|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 21, 2015 16:20:01 GMT -8
"• Despite the sense of urgency created by Carson and the NFL’s looming decision about who will relocate to Los Angeles, the task force is creating a lengthy process potentially subject to voter approval, with no guarantee of success, to get the various aspects of the development approved."
Sorry about that pesky Constitution and the gall to subject it to voter approval.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 21, 2015 16:29:35 GMT -8
It will be interesting to see the results of the NFL draft & what the CSAG proposes. From the piece... After talking with city leaders and task force members, the Chargers and NFL aren’t seeing a workable plan within a workable timetable to keep the Chargers in San Diego. NFL Vice President Eric Grubman repeatedly expressed his concerns, which were shared by the Chargers, in the meeting.
“Our view is that Mr. Grubman spoke both clearly and candidly about the situation we all face,” said Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani.
At least in the eyes of the NFL and Chargers — the audience San Diego needs to satisfy most right now — the plans being presented don’t add up.
Well, that about says it all, doesn't it? The Aztecs? Who the hell cares about them? It's really nice that the city is going all-out for the privately owned Chargers while at the same time completely ignoring San Diego's oldest and (as I see it) most beloved institution of higher learning.* I guess the city fathers and mothers believe that favoring the Chargers is an example of sensible priorities.
AzWm
(I mean, seriously, we can all respect UCSD for being one of the best American universities, but can we actually have warm feelings for that impressive but somewhat austere array of gray concrete buildings? )
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Apr 21, 2015 16:52:52 GMT -8
And yet Fabiani keeps saying both in the media and to the CSAG privately that they are agnostic to MV or Downtown. The only reason the Chargers "prefer" downtown is because according to Fabiani, 'based on their research that is more doable since they've tried MV before and it didn't work' (which is a whole different debate). And of course there's no workable plan right now. We're not going to know that until May 20th whether it's a feasible plan or not and whether or not.I'll be very surprised if we'll know much then either. Agnostic? Never seen the word used like that before. Thanks for the education about its broader definition. Finally, consistent with the one comment to the linked Daily News column, a Credit Carders' exec told L.A. AM980's Fred Rogan last week that he could envision the Chargers moving into the stadium in Inglewood, which contrary to what the other commenter says, WILL be built. For that not to happen would require four things. One, a plan for a new stadium in SL is expedited to such a degree that it catches up to Inglewood, which already has a huge head start. Two, that at least one-third of the NFL owners then become so enamored of the new SL stadium that they think it should stop the Rams from moving to Inglewood. Three, that even then, a plan couldn't be worked out to placate that one-third of the owners, such as the Raiders moving into the new SL stadium. And four, that if #2 happened but not #3, that Kroenke, who is the second richest man in professional sports, wouldn't just go ahead and move the Rams to Inglewood anyway and dare the NFL to sue him.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 21, 2015 22:16:02 GMT -8
And yet Fabiani keeps saying both in the media and to the CSAG privately that they are agnostic to MV or Downtown. The only reason the Chargers "prefer" downtown is because according to Fabiani, 'based on their research that is more doable since they've tried MV before and it didn't work' (which is a whole different debate). And of course there's no workable plan right now. We're not going to know that until May 20th whether it's a feasible plan or not and whether or not.I'll be very surprised if we'll know much then either. Agnostic? Never seen the word used like that before. Thanks for the education about its broader definition. Hmm, maybe I got the wrong word but I was just repeating what has been quoted by people on the radio. Anyway, Fabiani has said multiple times that they don't have a preference for either MV or Downtown. So it's curious why it keeps getting reported in the media that they prefer downtown. Maybe Fabiani is having that leaked out just to keep stirring up drama.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Apr 22, 2015 9:24:57 GMT -8
What I meant was that although you can bet the house that on May 20 a "feasible" funding plan will be announced, once it's reviewed with a number of fine-toothed combs, it won't look so feasible.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 22, 2015 9:49:35 GMT -8
What I meant was that although you can bet the house that on May 20 a "feasible" funding plan will be announced, once it's reviewed with a number of fine-toothed combs, it won't look so feasible. Well, I'm certain the Chargers will shoot it down. That's going to be part of their negotiation strategy. There will be objective people who will look at it and say whether or not it looks like a fair proposal or not though. Ultimately though, I believe they'll reach an agreement. The only way I see LA as an option is a last ditch desperation effort down the road when they've truly exhausted everything here and they have to go groveling to Kroenke to let them in his stadium. It would actually make more sense for them to move somewhere else where they can get their own stadium though. St. Louis? San Antonio?
