|
Post by sleepy on Jul 10, 2017 14:19:56 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Jul 10, 2017 15:00:15 GMT -8
Interesting. I just hope Sally, McGrory and Wicker put together a REAL plan that is ready to go and marketed well enough to the public long before the end of this year. We all know the MLS "expansion timeline" was a sham and the FS initiative is on the ballot for 2018. This plan better knock a lot of socks off.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 10, 2017 15:32:23 GMT -8
Interesting. I just hope Sally, McGrory and Wicker put together a REAL plan that is ready to go and marketed well enough to the public long before the end of this year. We all know the MLS "expansion timeline" was a sham and the FS initiative is on the ballot for 2018. This plan better knock a lot of socks off. You may be keeping your socks on, and turning blue at the same time. From that exchange, and from Canepa's column this morning, I would have to conclude that SDSU is about where they were 5 years ago. The fact that they are not eliminating Balboa track field as a possibility, and the fact that Ms. Roush is assuming someone will be developing the Q site in the years ahead, and she "feels" that SDSU would make a good addition, is very disheartening. Their only goal right now appears to be how to extend the lease at Qualcomm, and then hope and pray someone includes them in some future development. God. I was hoping for much more from her, but instead the aphorisms and happy talk just keep the eructations flowing.
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Jul 10, 2017 15:43:20 GMT -8
Wow. Well she just said he initiative had to fail for SDSU to act on their plan.
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Jul 10, 2017 15:45:58 GMT -8
Interesting. I just hope Sally, McGrory and Wicker put together a REAL plan that is ready to go and marketed well enough to the public long before the end of this year. We all know the MLS "expansion timeline" was a sham and the FS initiative is on the ballot for 2018. This plan better knock a lot of socks off. What will really be interesting is to see what FS does when there are no more expansion teams to be awarded. Me thinks the initiative stays on the ballot and they try to convince the good people of SD that they should build the stadium then bring a USL team to the site.
|
|
|
Post by longtimebooster on Jul 10, 2017 16:26:15 GMT -8
So much for repeated promises of "big news from SDSU any day now."
Sheesh.
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Jul 10, 2017 16:35:48 GMT -8
So much for repeated promises of "big news from SDSU any day now." Sheesh. Wicker is on vacation right now so don't expect anything for awhile.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 10, 2017 16:38:08 GMT -8
So much for repeated promises of "big news from SDSU any day now." Sheesh. Wicker is on vacation right now so don't expect anything for awhile. Umm. He's been on vacation since he schlepped into the position.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 10, 2017 16:43:24 GMT -8
It would seem that Sally is really just a babysitter at this point.
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Jul 10, 2017 17:01:25 GMT -8
So much for repeated promises of "big news from SDSU any day now." Sheesh. McGrory said we would have an idea after 45 days. No one is expecting anything anyday now.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 10, 2017 17:25:55 GMT -8
So much for repeated promises of "big news from SDSU any day now." Sheesh. McGrory said we would have an idea after 45 days. No one is expecting anything anyday now. From what I read, his notion of an "idea" is simply whether or not they'll be extending the lease on The Stadium Formerly Known as Qualcomm.
