expiration as SDSU. If the Chargers move, Qualcomm will be razed. The public will demand it. Not a penny more of tax payer money, right? You guys are so sure the public won't approve 15 million for a new stadium but will be perfectly fine spending 15 million to operate Qualcomm just to they can continue losing money on the aztecs? Please explain how it is obvious that the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You seem to claim you are knowledgeable about what is going on in regard to San Diego, the Chargers and the Aztecs. What would be the benefit for the Holiday Bowl to move to anywhere in the LA area? I guess I just lack your knowledge. This is what confuses me about your statement that the Holiday Bowl's move would be obvious. On the San Diego Bowl Game Association web site they state this as their mission: "The mission of the non-profit San Diego Bowl Game Association is to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens by presenting the nation’s most exciting and entertaining bowl games and festivals of events. The San Diego Bowl Game Association is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization which produces the Holiday Bowl and the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl." How does moving the Holiday Bowl to Inglewood help to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens?
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 16, 2016 16:44:43 GMT -8
Please explain how it is obvious that the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You seem to claim you are knowledgeable about what is going on in regard to San Diego, the Chargers and the Aztecs. What would be the benefit for the Holiday Bowl to move to anywhere in the LA area? I guess I just lack your knowledge. This is what confuses me about your statement that the Holiday Bowl's move would be obvious. On the San Diego Bowl Game Association web site they state this as their mission: "The mission of the non-profit San Diego Bowl Game Association is to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens by presenting the nation’s most exciting and entertaining bowl games and festivals of events. The San Diego Bowl Game Association is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization which produces the Holiday Bowl and the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl." How does moving the Holiday Bowl to Inglewood help to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens? San Diego is not going to keep Qualcomm standing for the Holiday Bowl or the Aztecs. With Qualcomm razed, the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You'll then see the SDBGA become the LABGA. Stop the double talk on San Diegan's appetite for subsidizing a stadium - then turning around thinking Qualcomm is going to be standing more than a few more years. Can't believe I am getting argued with on this. AGAIN - if SDSU is ready to move on their own Stadium - then maybe the SDBGA will contribute to the financing. We'll see.
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Feb 16, 2016 17:00:00 GMT -8
Please explain how it is obvious that the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You seem to claim you are knowledgeable about what is going on in regard to San Diego, the Chargers and the Aztecs. What would be the benefit for the Holiday Bowl to move to anywhere in the LA area? I guess I just lack your knowledge. This is what confuses me about your statement that the Holiday Bowl's move would be obvious. On the San Diego Bowl Game Association web site they state this as their mission: "The mission of the non-profit San Diego Bowl Game Association is to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens by presenting the nation’s most exciting and entertaining bowl games and festivals of events. The San Diego Bowl Game Association is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization which produces the Holiday Bowl and the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl." How does moving the Holiday Bowl to Inglewood help to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens? San Diego is not going to keep Qualcomm standing for the Holiday Bowl or the Aztecs. With Qualcomm razed, the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You'll then see the SDBGA become the LABGA.Stop the double talk on San Diegan's appetite for subsidizing a stadium - then turning around thinking Qualcomm is going to be standing more than a few more years. Can't believe I am getting argued with on this. AGAIN - if SDSU is ready to move on their own Stadium - then maybe the SDBGA will contribute to the financing. We'll see. Thank you. That explains it clearly. I just didn't know that the San Diego tourism industry would start promoting the Los Angeles area. I appreciate you sharing your wisdom. I didn't realize that asking why one of your statements was "obvious" was arguing. I continue learning from you.