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 22, 2015 10:01:22 GMT -8
What I meant was that although you can bet the house that on May 20 a "feasible" funding plan will be announced, once it's reviewed with a number of fine-toothed combs, it won't look so feasible. Well, I'm certain the Chargers will shoot it down. That's going to be part of their negotiation strategy. There will be objective people who will look at it and say whether or not it looks like a fair proposal or not though. Ultimately though, I believe they'll reach an agreement. The only way I see LA as an option is a last ditch desperation effort down the road when they've truly exhausted everything here and they have to go groveling to Kroenke to let them in his stadium. It would actually make more sense for them to move somewhere else where they can get their own stadium though. St. Louis? San Antonio? Any of those scenarios would be awesome for SDSU.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Apr 22, 2015 10:19:01 GMT -8
Well, I'm certain the Chargers will shoot it down. That's going to be part of their negotiation strategy. There will be objective people who will look at it and say whether or not it looks like a fair proposal or not though. Ultimately though, I believe they'll reach an agreement. The only way I see LA as an option is a last ditch desperation effort down the road when they've truly exhausted everything here and they have to go groveling to Kroenke to let them in his stadium. It would actually make more sense for them to move somewhere else where they can get their own stadium though. St. Louis? San Antonio? Any of those scenarios would be awesome for SDSU. You seem to possess enormous faith in the administration of SDSU. I don't expect an answer, as this is more rhetorical, but is there anything approaching--in football or any sport at SDSU--the scope of your hope, which this administration has promised, (such as set aside funds or revealed a funding source?) or commenced, that would give you that kind of confidence? Basketball is not even close to a comparison, and in any case prior to Hirshman and Sterk. JAM was also commenced prior to either man burdening us.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2015 10:21:14 GMT -8
Any of those scenarios would be awesome for SDSU. You seem to possess enormous faith in the administration of SDSU. I don't expect an answer, as this is more rhetorical, but is there anything approaching--in football or any sport at SDSU--the scope of your hope, which this administration has promised, (such as set aside funds or revealed a funding source?) or commenced, that would give you that kind of confidence? Basketball is not even close to a comparison, and in any case prior to Hirshman and Sterk. JAM was also commenced prior to either man burdening us. The JAM was announced prior to 2010? Man, I don't remember it prior to 2012 or maybe 2011.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Apr 22, 2015 10:27:23 GMT -8
You seem to possess enormous faith in the administration of SDSU. I don't expect an answer, as this is more rhetorical, but is there anything approaching--in football or any sport at SDSU--the scope of your hope, which this administration has promised, (such as set aside funds or revealed a funding source?) or commenced, that would give you that kind of confidence? Basketball is not even close to a comparison, and in any case prior to Hirshman and Sterk. JAM was also commenced prior to either man burdening us. The JAM was announced prior to 2010? Man, I don't remember it prior to 2012 or maybe 2011. You know, I may have spoken too quickly. Seemed like Hoke was here at the time. Then it went silent as rumors continued leaking. RFQs then RFPs. Then they announced when they had about half the money raised. I believe that they are still looking for the final tranche.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2015 10:32:43 GMT -8
The JAM was announced prior to 2010? Man, I don't remember it prior to 2012 or maybe 2011. You know, I may have spoken too quickly. Seemed like Hoke was here at the time. Then it went silent as rumors continued leaking. RFQs then RFPs. Then they announced when they had about half the money raised. I believe that they are still looking for the final tranche. I believe there is only about 2mil left to raise for the JAM center. I could be wrong though.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 22, 2015 10:36:51 GMT -8
