|
|
Post by hoobs on Aug 17, 2015 9:08:57 GMT -8
Won't be #3 behind the Raiders if that franchise moves to St. Louis to back-fill a "pro-NFL" stadium situation in that city while they have no place to play in Oakland. With the social culture today, you have to wonder if the NFL won't make a deal to help the Raiders move to a better situation. In exchange the Raiders will change their name and thug image. The Raiders rebranding won't go over in LA, so I still think it will be Rams/Chargers and Davis may end up in St. Louis eventually selling the team. I think it's more about business than social culture. The NFL will want to "reward" St. Louis for making a very "team-friendly" package for a new stadium. Just remains to be seen if that means forcing the Rams to stay (looking less likely) or "all-but-forcing" either the Chargers or Raiders (whoever doesn't become Kroenke's tenant) to move there. It would be a horrible business move for the NFL to turn their collective backs on a city that is putting a lot of public money into a new stadium effort. |
|
|
|
Post by fisherville on Aug 17, 2015 9:25:35 GMT -8
Not sure if credible but Benjamin allbright says chargers to la unlikely to happen because of eroded support from owners. Rams considered virtual lock to move.
This is from Twitter I would quote and paste it but new feature won't let me do that so someone help me, using phone
|
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Aug 17, 2015 9:31:26 GMT -8
The Chargers should just move to St. Louis. Just makes too much sense. They want a new stadium on the water but don't want to pay for it and St. Louis is building a new stadium on the water and going to pay the full freight.
St. Louis Chargers! St. Louis Chargers! St. Louis Chargers!
|
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Aug 17, 2015 10:27:24 GMT -8
Only the Spanoi could be dumb enough to think anyone would believe a stadium built on a former toxic waste dump in Carson could cost $1,700,000,000. Jeanie Zelasko (an Aztec BTW) and Marcus Johnson discussed the stadium situation on their AM980 show this morning. An NFL source told them Kroenke's application for approval of the move to Inglewood showed the Rams have gone the extra mile to "get their ducks in a row" as Johnson put it and the source speculated the application will be approved. I didn't think they could apply for relocation yet. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 17, 2015 10:58:38 GMT -8
The Chargers should just move to St. Louis. Just makes too much sense. They want a new stadium on the water but don't want to pay for it and St. Louis is building a new stadium on the water and going to pay the full freight. St. Louis Chargers! St. Louis Chargers! St. Louis Chargers! They are paying for all of it? I thought the St Louis proposal called for team and NFL funding of $400-450 mil? |
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Aug 17, 2015 11:12:57 GMT -8
Only the Spanoi could be dumb enough to think anyone would believe a stadium built on a former toxic waste dump in Carson could cost $1,700,000,000. Jeanie Zelasko (an Aztec BTW) and Marcus Johnson discussed the stadium situation on their AM980 show this morning. An NFL source told them Kroenke's application for approval of the move to Inglewood showed the Rams have gone the extra mile to "get their ducks in a row" as Johnson put it and the source speculated the application will be approved. I didn't think they could apply for relocation yet. Hey, I just report stuff I hear, I don't guarantee its accuracy.  Since we're on the topic, here's something hot and heavy: www.forbes.com/sites/anthonydimoro/2015/08/17/nfl-may-not-charge-relocation-fee-raiders-preparing-for-move/Raiders to San Antonio anybody? (Sorry, Dino, but Carson has always been a farce. Have fun renting from Kroenke.) |
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Aug 17, 2015 11:15:25 GMT -8
The Chargers should just move to St. Louis. Just makes too much sense. They want a new stadium on the water but don't want to pay for it and St. Louis is building a new stadium on the water and going to pay the full freight. St. Louis Chargers! St. Louis Chargers! St. Louis Chargers! They are paying for all of it? I thought the St Louis proposal called for team and NFL funding of $400-450 mil? I stand corrected. Or clarified actually. I meant that whomever moves into that stadium in St. Louis won't be footing the bill. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Aug 17, 2015 11:26:06 GMT -8
They are paying for all of it? I thought the St Louis proposal called for team and NFL funding of $400-450 mil? I stand corrected. Or clarified actually. I meant that whomever moves into that stadium in St. Louis won't be footing the bill. I can't see St Louis building a new stadium without guarantees of another NFL team available to play in it. But then again, stranger things have happened. |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 17, 2015 13:18:42 GMT -8