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Jul 10, 2017 18:14:25 GMT -8
Interesting. I just hope Sally, McGrory and Wicker put together a REAL plan that is ready to go and marketed well enough to the public long before the end of this year. We all know the MLS "expansion timeline" was a sham and the FS initiative is on the ballot for 2018. This plan better knock a lot of socks off. You may be keeping your socks on, and turning blue at the same time. From that exchange, and from Canepa's column this morning, I would have to conclude that SDSU is about where they were 5 years ago. The fact that they are not eliminating Balboa track field as a possibility, and the fact that Ms. Roush is assuming someone will be developing the Q site in the years ahead, and she "feels" that SDSU would make a good addition, is very disheartening. Their only goal right now appears to be how to extend the lease at Qualcomm, and then hope and pray someone includes them in some future development. God. I was hoping for much more from her, but instead the aphorisms and happy talk just keep the eructations flowing. Kind of... I don't think her strong suite is sharing strategy, etc. with others in an interview setting. Having said that, I think the interview could have been better and it did not give me a "ton" of confidence that there is a a plan. In fairness to her, she was clear that there is a solution in play to open a stadium by fall 2020. That may seem like a pipe dream, but I have consistently heard this from folks at SDSU. My other thought, and it may be off base, is that there are plans in the works, but that SDSU doesn't want to talk about how they are going to unfold because that would conclude certain things are going to happen that are not SDSU's pervue. For example, one idea that I have heard would have the City Council declare only 15 to 20 acres of the site as "surplus" allowing for a potential compromise which would allow SDSU to get started on a stadium in time to open in 2020.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jul 10, 2017 18:15:40 GMT -8
So much for repeated promises of "big news from SDSU any day now." Sheesh. McGrory said we would have an idea after 45 days. No one is expecting anything anyday now. Let's be clear. He said 30-45 days and he so stated on June 19, the day before this article appeared. www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/growth-development/sd-fi-sdsustadium-20170620-story.htmlDay 30 is next Wednesday. Day 45 is Thursday, August 3. One hopes the man wasn't just talking the talk as it appears Hirshman and Wicker were doing.
|
|
|
Post by aztecfan1 on Jul 10, 2017 20:45:07 GMT -8
They surely need to show the city council something as council will be under increasing pressure to demo that they are not subsidizing the Q just for SDSU . Even a vision is important for the future, even if it's 2020 or beyond. So obvious.
|
|
|
Post by 94sdsu on Jul 13, 2017 13:52:08 GMT -8
Finally got around to listening to the interview...what a bummer. How they hell can SDSU continue to sit around and wait for the damn FS thing to go away? Why do we have to wait until after the 2018 vote for SDSU to present anything. Come on SDSU, get out in front and god damn make something happen!!!
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Jul 13, 2017 14:25:46 GMT -8
Finally got around to listening to the interview...what a bummer. How they hell can SDSU continue to sit around and wait for the damn FS thing to go away? Why do we have to wait until after the 2018 vote for SDSU to present anything. Come on SDSU, get out in front and god damn make something happen!!! I agree. It was not a very confidence inspiring interview.
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Jul 13, 2017 15:22:12 GMT -8
Finally got around to listening to the interview...what a bummer. How they hell can SDSU continue to sit around and wait for the damn FS thing to go away? Why do we have to wait until after the 2018 vote for SDSU to present anything. Come on SDSU, get out in front and god damn make something happen!!! We dont.
Interviewer: The FS Investor’s ballot initiative is scheduled to be on the ballot in November 2018. Can you take action before then, to do something with the Qualcomm site? Roush: We think that we can initiate a process whereby a plan could be activated once the initiative vote occurs and is resolved. If the initiative passes it’s a very different kind of scenario. If the initiative fails we have the opportunity now to have something in play or developed to a point where that it could be fairly quickly after that that we could finalize it. It could be something that could be finalized before and only activated if the initiative were to fail. So there are a variety of ways to approach it. And again, we need to be able to get into a dialogue with the various aspects of the city that help us understand what their preference is so that we can be prepared to respond to that. -------- But i know what you're saying. Its not that SDSU has to wait until after the 2018 vote to "present" anything. Roush clearly says they can present a plan beforehand and that it can be "finalized" fairly quickly after the vote fails. The MLS has said their timeframe to make those expansion decisions were going to be made well ahead of that November 2018 vote though. If the MLS decides to grant San Diego a team BEFORE the city even has a Vote that would be a miracle. I cant see the MLS doing that.
|
|
|
Post by ab on Jul 13, 2017 15:33:32 GMT -8
I've sat down and had lunch with her twice. Not impressed.