Well, I'm certain the Chargers will shoot it down. That's going to be part of their negotiation strategy. There will be objective people who will look at it and say whether or not it looks like a fair proposal or not though. Ultimately though, I believe they'll reach an agreement. The only way I see LA as an option is a last ditch desperation effort down the road when they've truly exhausted everything here and they have to go groveling to Kroenke to let them in his stadium. It would actually make more sense for them to move somewhere else where they can get their own stadium though. St. Louis? San Antonio? Any of those scenarios would be awesome for SDSU. I don't know if the Chargers leaving San Diego altogether is actually awesome for SDSU. Leaving Mission Valley would be enough, but leaving San Diego could be too much. I believe there is a sweet spot somewhere in San Diego County to build the Chargers an NFL stadium (preferably the $800M model) that would free up the Q for SDSU and the Aztecs. The spot for the Chargers doesn't have to be downtown -- it could just as easily be in Chula Vista, Escondido, Oceanside or El Cajon ... the point being a professional team in San Diego is still a draw and an NFL stadium in San Diego could bid for a CFP NCG site. Construction jobs are always welcome, and if located in the right area, could also spur residential, retail & hotel development in a part of the county that needs it more than Mission Valley does. Separating the venues for the Holiday Bowl & Poinsettia Bowl could have a positive impact on both bowls in terms of both scheduling & costs. I have said this before ... but if the Chargers had been better negotiating partners with the City and County, they would have had their stadium downtown 4-5 years ago
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Apr 22, 2015 10:36:54 GMT -8
You know, I may have spoken too quickly. Seemed like Hoke was here at the time. Then it went silent as rumors continued leaking. RFQs then RFPs. Then they announced when they had about half the money raised. I believe that they are still looking for the final tranche. I believe there is only about 2mil left to raise for the JAM center. I could be wrong though. That sounds about right. But it illustrates my point of how very difficult it is for them to raise money for sports, even basketball, which I firmly believe is their favorite sport.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 22, 2015 10:38:35 GMT -8
Any of those scenarios would be awesome for SDSU. You seem to possess enormous faith in the administration of SDSU. I don't expect an answer, as this is more rhetorical, but is there anything approaching--in football or any sport at SDSU--the scope of your hope, which this administration has promised, (such as set aside funds or revealed a funding source?) or commenced, that would give you that kind of confidence? Basketball is not even close to a comparison, and in any case prior to Hirshman and Sterk. JAM was also commenced prior to either man burdening us. To be perfectly honest I would much rather SDSU be proactive and find its own independent stadium solution. The sooner we stop becoming dependent on the Chargers for a stadium the better. The Chargers departing the city would be the catalyst for this action at SDSU. Is it possible we will not find a stadium solution? Of course. If indeed that is the case and SDSU can't find a long term stadium solution on its own then perhaps we don't deserve to have a division I football program in San Diego. However, I firmly believe SDSU will find a stadium solution when the Chargers leave.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Apr 22, 2015 10:40:47 GMT -8
Stan Kroenke can only hop in front of the Chargers & Raiders in the LA pecking order if he decides to go rogue and goes to LA without the NFL's approval. The Seahawks moved to LA for a week in '95 before the NFL threatened to fine them $500K per day and they quickly moved back. This article by Sam Farmer, who is as connected as they come in the LA Stadium game, says Kroenke's people insist he won't go without the NFL's blessing. www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-nfl-la-memo-20150209-story.htmlThe Chargers and Raiders have the worst stadiums in the league (multi-purpose dinosaurs built in the 60's) and have been trying to get something done for years while the Rams have a 20 year old stadium and just started the process while St. Louis is working their asses off to keep them. The Chargers/Raiders stadium solves two of the leagues stadium problems and a Rams move to LA will hurt the Raider & Chargers odds of getting stadiums done in their respective cities. Carson may provide leverage in San Diego and Oakland but it also provides leverage with Kroenke as he's not going to get approved for a move by the NFL before the Chargers/Raiders.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 22, 2015 11:09:49 GMT -8
If the Chargers leave San Diego, where are the Aztecs going to play? The city isn't going to keep the Q going if the Chargers leave. It's bad enough of a money drain as it is right now but at least some money is being made. Aztec football brings in pennies compared to that.
What kind of temporary stadium are they going to play in? Or would they just shut it down either temporarily or permanently? Either way, it would set the program back considerably I would think and the program is not in good shape right now anyway.
