|
Post by longtimebooster on Mar 30, 2015 14:16:43 GMT -8
Acee just on the radio with D Smith: "Being around the owners meetings, you get the sense the Chargers are as good as gone. The Spanos family and M Fabiani have such an agenda to move the team to LA that all they did is present to the owners that a deal cannot get done in SD. CSAG's new mission is not to convince the Chargers that they have come up with a good deal, their top priory coming out of those meetings is to convince the other 31 teams that they have come up with a plan that will work for the city and the Chargers. They have to be convincing enough so 24 out of the 31 owners will not vote to allow the Chargers to move" He also said that he is extremely impressed with the work CSAG has done and it is his opinion that the deal they come up with will be good enough to at least go to the ballot. He was very clear though that is extremely obvious that Dean and Fabiani CLEARLY have an LA agenda and are trying like crazy to sell their sad story to the other owners. He also said it is very clear that the Inglewood location is by far the plan that is desired by the other owners over Carson. The biggest show-stopper for the Chargers will be their extremely lame Carson plan. Ain't gonna happen. And the owners know that. So Spanos and his puppet troll can posture all they want, they're stuck in San Diego. And then they'll have to live with the bad will they've generated over the past several years forever. Hell, they've burned so many bridges that I can see this whole thing blowing up in their faces. Kroenke moves the Rams and the Raiders to his new stadium in Inglewood. The Chargers are left without a chair when the music stops playing. Spanos and Fabiani go back to City Hall and the angry villagers with hat in hand and say, "Pretty please, can we dust off those Mission Valley plans again?" What a bunch of putzes.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Mar 30, 2015 14:29:18 GMT -8
Acee just on the radio with D Smith: "Being around the owners meetings, you get the sense the Chargers are as good as gone. The Spanos family and M Fabiani have such an agenda to move the team to LA that all they did is present to the owners that a deal cannot get done in SD. CSAG's new mission is not to convince the Chargers that they have come up with a good deal, their top priory coming out of those meetings is to convince the other 31 teams that they have come up with a plan that will work for the city and the Chargers. They have to be convincing enough so 24 out of the 31 owners will not vote to allow the Chargers to move" He also said that he is extremely impressed with the work CSAG has done and it is his opinion that the deal they come up with will be good enough to at least go to the ballot. He was very clear though that is extremely obvious that Dean and Fabiani CLEARLY have an LA agenda and are trying like crazy to sell their sad story to the other owners. He also said it is very clear that the Inglewood location is by far the plan that is desired by the other owners over Carson. The biggest show-stopper for the Chargers will be their extremely lame Carson plan. Ain't gonna happen. And the owners know that. So Spanos and his puppet troll can posture all they want, they're stuck in San Diego. And then they'll have to live with the bad will they've generated over the past several years forever. Hell, they've burned so many bridges that I can see this whole thing blowing up in their faces. Kroenke moves the Rams and the Raiders to his new stadium in Inglewood. The Chargers are left without a chair when the music stops playing. Spanos and Fabiani go back to City Hall and the angry villagers with hat in hand and say, "Pretty please, can we dust off those Mission Valley plans again?" What a bunch of putzes. There seems to be many scenarios that could play out. One thing is certain however. And that is the NFL has said there will be 2 teams in Southern California. Either 2 in LA or just one in LA and one in SD. Your scenario of the Rams and Raiders in LA and the Chargers in San Diego won't happen. That would be 3 teams in Southern California.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Mar 30, 2015 15:31:07 GMT -8
Seriously Quoting acee? This guys has no inside scoop. None. He listens to a few pleoe say their gone but no sources nothing but but feeling. It's no different than my gut saying that they are staying. Same credibility. I swear that this is a set up for dean to look like a hero when he is says I will take the deal even though I could have gone to la. What annoys me is that no one wishes to accept a few realities. Sharing a stadium when you didn't build it means your a tenant. Tenants pay rent. If the Chargers buddie up with kroenke the only revenue they will generate will be from game day sales and tickets. And I. Gaurantee that kroenke will want a peice of that as well. Being kroenke tenant will add no value to the team nor generate increased revenue. The only teo two teams in the NFL that share a stadium are jets and Giants and that only works cause they share everything. No stadium will ever get built on carson. It took over a decade to clean up qualcomm cause of a gas plume. How long it will it take to clean up an dump site. Eirs don't work in this case. Aeg will sue the living s h I t out of the Chargers the second they