More interest minutia from that liar Policy. He's completely lost any ouce of credibility based on what he told the NFL that most Chargers fans would follow the team AND that people in L.A. would most like to see the Chargers out of the 3 teams. He's worse than Fibiani for telling the truth. |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 17, 2015 13:19:53 GMT -8
IMO, the poll is also meaningless. I spent the weekend in Anaheim at the O's/Angels series, and most of the people I talked to were hoping the Rams would be the team that moves back. They only asked those people who were wearing Chargers gear for their biased and unrealistic results. |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 17, 2015 13:29:44 GMT -8
Only the Spanoi could be dumb enough to think anyone would believe a stadium built on a former toxic waste dump in Carson could cost $1,700,000,000. Jeanie Zelasko (an Aztec BTW) and Marcus Johnson discussed the stadium situation on their AM980 show this morning. An NFL source told them Kroenke's application for approval of the move to Inglewood showed the Rams have gone the extra mile to "get their ducks in a row" as Johnson put it and the source speculated the application will be approved. Just one more indication Kroenke is hellbent on taking his team to Inglewood by hook or crook and that unless somebody with more clout than Spanos steps forward to stop him, it's going to be a done deal. Having so said, St. Louis Chargers has a nice ring to it. I don't see anyway that the Charges move to St. Louis. The only reason Spanos wants to move to LA is to increase the value of the team from $900 mill to around $3 Billion and making more $ on an annual basis w/ Suites/season tickets etc... Moving to St Louis wouldn't accomplish this. It's not about having a new(er) stadium. It's about his bottomline. If he doesn't get L.A., he'll be forced back to the negotiation tables w/ Faulconer and Co and will no doubt feel like a real schlump having to back track every minute of the way. His arrogance meter would have to be reset along w/ Fibiani's who will start a whole new spin doctor treatment saying they never intended to go blah blah blah blah. |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 17, 2015 13:30:28 GMT -8
I stand corrected. Or clarified actually. I meant that whomever moves into that stadium in St. Louis won't be footing the bill. I can't see St Louis building a new stadium without guarantees of another NFL team available to play in it. But then again, stranger things have happened. I would doubt it as well but Orlando and San Antonio built stadiums with no promises and they're still sitting mostly vacant |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 17, 2015 13:33:34 GMT -8
With the social culture today, you have to wonder if the NFL won't make a deal to help the Raiders move to a better situation. In exchange the Raiders will change their name and thug image. The Raiders rebranding won't go over in LA, so I still think it will be Rams/Chargers and Davis may end up in St. Louis eventually selling the team. I think it's more about business than social culture. The NFL will want to "reward" St. Louis for making a very "team-friendly" package for a new stadium. Just remains to be seen if that means forcing the Rams to stay (looking less likely) or "all-but-forcing" either the Chargers or Raiders (whoever doesn't become Kroenke's tenant) to move there. It would be a horrible business move for the NFL to turn their collective backs on a city that is putting a lot of public money into a new stadium effort. The NFL hasn't promised St Louis anything as of yet. Realistically, St Louis gets a team if they build the new stadium but not for at least a couple years. I don't believe Indianapolis, Houston or Cleveland got teams right away did they? |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 17, 2015 13:35:39 GMT -8
they may have been offered the #2 spot in Inglewood, but the reality is they will still be #3 of 3 in LA behind the Rams and Rayders and will have transformed themselves into persona non grata here with SD fans They can be the 18th team in LA for all I care. Where exactly did Roggin say that the Chargers were offered the #2 spot? I didn't hear it when I was listening. He just said in a perfect world they'd be #2 (for some unknown reason) or is it just wishful thinking on your part? Why report the facts when you can blow smoke up someone's ass? |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 17, 2015 13:42:40 GMT -8
twitter.com/allbrightnflBenjamin Allbright @allbrightnfl 5h5 hours ago Source indicates #Chargers to LA support has eroded among owners, likely not happening. #Rams considered "a virtual lock" to move though.
