Chargers now want public money for a stadium.

[AztecWilliam]

After saying for years that they did not want the public to help build a new stadium, the Chargers have shifted their position. Does this mean that a stadium is now more likely? Does it mean that the LA deal has gone sour?

And what does this mean for the Aztecs?

www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/dec/10/chargers-say-they-need-public-money-stadium/

AzWm

[AlwaysAnAztec]

I think that it means they have a real possible solution for their stadium 'problem'. They have wanted to be downtown all along. They are not going to be given the same gift we gave to Moores so they need another way of paying for it. US.

I like the location and would approve of cooperation by government but stop short of using taxpayer money to further subsidize a billionaire.

[aztecwin]

Dec 11, 2009 11:22:13 GMT -8 AlwaysAnAztec said:

I think that it means they have a real possible solution for their stadium 'problem'. They have wanted to be downtown all along. They are not going to be given the same gift we gave to Moores so they need another way of paying for it. US.

I like the location and would approve of cooperation by government but stop short of using taxpayer money to further subsidize a billionaire.

I agree with that! I would look for those "win/win" kind of situations that could have been the case by letting the Chargers develop the present site where both the team and the City would have been clear winners. Too many folks had the attitude that they were not going to let the Chargers gain any financial advantage even if the City gained at the same time. Now it seems like the best thing for the Aztecs, my first consideration, would be to let SDSU redevelop the present site of the "Q".