try to build in carson. It's a non starter Dean wanting to move to la is like me saying on what to own beach front property in del mar. It's sad that so many on this board think the Chargers leaving is an fincancial wind fall for sdsu. It's not. Why do you think that state isn't part of the financing plan now? No cash. And don't think that the city and county are going to be real excited to loan money to sdsu. And state has to pay off the water district a cool 150 mil. States best option is ride the Chargers coat tail into mission valley.Some of you are so blinded by hate and delusions of grandiuer So, let me understand this, the UT Chargers beat writer for the last 7 years has no inside scoop? Lol… okay? If you can't see that the best case scenario for San Diego State University would be to build a West Campus at the Mission Valley site I don't know what to say. Short of helping you remove your Charger blinders there is no hope for you. SDSU's easiest and cheapest option is to continue to ride the coat tails of the Chargers in Mission Valley. By no means is it even close to being their best option. I can understand where you are coming from. I am an Aztec fan first and as such I am looking at this from the best interest of San Diego State University. Based on your comments you are obviously a Charger fan first. Now, just switch your point of view for a moment and pretend that you actually have San Diego State's best interest in mind. Can you honestly tell me that acquiring the Mission Valley site for West Campus expansion would not be a major benefit for SDSU to serve its students and the greater San Diego community? Can you also honestly tell me that if SDSU had an opportunity to build a stadium that was appropriate for their needs, rather than share a stadium designed for an NFL team, that it would not be their best option?
|
|
|
Post by adammclane on Mar 30, 2015 15:35:07 GMT -8
I could care less what the Chargers do. I would LOVE to see the Aztecs partner with an MLS team and do their own thing.
SDSU isn't little brother to the Chargers, time to stop acting like it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2015 15:48:54 GMT -8
Seriously Quoting acee? This guys has no inside scoop. None. He listens to a few pleoe say their gone but no sources nothing but but feeling. It's no different than my gut saying that they are staying. Same credibility. I swear that this is a set up for dean to look like a hero when he is says I will take the deal even though I could have gone to la. What annoys me is that no one wishes to accept a few realities. Sharing a stadium when you didn't build it means your a tenant. Tenants pay rent. If the Chargers buddie up with kroenke the only revenue they will generate will be from game day sales and tickets. And I. Gaurantee that kroenke will want a peice of that as well. Being kroenke tenant will add no value to the team nor generate increased revenue. The only teo two teams in the NFL that share a stadium are jets and Giants and that only works cause they share everything. No stadium will ever get built on carson. It took over a decade to clean up qualcomm cause of a gas plume. How long it will it take to clean up an dump site. Eirs don't work in this case. Aeg will sue the living s h I t out of the Chargers the second they try to build in carson. It's a non starter Dean wanting to move to la is like me saying on what to own beach front property in del mar. It's sad that so many on this board think the Chargers leaving is an fincancial wind fall for sdsu. It's not. Why do you think that state isn't part of the financing plan now? No cash. And don't think that the city and county are going to be real excited to loan money to sdsu. And state has to pay off the water district a cool 150 mil. States best option is ride the Chargers coat tail into mission valley.Some of you are so blinded by hate and delusions of grandiuer So, let me understand this, the UT Chargers beat writer for the last 7 years has no inside scoop? Lol… okay? If you can't see that the best case scenario for San Diego State University would be to build a West Campus at the Mission Valley site I don't know what to say. Short of helping you remove your Charger blinders there is no hope for you. SDSU's easiest and cheapest option is to continue to ride the coat tails of the Chargers in Mission Valley. By no means is it even close to being their best option. I can understand where you are coming from. I am an Aztec fan first and as such I am looking at this from the best interest of San Diego State University. Based on your comments you are obviously a Charger fan first. Now, just switch your point of view for a moment and pretend that you actually have San Diego State's best interest in mind. Can you honestly tell me that acquiring the Mission Valley site for West Campus expansion would not be a major benefit for SDSU to serve its students and the greater San Diego community? Can you also honestly tell me that if SDSU had an opportunity to build a stadium that was appropriate for their needs, rather than share a stadium designed for an NFL team, that it would not be their best option? Maybe not so much on the inside now. His claim to fame was his relationship with AJ
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Mar 30, 2015 17:26:53 GMT -8
Acee is an idiot with marginal writing talent.