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 16, 2016 17:18:01 GMT -8
San Diego is not going to keep Qualcomm standing for the Holiday Bowl or the Aztecs. With Qualcomm razed, the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You'll then see the SDBGA become the LABGA.Stop the double talk on San Diegan's appetite for subsidizing a stadium - then turning around thinking Qualcomm is going to be standing more than a few more years. Can't believe I am getting argued with on this. AGAIN - if SDSU is ready to move on their own Stadium - then maybe the SDBGA will contribute to the financing. We'll see. Thank you. That explains it clearly. I just didn't know that the San Diego tourism industry would start promoting the Los Angeles area. I appreciate you sharing your wisdom. I didn't realize that asking why one of your statements was "obvious" was arguing. I continue learning from you. Yeah, they won't move to Los Angeles where there is an actual stadium. They're cemented in San Diego. Who'd ever even consider a 501c moving cities. They are every part of San Diego, just like the Chargers. Oh wait. And you're ignoring the bottom line. Qualcomm will be rubble.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 17:22:59 GMT -8
Thank you. That explains it clearly. I just didn't know that the San Diego tourism industry would start promoting the Los Angeles area. I appreciate you sharing your wisdom. I didn't realize that asking why one of your statements was "obvious" was arguing. I continue learning from you. Yeah, they won't move to Los Angeles where there is an actual stadium. They're cemented in San Diego. Who'd ever even consider a 501c moving cities. They are every part of San Diego, just like the Chargers. Oh wait. And you're ignoring the bottom line. Qualcomm will be rubble. Barney???
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Feb 16, 2016 17:24:32 GMT -8
Please explain how it is obvious that the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You seem to claim you are knowledgeable about what is going on in regard to San Diego, the Chargers and the Aztecs. What would be the benefit for the Holiday Bowl to move to anywhere in the LA area? I guess I just lack your knowledge. This is what confuses me about your statement that the Holiday Bowl's move would be obvious. On the San Diego Bowl Game Association web site they state this as their mission: "The mission of the non-profit San Diego Bowl Game Association is to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens by presenting the nation’s most exciting and entertaining bowl games and festivals of events. The San Diego Bowl Game Association is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization which produces the Holiday Bowl and the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl." How does moving the Holiday Bowl to Inglewood help to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens? San Diego is not going to keep Qualcomm standing for the Holiday Bowl or the Aztecs. With Qualcomm razed, the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You'll then see the SDBGA become the LABGA. Stop the double talk on San Diegan's appetite for subsidizing a stadium - then turning around thinking Qualcomm is going to be standing more than a few more years. Can't believe I am getting argued with on this. AGAIN - if SDSU is ready to move on their own Stadium - then maybe the SDBGA will contribute to the financing. We'll see. Nobody gives a flying f x x x about the Holiday Bowl.
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 16, 2016 17:34:09 GMT -8
Nobody gives a flying F X X X about the Holiday Bowl. I care about the Holiday Bowl. Its one of the many reasons I support a new stadium in San Diego.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 16, 2016 17:43:53 GMT -8
Yeah. I hear you. San Diego State Football is just too big to drop. It makes too much money. Its in a great conference with a sizable distribution. Fans fill the stadium. Students can't get enough of Aztec football. Crazy to consider your leadership may look at the price tag doing it alone and pass. I am sure San Diegan's would be outraged. Look at this message board as an example - you guys might just have a hundred Aztec fanatics around here. I'll strip all the sarcasm from this post and deal with it's underlying issues. Sure, the MWC is at best the 7th best Division I conference in the country. No, we are not filling the stadium at present. If we can continue to post seasons such as 2015, I think the crowds will get bigger. Being a member of the 7th best conference out of the 23 Division I football conferences (10 FBS & 13 FCS) isn't all that bad. Even if joining a Power 5 conference is more than a long shot, building the program to the level of Boise State, Houston, and BYU is still possible, and rising to that level would be pretty good. I am of the opinion that building a stadium for SDSU, no matter where, is one of the best ways to make this program solvent and keeping it there. As difficult as that goal may be to reach, why should be not try to reach it?