|
|
|
|
Post by fisherville on Aug 17, 2015 14:04:23 GMT -8
twitter.com/allbrightnflBenjamin Allbright @allbrightnfl 5h5 hours ago Source indicates #Chargers to LA support has eroded among owners, likely not happening. #Rams considered "a virtual lock" to move though. Thx |
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Aug 17, 2015 14:18:46 GMT -8
Only the Spanoi could be dumb enough to think anyone would believe a stadium built on a former toxic waste dump in Carson could cost $1,700,000,000. Jeanie Zelasko (an Aztec BTW) and Marcus Johnson discussed the stadium situation on their AM980 show this morning. An NFL source told them Kroenke's application for approval of the move to Inglewood showed the Rams have gone the extra mile to "get their ducks in a row" as Johnson put it and the source speculated the application will be approved. Just one more indication Kroenke is hellbent on taking his team to Inglewood by hook or crook and that unless somebody with more clout than Spanos steps forward to stop him, it's going to be a done deal. Having so said, St. Louis Chargers has a nice ring to it. I don't see anyway that the Charges move to St. Louis. The only reason Spanos wants to move to LA is to increase the value of the team from $900 mill to around $3 Billion and making more $ on an annual basis w/ Suites/season tickets etc... Moving to St Louis wouldn't accomplish this. It's not about having a new(er) stadium. It's about his bottomline. If he doesn't get L.A., he'll be forced back to the negotiation tables w/ Faulconer and Co and will no doubt feel like a real schlump having to back track every minute of the way. His arrogance meter would have to be reset along w/ Fibiani's who will start a whole new spin doctor treatment saying they never intended to go blah blah blah blah. You make a good point. On a related issue, the city of SD recently got a favorable ruling over the CSU board of trustees generally and SDSU specifically here: www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S199557.PDFFor those not wanting to bother reading it, the California Supreme court held among other things that the EIR San Diego State completed in 2007 in anticipation of expanding the campus to accommodate 10K-11,385 more students in the future has to be redone. The court also held that the CSU was incorrect in interpreting dictum in a prior case as alleviating its campuses like SDSU and CSU Monterey Bay from having to help mitigate additional traffic caused by campus expansion unless the legislature expressly passes a bill authorizes money for that purpose. I'm certainly no expert but I think this holding could considerably complicate SDSU's ability to purchase the Qualcomm site if the Chargers leave SD. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Aug 17, 2015 14:28:43 GMT -8
I don't see anyway that the Charges move to St. Louis. The only reason Spanos wants to move to LA is to increase the value of the team from $900 mill to around $3 Billion and making more $ on an annual basis w/ Suites/season tickets etc... Moving to St Louis wouldn't accomplish this. It's not about having a new(er) stadium. It's about his bottomline. If he doesn't get L.A., he'll be forced back to the negotiation tables w/ Faulconer and Co and will no doubt feel like a real schlump having to back track every minute of the way. His arrogance meter would have to be reset along w/ Fibiani's who will start a whole new spin doctor treatment saying they never intended to go blah blah blah blah. You make a good point. On a related issue, the city of SD recently got a favorable ruling over the CSU board of trustees generally and SDSU specifically here: www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S199557.PDFFor those not wanting to bother reading it, the California Supreme court held among other things that the EIR San Diego State completed in 2007 in anticipation of expanding the campus to accommodate 10K-11,385 more students in the future has to be redone. The court also held that the CSU was incorrect in interpreting dictum in a prior case as alleviating its campuses like SDSU and CSU Monterey Bay from having to help mitigate additional traffic caused by campus expansion unless the legislature expressly passes a bill authorizes money for that purpose. I'm certainly no expert but I think this holding could considerably complicate SDSU's ability to purchase the Qualcomm site if the Chargers leave SD. This is California. Planting a tree might have a lawsuit associated with it. |
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Aug 17, 2015 14:42:57 GMT -8
I can't see St Louis building a new stadium without guarantees of another NFL team available to play in it. But then again, stranger things have happened. I would doubt it as well but Orlando and San Antonio built stadiums with no promises and they're still sitting mostly vacant IIRC, Orlando and Tampa are only like and hour and a half apart so I can't see why any NFL franchise would want to move to Orlando. As to San Antonio, although Jerry Jones reportedly highly opposes a team there, it looks like the guy has been mellowing a bit recently and no longer trying to throw his weight around as much. So who knows, maybe the Raiders or Chargers might actually move there. |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 17, 2015 15:25:25 GMT -8
I don't see anyway that the Charges move to St. Louis. The only reason Spanos wants to move to LA is to increase the value of the team from $900 mill to around $3 Billion and making more $ on an annual basis w/ Suites/season tickets etc... Moving to St Louis wouldn't accomplish this. It's not about having a new(er) stadium. It's about his bottomline. If he doesn't get L.A., he'll be forced back to the negotiation tables w/ Faulconer and Co and will no doubt feel like a real schlump having to back track every minute of the way. His arrogance meter would have to be reset along w/ Fibiani's who will start a whole new spin doctor treatment saying they never intended to go blah blah blah blah. You make a good point. On a related issue, the city of SD recently got a favorable ruling over the CSU board of trustees generally and SDSU specifically here: www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S199557.PDFFor those not wanting to bother reading it, the California Supreme court held among other things that the EIR San Diego State completed in 2007 in anticipation of expanding the campus to accommodate 10K-11,385 more students in the future has to be redone. The court also held that the CSU was incorrect in interpreting dictum in a prior case as alleviating its campuses like SDSU and CSU Monterey Bay from having to help mitigate additional traffic caused by campus expansion unless the legislature expressly passes a bill authorizes money for that purpose. I'm certainly no expert but I think this holding could considerably complicate SDSU's ability to purchase the Qualcomm site if the Chargers leave SD. This reminds me of when Dr. Webs & Co bought some land in Adobe Falls across the fwy expecting that they could build there without any problems. They grossly underestimated the "pull" and power that people in Del Cerro have. Some of this went on while we (AWF) were in negotiations with the school about the mascot and one of the V.P.s asked me how they could get that land to work. I told her to build a bridge or tunnel over/under the 8 and have all traffic go back through the campus or Alvarado Rd. No way the people were going to allow extra traffic on Del Cerro Blvd feeding onto College. But, I digress.... |
|