Like I said Spanos can scream to the mountains that he wants to be in la. And I want a Porsche and a beachfront home Del mar. My son wants a play station but neither are going to happen.
They have to sell carson, it's their only avenue to recieve more than the other owners for relocation fees from kroenke. Just like 25 percent crap.
Btw.... Owners don't want to be tenants ask mark davis. He could at any time pay rent to the 49ers and play in a brand new stadium instead of the colosseum which btw makes mv look like Taj Mahal. But he won't cause their is no money in paying rent.
Plus kroenke is on record saying that he will only allow another team after he has established his presence in la.
Carson will not happen. Period. End of story. You cAnt build on a dump.
So once again the Chargers are staying.
Christ the last time acee had any insight was when he was aj s fluffer.
So Acees opinion is worth sheet. He wasn't at the owners meetings anyway and doesn't quote one source. He is just repeating Florios peice for pft.
Once again show me how spanos is going to build a stadium In carson.
Saying that acee said so is worthless
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Mar 30, 2015 23:38:03 GMT -8
Acee is an idiot with marginal writing talent. Like I said Spanos can scream to the mountains that he wants to be in la. And I want a Porsche and a beachfront home Del mar. My son wants a play station but neither are going to happen. They have to sell carson, it's their only avenue to recieve more than the other owners for relocation fees from kroenke. Just like 25 percent crap. Btw.... Owners don't want to be tenants ask mark davis. He could at any time pay rent to the 49ers and play in a brand new stadium instead of the colosseum which btw makes mv look like Taj Mahal. But he won't cause their is no money in paying rent. Plus kroenke is on record saying that he will only allow another team after he has established his presence in la. Carson will not happen. Period. End of story. You cAnt build on a dump. So once again the Chargers are staying. Christ the last time acee had any insight was when he was aj s fluffer. So Acees opinion is worth sheet. He wasn't at the owners meetings anyway and doesn't quote one source. He is just repeating Florios peice for pft. Once again show me how spanos is going to build a stadium In carson. Saying that acee said so is worthless I certainly don't know where the Chargers will end up but all signs thus far point to out of town. There are some who believe that it will be the Rams & Chargers in LA. There seem to be several ways that could happen. www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2015/mar/27/ticker-chargers-los-angeles/www.businessinsider.com/nfl-los-angeles-oakland-raiders-st-louis-2015-3Kevin Acee was at the owners meetings... www.mighty1090.com/episode/3-30-15-kevin-acee/
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Mar 31, 2015 9:23:02 GMT -8
The Chargers to LA makes zero sense, especially since they would be at the bottom of the totem pole in LA/OC sports (Rams, Lakers, Dodgers, Clippers, Angles, USC, UCLA, Kings, Ducks, Galaxy). For an NFL team to be lower than college teams and NHL and MLS teams would be embarrassing. The NFL's best interest is to have the Rams move there with the second set of home locker rooms waiting to be filled but it will serve as the dangling carrot it has been in LA for 20 years now. Any team in the future that needs a new stadium will be able to threaten a move to LA without having to worry about a temporary facility to play in. They could move in immediately the next season. In addition, there's no way Spanos wants to play a distant second fiddle in the same stadium as the Rams. There's no financial gain there for him in a city that doesn't care about the Chargers.
The NFL isn't going to saturate the LA market suddenly with two teams. Kroenke wants the LA market to himself and he's appeasing the NFL's wishes by now including the second set of locker rooms, owner's suites, etc. From what I gather, the Rams to LA is inevitable. Maybe not in 2016 but 2017. The momentum here for a stadium is vastly stronger than it ever has been. The 'political will' everyone keeps referencing is stong. Very strong. In 2003, a new stadium was too soon after the upgrades done just a few years before and the pension crisis and real estate crash in the years following just wouldn't allow the stadium issue to become a priority. The timing now is finally right and everyone's saying that the CSAG really has all their ducks in a row and they're going to present a proposal that is going to be very difficult for the Chargers to shoot holes in and that's huge because of the NFL's relocation rules. There will be tough negotiations for sure but in the end, just like Acee said, signs are pointing that a deal is going to be reached and this is going on the ballot next year. But the bottom line is that, the Chargers just don't have a better option out there. Carson is a non-starter like it was pointed out earlier in this thread so the Chargers best option will always be San Diego. All this drama is just a brilliant leverage play by Fabiani. This is what he does.