AzWm
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 16, 2016 17:59:53 GMT -8
I am of the opinion that building a stadium for SDSU, no matter where, is one of the best ways to make this program solvent and keeping it there. As difficult as that goal may be to reach, why should be not try to reach it? AzWm I am of the same opinion. No disagreement from me. But I am an unabashed CFB fan who thinks a strong football program is an excellent front porch to a University that delivers all kinds of benefits. Not the least of which is more applications which in turn affects selectivity which in turn raises the academic profile of the school. One of many similar arguments I'd make for keeping the Chargers that are not received well here. I mention the MWC not because of the strength of the conference - but the massive disparity in conference distribution with the P5 and it's only going to get wider. G5 schools that are sinking or will sink hundreds of millions into a stadium are doing so to subsidize their athletics programs. Because absent of major donations, its going to be a money suck.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Feb 16, 2016 18:00:00 GMT -8
SDSU has had plans in place for years. I know I've said this 20 times in this thread alone - but if you had a plan - it would have been executed. SDSU buying Mission Valley solves almost all the problems and the City and Chargers can piggy back off SDSU to build a brand new stadium for you guys in the process. I know you'll tell me you "want" a smaller 40K stadium. That's fine. But you'd do just fine in a bigger stadium and tarping off the upper deck. Having your own locker room - your own signage - it would be like your own stadium. Tell me the downside to this? And leave me being a Chargers fan out of this. I am not trying to figure out a way to save the Chargers in this question. I am simply curious what the downside to this is and why SDSU hasn't come forward? I already answered your question in the same post you just responded to. SDSU may very well end up sharing a stadium with the Chargers once again but that is not their first preference. As a matter of fact no college football program actually wants to share with an NFL team (if that was true all 32 NFL teams would be sharing with a college team). The most recent venture at sharing a stadium with a college team & the NFL did not meet the expectations that were being sold to the university at the time. That venture is Heinz Field with the Steelers & Pitt Panthers. It isn't really their own stadium. It is off campus & is the home stadium of the Steelers; oh and Pitt plays there on Saturdays too. It wouldn't be much different in a new stadium that was "shared" between the Aztecs & NFL. There is a reason why very few FBS football programs don't share with an NFL team. They have very different needs. Those that have shared in the past have moved on to build their own college stadiums or are in the process of finding a solution to do so... Houston, Tulane, Temple, Miami etc. SDSU has shared with an NFL team for decades; it is time for us to move on and find our own identity & it appears we may have the opportunity to do so very soon. Consequently, what current college football program is doing "just fine" sharing with an NFL team? Certainly not SDSU. The NFL/Chargers have clearly demonstrated on multiple occasions that it doesn't care about its host cities, politicians, fans or even its players. They certainly don't care about the San Diego State University Aztecs wants or needs. You are fooling yourself if you believe otherwise. Go Aztecs!