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Jul 13, 2017 18:29:29 GMT -8
Finally got around to listening to the interview...what a bummer. How they hell can SDSU continue to sit around and wait for the damn FS thing to go away? Why do we have to wait until after the 2018 vote for SDSU to present anything. Come on SDSU, get out in front and god damn make something happen!!! We dont.
Interviewer: The FS Investor’s ballot initiative is scheduled to be on the ballot in November 2018. Can you take action before then, to do something with the Qualcomm site? Roush: We think that we can initiate a process whereby a plan could be activated once the initiative vote occurs and is resolved. If the initiative passes it’s a very different kind of scenario. If the initiative fails we have the opportunity now to have something in play or developed to a point where that it could be fairly quickly after that that we could finalize it. It could be something that could be finalized before and only activated if the initiative were to fail. So there are a variety of ways to approach it. And again, we need to be able to get into a dialogue with the various aspects of the city that help us understand what their preference is so that we can be prepared to respond to that. -------- But i know what you're saying. Its not that SDSU has to wait until after the 2018 vote to "present" anything. Roush clearly says they can present a plan beforehand and that it can be "finalized" fairly quickly after the vote fails. The MLS has said their timeframe to make those expansion decisions were going to be made well ahead of that November 2018 vote though. If the MLS decides to grant San Diego a team BEFORE the city even has a Vote that would be a miracle. I cant see the MLS doing that. She actually went further... Sally Roush Interview Q: You mentioned the Aztec football team and their future is a little bit squishy beyond 2018 when their lease with Qualcomm expires. What are the options there? A: Option No. 1 is for the city to come back to the table and extend our lease. That is a primary objective of mine is to get that lease extended. Secondarily, we want the lease extended for a sufficient period of time, probably two years is sufficient, to actually build a stadium. In order to do that we need to work with the city to identify a location on a site where we can move forward with stadium construction while the rest of the issues around the future use of the site are resolved. SDSU is working on solutions that can be approved and moved forward right now. As someone else said, they can't dance alone so the City has to participate...
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jul 13, 2017 20:55:06 GMT -8
We dont.
Interviewer: The FS Investor’s ballot initiative is scheduled to be on the ballot in November 2018. Can you take action before then, to do something with the Qualcomm site? Roush: We think that we can initiate a process whereby a plan could be activated once the initiative vote occurs and is resolved. If the initiative passes it’s a very different kind of scenario. If the initiative fails we have the opportunity now to have something in play or developed to a point where that it could be fairly quickly after that that we could finalize it. It could be something that could be finalized before and only activated if the initiative were to fail. So there are a variety of ways to approach it. And again, we need to be able to get into a dialogue with the various aspects of the city that help us understand what their preference is so that we can be prepared to respond to that. -------- But i know what you're saying. Its not that SDSU has to wait until after the 2018 vote to "present" anything. Roush clearly says they can present a plan beforehand and that it can be "finalized" fairly quickly after the vote fails. The MLS has said their timeframe to make those expansion decisions were going to be made well ahead of that November 2018 vote though. If the MLS decides to grant San Diego a team BEFORE the city even has a Vote that would be a miracle. I cant see the MLS doing that. She actually went further... Sally Roush Interview Q: You mentioned the Aztec football team and their future is a little bit squishy beyond 2018 when their lease with Qualcomm expires. What are the options there? A: Option No. 1 is for the city to come back to the table and extend our lease. That is a primary objective of mine is to get that lease extended. Secondarily, we want the lease extended for a sufficient period of time, probably two years is sufficient, to actually build a stadium. In order to do that we need to work with the city to identify a location on a site where we can move forward with stadium construction while the rest of the issues around the future use of the site are resolved. SDSU is working on solutions that can be approved and moved forward right now. As someone else said, they can't dance alone so the City has to participate... "To identify a location on THE site"... meaning a location on the Mission Valley/Qualcomm site.
|
|