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Mar 31, 2015 9:52:05 GMT -8
The Chargers to LA makes zero sense, especially since they would be at the bottom of the totem pole in LA/OC sports (Rams, Lakers, Dodgers, Clippers, Angles, USC, UCLA, Kings, Ducks, Galaxy). For an NFL team to be lower than college teams and NHL and MLS teams would be embarrassing. The NFL's best interest is to have the Rams move there with the second set of home locker rooms waiting to be filled but it will serve as the dangling carrot it has been in LA for 20 years now. Any team in the future that needs a new stadium will be able to threaten a move to LA without having to worry about a temporary facility to play in. They could move in immediately the next season. In addition, there's no way Spanos wants to play a distant second fiddle in the same stadium as the Rams. There's no financial gain there for him in a city that doesn't care about the Chargers. The NFL isn't going to saturate the LA market suddenly with two teams. Kroenke wants the LA market to himself and he's appeasing the NFL's wishes by now including the second set of locker rooms, owner's suites, etc. From what I gather, the Rams to LA is inevitable. Maybe not in 2016 but 2017. The momentum here for a stadium is vastly stronger than it ever has been. The 'political will' everyone keeps referencing is stong. Very strong. In 2003, a new stadium was too soon after the upgrades done just a few years before and the pension crisis and real estate crash in the years following just wouldn't allow the stadium issue to become a priority. The timing now is finally right and everyone's saying that the CSAG really has all their ducks in a row and they're going to present a proposal that is going to be very difficult for the Chargers to shoot holes in and that's huge because of the NFL's relocation rules. There will be tough negotiations for sure but in the end, just like Acee said, signs are pointing that a deal is going to be reached and this is going on the ballot next year. But the bottom line is that, the Chargers just don't have a better option out there. Carson is a non-starter like it was pointed out earlier in this thread so the Chargers best option will always be San Diego. All this drama is just a brilliant leverage play by Fabiani. This is what he does. Nail.head.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 10:06:41 GMT -8
I def believe the Carson project will likely never happen. But I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of the Chargers sharing the facility with the Rams. Especially since they've specifically mentioned the Inglewood site could house two teams.
I do think that the NFL and the Chargers are posturing to get the best deal out of SD. Which means its hard to believe any of their threats right now. However, I am not so sure they will stay in town if we don't deliver the project they desire...especially if they project enough earnings at a shared LA location. Hell, they may even view the shared site as a temporary solution while a second, permanent LA location is developed and financed. That's hopw big the LA markets is unfortunately.
My guess is there is probably a 30 to 40% chance the Chargers actually leave. So still a good chance they're staying. Don't fret yet honks!
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Dad on Apr 1, 2015 12:45:46 GMT -8
Welcome to your new blue home Aztecs! The Spanos Clan will still be your landlords, but on the bright side, you'll have the best looking facility in the Mountain West.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 1, 2015 12:53:16 GMT -8
Welcome to your new blue home Aztecs! The Spanos Clan will still be your landlords, but on the bright side, you'll have the best looking facility in the Mountain West. That's a really nice rendering of the SDSU West Campus -- but the stadium colors are all wrong
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Apr 1, 2015 12:55:07 GMT -8
I def believe the Carson project will likely never happen. But I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of the Chargers sharing the facility with the Rams. Especially since they've specifically mentioned the Inglewood site could house two teams. I do think that the NFL and the Chargers are posturing to get the best deal out of SD. Which means its hard to believe any of their threats right now. However, I am not so sure they will stay in town if we don't deliver the project they desire...especially if they project enough earnings at a shared LA location. Hell, they may even view the shared site as a temporary solution while a second, permanent LA location is developed and financed. That's hopw big the LA markets is unfortunately. My guess is there is probably a 30 to 40% chance the Chargers actually leave. So still a good chance they're staying. Don't fret yet honks! If the Rams go to LA, what's to stop the Chargers from going to St. Louis? They support their pro teams much more than San Diego ever would.