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 16, 2016 18:03:04 GMT -8
OK. So now we're back to SDSU not acting on their first preference. Still yet to read a single real reason why that is. If you're ready to roll, do it.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Feb 16, 2016 18:06:23 GMT -8
OK. So now we're back to SDSU not acting on their first preference. Still yet to read a single real reason why that is. If you're ready to roll, do it. Read my previous post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 18:07:38 GMT -8
OK. So now we're back to SDSU not acting on their first preference. Still yet to read a single real reason why that is. If you're ready to roll, do it. When you say something like this, i.e. Why don't we just take over a plot of land we don't yet own, well it makes me wonder why the mods even let you troll. At least have a basic understanding of what you're talking about. LOL
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 16, 2016 18:22:17 GMT -8
Please explain how it is obvious that the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You seem to claim you are knowledgeable about what is going on in regard to San Diego, the Chargers and the Aztecs. What would be the benefit for the Holiday Bowl to move to anywhere in the LA area? I guess I just lack your knowledge. This is what confuses me about your statement that the Holiday Bowl's move would be obvious. On the San Diego Bowl Game Association web site they state this as their mission: "The mission of the non-profit San Diego Bowl Game Association is to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens by presenting the nation’s most exciting and entertaining bowl games and festivals of events. The San Diego Bowl Game Association is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization which produces the Holiday Bowl and the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl." How does moving the Holiday Bowl to Inglewood help to generate tourism, exposure, economic benefit and civic pride for San Diego and its citizens? San Diego is not going to keep Qualcomm standing for the Holiday Bowl or the Aztecs. With Qualcomm razed, the Holiday Bowl will move to Inglewood. You'll then see the SDBGA become the LABGA. Stop the double talk on San Diegan's appetite for subsidizing a stadium - then turning around thinking Qualcomm is going to be standing more than a few more years. Can't believe I am getting argued with on this. AGAIN - if SDSU is ready to move on their own Stadium - then maybe the SDBGA will contribute to the financing. We'll see. Of course, Qualcomm Stadium will not remain standing forever. But neither will it be torn down percipitously. For one thing, if the Chargers are gone, the city would want the Q to remain in hopes of luring another NFL team. In that scenario, think of the Q being to San Diego what the Coliseum is to Los Angeres; a place for a new franchise to play while a proper football palace is being built. Personally, I am not keen on having another NFL team here. Nevertheless, one must acknowledge that the city council would probably have that possibility in mind, and that thought would work against the idea of tearing down the stadium.
In any case, NFL franchise or not, tearing down the only large stadium in a county of over three million citizens doesn't strike me as a very sound move. Some have talked about whether San Diego will look like a jerk-water town without the Chargers. How much more small-time would be look like if we not only lost the Chargers but then tore down our only big outdoor sports venue? More important, SDSU and the bowl committee are not without influence in this city. The recent panel discussion with Marty Block, Steve Piece, and others, showed that some pretty big guns in the community have been thinking about the West Campus/New Aztec Stadium for some time. They, and the many other alumni and fans who rise up, would not just fold their tents if the city even casually suggested that the Q be torn down. As made clear in that panel discusison, the highest and best use of the Qualcomm site would involve creation of new SDSU facilities (classrooms, research labs, dorms, etc.). I don't think it would be too hard to make that case before the city council.
Of coures, none of the imaginative plans we have been discussing will be easy to turn into reality. Given their potential benefits for SDSU and the entire community (including perhaps some cooperation with UCSD), I think it only makes sense to try. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 16, 2016 18:30:00 GMT -8
When you say something like this, i.e. Why don't we just take over a plot of land we don't yet own, well it makes me wonder why the mods even let you troll. At least have a basic understanding of what you're talking about. LOL Wait. You mean the City would have to make the 166 acres available for sale, the SDSU would have to buy the land? Damn man. Thanks. Or I meant what I have said over and over and over. If this is your preference, to do it alone without the Chargers and expand your campus - why is a SDSU alum and the Mayor pushing so hard to build a new Chargers stadium on that land? The only mention from City leaders (inlcuding Scott Sherman yesterday) continues to include SDSU in the Chargers plans. I've said it over and over and over and you guys keep saying I am trolling. The reason is because your first preference is the City and Chargers building you guys a stadium you can rent vs. financing a stadium on your own. No, I don't know that definitively. I am just paying attention and not relying on cocktail chatter at club luncheons.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 18:33:09 GMT -8
When you say something like this, i.e. Why don't we just take over a plot of land we don't yet own, well it makes me wonder why the mods even let you troll. At least have a basic understanding of what you're talking about. LOL Wait. You mean the City would have to make the 166 acres available for sale, the SDSU would have to buy the land? Damn man. Thanks. Or I meant what I have said over and over and over. If this is your preference, to do it alone without the Chargers and expand your campus - why is a SDSU alum and the Mayor pushing so hard to build a new Chargers stadium on that land? The only mention from City leaders (inlcuding Scott Sherman yesterday) continues to include SDSU in the Chargers plans. I've said it over and over and over and you guys keep saying I am trolling. The reason is because your first preference is the City and Chargers building you guys a stadium you can rent vs. financing a stadium on your own. No, I don't know that definitively. I am just paying attention and not relying on cocktail chatter at club luncheons. lol...