Everything I've heard is that if the Chargers leave, it's the death of football in San Diego completely but maybe someone knows different here?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2015 11:19:24 GMT -8
If the Chargers leave San Diego, where are the Aztecs going to play? The city isn't going to keep the Q going if the Chargers leave. It's bad enough of a money drain as it is right now but at least some money is being made. Aztec football brings in pennies compared to that. What kind of temporary stadium are they going to play in? Or would they just shut it down either temporarily or permanently? Either way, it would set the program back considerably I would think and the program is not in good shape right now anyway. Everything I've heard is that if the Chargers leave, it's the death of football in San Diego completely but maybe someone knows different here?Where exactly did you hear that? We get 5 years in the Q guaranteed. If the Chargers leave it seems pretty clear the University will attempt to obtain all or part of the Q site for campus expansion as well.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Apr 22, 2015 11:27:29 GMT -8
If the Chargers leave San Diego, where are the Aztecs going to play? The city isn't going to keep the Q going if the Chargers leave. It's bad enough of a money drain as it is right now but at least some money is being made. Aztec football brings in pennies compared to that. What kind of temporary stadium are they going to play in? Or would they just shut it down either temporarily or permanently? Either way, it would set the program back considerably I would think and the program is not in good shape right now anyway. Everything I've heard is that if the Chargers leave, it's the death of football in San Diego completely but maybe someone knows different here?Where exactly did you hear that? We get 5 years in the Q guaranteed. If the Chargers leave it seems pretty clear the University will attempt to obtain all or part of the Q site for campus expansion as well. I've seen that quote in reference ONLY to the NFL... pundits saying that if the Chargers leave SD then the NFL won't come back. EDIT: TO which I say... Meh.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Apr 22, 2015 11:30:28 GMT -8
What I meant was that although you can bet the house that on May 20 a "feasible" funding plan will be announced, once it's reviewed with a number of fine-toothed combs, it won't look so feasible. Well, I'm certain the Chargers will shoot it down. That's going to be part of their negotiation strategy. There will be objective people who will look at it and say whether or not it looks like a fair proposal or not though. Ultimately though, I believe they'll reach an agreement. The only way I see LA as an option is a last ditch desperation effort down the road when they've truly exhausted everything here and they have to go groveling to Kroenke to let them in his stadium. It would actually make more sense for them to move somewhere else where they can get their own stadium though. St. Louis? San Antonio? I've heard so many folks within the media weigh in on this stuff that I can't be sure about this. However, IIRC, it was the well regarded John Clayton who I heard say nobody should expect an NFL franchise in San Antonio. Word is Jerry Jones is adamantly opposed to that idea and other than Jerry Richardson and a couple other owners, nobody wields the clout within NFL ownership that Jones does. That makes perfect sense given that an NFL team in SA wouldn't just eliminate most of the NFL fans in that city as Cowboys fans but since Austin is located between SA and Dallas, the same might be true for residents there. As to St. Louis, I think that might be a distinct possibility since the city of SL seems hell bent on building a new stadium even if the Rams leave and being the only game in town in SL would probably be akin to sharing L.A. with the Rams.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 22, 2015 11:53:33 GMT -8
If the Chargers leave San Diego, where are the Aztecs going to play? The city isn't going to keep the Q going if the Chargers leave. It's bad enough of a money drain as it is right now but at least some money is being made. Aztec football brings in pennies compared to that. What kind of temporary stadium are they going to play in? Or would they just shut it down either temporarily or permanently? Either way, it would set the program back considerably I would think and the program is not in good shape right now anyway. Everything I've heard is that if the Chargers leave, it's the death of football in San Diego completely but maybe someone knows different here?Where exactly did you hear that? We get 5 years in the Q guaranteed. If the Chargers leave it seems pretty clear the University will attempt to obtain all or part of the Q site for campus expansion as well. Actually, I did find a couple of articles from the UT talking about it saying the Aztecs lease is through 2018. www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/mar/02/qualcomm-stadium-aztecs-chargers-lease/www.utsandiego.com/news/2009/jul/27/bn27stadium-lease-aztecs/The article says the city can renegotiate the rent if they don't think they're getting a good deal. I wonder if that's going to happen if the Aztecs are the only tenant, especially if they continue to draw so poorly. 2018 is going to come quickly though. If the Chargers leave, I think it's going to be to join the Rams in LA but not after the Rams have already established themselves and that would be way past 2018, probably around 2020 when the lease is up for the Chargers as well. Hopefully, a stadium deal gets done here because I want to see the Chargers and Aztecs get a new stadium.
|
|