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Dad on Apr 1, 2015 12:57:43 GMT -8
Welcome to your new blue home Aztecs! The Spanos Clan will still be your landlords, but on the bright side, you'll have the best looking facility in the Mountain West. That's a really nice rendering of the SDSU West Campus -- but the stadium colors are all wrong I'm sure the Chargers wouldn't mind loaning San Diego State a room to store some school supplies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 13:02:55 GMT -8
I def believe the Carson project will likely never happen. But I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of the Chargers sharing the facility with the Rams. Especially since they've specifically mentioned the Inglewood site could house two teams. I do think that the NFL and the Chargers are posturing to get the best deal out of SD. Which means its hard to believe any of their threats right now. However, I am not so sure they will stay in town if we don't deliver the project they desire...especially if they project enough earnings at a shared LA location. Hell, they may even view the shared site as a temporary solution while a second, permanent LA location is developed and financed. That's hopw big the LA markets is unfortunately. My guess is there is probably a 30 to 40% chance the Chargers actually leave. So still a good chance they're staying. Don't fret yet honks! If the Rams go to LA, what's to stop the Chargers from going to St. Louis? They support their pro teams much more than San Diego ever would. Honestly? Probably future market growth projections. As transient and lame as SoCal is at being consistent in fan support our growth potential is off the chart. You have to figure that a decision to move is one that looks a minimum of 25 to 30 years into the future. You have to think the pop growth here will make SD a more valuable location than St. Louis. But who knows...anything is possible. If support was so good and the market projections were strong in St. Louis I doubt the Rams would be leaving though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 13:04:15 GMT -8
Welcome to your new blue home Aztecs! The Spanos Clan will still be your landlords, but on the bright side, you'll have the best looking facility in the Mountain West. damn that's nice. Wouldn't mind sharing that with the Chargers. I know one thing though, if I lived in MV I would move out of there very soon.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 1, 2015 13:04:44 GMT -8
That's a really nice rendering of the SDSU West Campus -- but the stadium colors are all wrong I'm sure the Chargers wouldn't mind loaning San Diego State a room to store some school supplies. I highly doubt that this or any other development paid stadium will occur ... California is now under a mandatory 25% cut in water use -- that number will only increase as the drought continues. Secondary effects of mandatory restrictions will be to curtail or restrict any new development that will increase overall water consumption in the city / county / state. This does not directly affect the construction of a stadium if it can be paid through means other than residential development, so this will not prohibit Kronke from funding his own stadium (for now).
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Dad on Apr 1, 2015 13:15:43 GMT -8
I'm sure the Chargers wouldn't mind loaning San Diego State a room to store some school supplies. I highly doubt that this or any other development paid stadium will occur ... California is now under a mandatory 25% cut in water use -- that number will only increase as the drought continues. Secondary effects of mandatory restrictions will be to curtail or restrict any new development that will increase overall water consumption in the city / county / state. This does not directly affect the construction of a stadium if it can be paid through means other than residential development, so this will not prohibit Kronke from funding his own stadium (for now). Tell that to the city councilman who came up with this plan. I'm sure he knows nothing about mandatory water cuts and restrictions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2015 13:18:26 GMT -8
Welcome to your new blue home Aztecs! The Spanos Clan will still be your landlords, but on the bright side, you'll have the best looking facility in the Mountain West. Where's the parking structure(s)?
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 1, 2015 13:22:45 GMT -8
I highly doubt that this or any other development paid stadium will occur ... California is now under a mandatory 25% cut in water use -- that number will only increase as the drought continues. Secondary effects of mandatory restrictions will be to curtail or restrict any new development that will increase overall water consumption in the city / county / state. This does not directly affect the construction of a stadium if it can be paid through means other than residential development, so this will not prohibit Kronke from funding his own stadium (for now). Tell that to the city councilman who came up with this plan. I'm sure he knows nothing about mandatory water cuts and restrictions. I don't have to do that ... the Governor has already done so: Brown orders California's first mandatory water restrictions: 'It's a different world' www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-snowpack-20150331-story.html#page=1
|
|