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 16, 2016 18:39:19 GMT -8
When you say something like this, i.e. Why don't we just take over a plot of land we don't yet own, well it makes me wonder why the mods even let you troll. At least have a basic understanding of what you're talking about. LOL Wait. You mean the City would have to make the 166 acres available for sale, the SDSU would have to buy the land? Damn man. Thanks. Or I meant what I have said over and over and over. If this is your preference, to do it alone without the Chargers and expand your campus - why is a SDSU alum and the Mayor pushing so hard to build a new Chargers stadium on that land? The only mention from City leaders (inlcuding Scott Sherman yesterday) continues to include SDSU in the Chargers plans. I've said it over and over and over and you guys keep saying I am trolling. The reason is because your first preference is the City and Chargers building you guys a stadium you can rent vs. financing a stadium on your own. No, I don't know that definitively. I am just paying attention and not relying on cocktail chatter at club luncheons. You have not been paying attention. Clearly, SDSU does not want to have to deal with the Chargers at all. Having to pay increased rental fees for a stadium that is too large and for which it gets no associated income (parking, concessions, etc.) is the LAST thing SDSU wants. Well, the last thing before having to play FCS Non-Sholarship football either in Escondido High's stadium or the one at Southwestern Collge. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by bolt1963 on Feb 16, 2016 18:41:55 GMT -8
Of course, Qualcomm Stadium will not remain standing forever. But neither will it be torn down percipitously. For one thing, if the Chargers are gone, the city would want the Q to remain in hopes of luring another NFL team. In that scenario, think of the Q being to San Diego what the Coliseum is to Los Angeres; a place for a new franchise to play while a proper football palace is being built. Personally, I am not keen on having another NFL team here. Nevertheless, one must acknowledge that the city council would probably have that possibility in mind, and that thought would work against the idea of tearing down the stadium.
In any case, NFL franchise or not, tearing down the only large stadium in a county of over three million citizens doesn't strike me as a very sound move. Some have talked about whether San Diego will look like a jerk-water town without the Chargers. How much more small-time would be look like if we not only lost the Chargers but then tore down our only big outdoor sports venue? More important, SDSU and the bowl committee are not without influence in this city. The recent panel discussion with Marty Block, Steve Piece, and others, showed that some pretty big guns in the community have been thining about the West Campus/New Aztec Stadium for some time. They, and the many other alumni and fans who rise up, would not just fold their tents if the city even casually suggested that the Q be torn down. As made clear in that panel discusison, the highest and best use of the Qualcomm site would involve creation of new SDSU facilities (classrooms, research labs, dorms, etc.). I don't think it would be too hard to make that case before the city council.
Of coures, none of the imaginative plans we have been discussing will be easy to turn into reality. Given their potential benefits for SDSU and the entire community (including perhaps some cooperation with UCSD), I think it only makes sense to try. AzWm
I can't even respond to this disconnect regarding Qualcomm. You realize how much differed maintenance is baked into Qualcomm? Hell, the JumboTron very well could not make it another year and they don't make parts for the freakn thing anymore. The place is totally falling apart. Qualcomm will be razed. This isn't a debate. Holiday Bowl will have no problem moving to Inglewood. Hell - the freakn Cotton Bowl isn't even played in the Cotton Bowl anymore - its played in Jerry's World. This is really simple. Chargers leave and Qualcomm won't be standing for more than a few more years. If SDSU can get this campus expansion and stadium done - then maybe the Bowls stick around and can even help finance part of it. It will be all gravy. IF that gets done. If not - then SDSU and the Bowls are done. But none of that matters because everyone here is convinced once the Chargers leave - this is all a done deal.
|
|