|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Nov 25, 2015 9:05:03 GMT -8
www.kpbs.org/news/2015/nov/25/could-chargers-departure-mean-better-stadium-aztec/Fantastic Article!!! "For many San Diego sports fans, the No. 1 question on their minds is whether the Chargers stay or go to Los Angeles. But the Aztecs aren’t going anywhere. If the Chargers abandon San Diego, you might say that’s bad news for SDSU. But you might also say it’s a chance to finally get a right-sized collegiate stadium for the Aztecs."“I think the stadium ultimately gets knocked down," said Block, a San Diego Democrat. "I don’t think anybody wants it for anything, and frankly it’s too big for San Diego State. And San Diego State as the sole tenant couldn’t make a go of it anyway. “So instead of the stadium, you put in the classrooms and housing and everything else I’ve mentioned. In a part of this huge parking lot you could build a much smaller stadium. Hopefully you’d bring in a major league soccer team. San Diego would be a great market for major league soccer, and it would be a public-private venture.” Take special note of this comment... "Neither MLS nor the San Diego State athletic department would not comment for this story."Its coming... Go Aztecs!
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Nov 25, 2015 9:18:53 GMT -8
Please let that happen.
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Nov 25, 2015 9:26:24 GMT -8
"The San Diego State University Aztecs football team hasn’t played on campus since 1966. And there’s nothing left of the old Aztec Bowl but the decaying stone terraces behind Viejas arena that once held the bleacher seats.
Longtime Aztec football fan Tom Ables sits there, on the east side of the old stadium and points to the opposing seats, which now enclose a parking lot.
“Oh it was a great place. It was fun,” Ables said. “And you can see what a great spectator stadium it was because the first seats, you had elevation. You weren’t down on the ground. And you were just a few feet from the sidelines. You were really in the game here.”As someone who was SO opposed to gutting Aztec Bowl for a basketball arena, when there were other options, including remaining at the Sports Arena, this part of the article is all that matters. The shortsightedness of the then administration is still a craw in my butt. Where I live, even Weber State has an on-campus stadium, so as far as I'm concerned who/whatever is willing to fight and pay for an off-campus stadium on city property, (in other words, business as usual), knock your self's out. (Yawn).
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Nov 25, 2015 9:51:57 GMT -8
"The San Diego State University Aztecs football team hasn’t played on campus since 1966. And there’s nothing left of the old Aztec Bowl but the decaying stone terraces behind Viejas arena that once held the bleacher seats.
Longtime Aztec football fan Tom Ables sits there, on the east side of the old stadium and points to the opposing seats, which now enclose a parking lot.
“Oh it was a great place. It was fun,” Ables said. “And you can see what a great spectator stadium it was because the first seats, you had elevation. You weren’t down on the ground. And you were just a few feet from the sidelines. You were really in the game here.”As someone who was SO opposed to gutting Aztec Bowl for a basketball arena, when there were other options, including remaining at the Sports Arena, this part of the article is all that matters. The shortsightedness of the then administration is still a craw in my butt. Where I live, even Weber State has an on-campus stadium, so as far as I'm concerned who/whatever is willing to fight and pay for an off-campus stadium on city property, (in other words, business as usual), knock your self's out. (Yawn). Go Chargers!!! :rotflmao
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Nov 25, 2015 10:38:45 GMT -8
"The San Diego State University Aztecs football team hasn’t played on campus since 1966. And there’s nothing left of the old Aztec Bowl but the decaying stone terraces behind Viejas arena that once held the bleacher seats.
Longtime Aztec football fan Tom Ables sits there, on the east side of the old stadium and points to the opposing seats, which now enclose a parking lot.
“Oh it was a great place. It was fun,” Ables said. “And you can see what a great spectator stadium it was because the first seats, you had elevation. You weren’t down on the ground. And you were just a few feet from the sidelines. You were really in the game here.”As someone who was SO opposed to gutting Aztec Bowl for a basketball arena, when there were other options, including remaining at the Sports Arena, this part of the article is all that matters. The shortsightedness of the then administration is still a craw in my butt. Where I live, even Weber State has an on-campus stadium, so as far as I'm concerned who/whatever is willing to fight and pay for an off-campus stadium on city property, (in other words, business as usual), knock your self's out. (Yawn). Go Chargers!!! :rotflmao Soon, and far.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Nov 25, 2015 11:03:58 GMT -8
www.kpbs.org/news/2015/nov/25/could-chargers-departure-mean-better-stadium-aztec/Fantastic Article!!! "For many San Diego sports fans, the No. 1 question on their minds is whether the Chargers stay or go to Los Angeles. But the Aztecs aren’t going anywhere. If the Chargers abandon San Diego, you might say that’s bad news for SDSU. But you might also say it’s a chance to finally get a right-sized collegiate stadium for the Aztecs."“I think the stadium ultimately gets knocked down," said Block, a San Diego Democrat. "I don’t think anybody wants it for anything, and frankly it’s too big for San Diego State. And San Diego State as the sole tenant couldn’t make a go of it anyway. “So instead of the stadium, you put in the classrooms and housing and everything else I’ve mentioned. In a part of this huge parking lot you could build a much smaller stadium. Hopefully you’d bring in a major league soccer team. San Diego would be a great market for major league soccer, and it would be a public-private venture.” Take special note of this comment... "Neither MLS nor the San Diego State athletic department would not comment for this story."Its coming... Go Aztecs! I would love to see this, but the words, "public-private venture", concern me for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by aztec92 on Nov 25, 2015 11:13:10 GMT -8
www.kpbs.org/news/2015/nov/25/could-chargers-departure-mean-better-stadium-aztec/Fantastic Article!!! "For many San Diego sports fans, the No. 1 question on their minds is whether the Chargers stay or go to Los Angeles. But the Aztecs aren’t going anywhere. If the Chargers abandon San Diego, you might say that’s bad news for SDSU. But you might also say it’s a chance to finally get a right-sized collegiate stadium for the Aztecs."“I think the stadium ultimately gets knocked down," said Block, a San Diego Democrat. "I don’t think anybody wants it for anything, and frankly it’s too big for San Diego State. And San Diego State as the sole tenant couldn’t make a go of it anyway. “So instead of the stadium, you put in the classrooms and housing and everything else I’ve mentioned. In a part of this huge parking lot you could build a much smaller stadium. Hopefully you’d bring in a major league soccer team. San Diego would be a great market for major league soccer, and it would be a public-private venture.” Take special note of this comment... "Neither MLS nor the San Diego State athletic department would not comment for this story."Its coming... Go Aztecs! I would love to see this, but the words, "public-private venture", concern me for some reason. It would be better if the MLS just paid rent and had no ownership. But maybe that's why the MLS didn't want to share the stadium with U of Minnesota.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 25, 2015 11:29:03 GMT -8
I'm sure some will dispute this, but I really think it is important for the university to announce, publicly and forcefully, that there is no way in hell that Aztec football will ever play in any stadium built downtown. We have to state a clear goal and begin working diligently to achieve that goal. First would be to work hard to convince the community that the current stadium is no more a Chargers venue than it is an Aztec one. That SDSU, as the linked article states, is going nowhere.
It would be helpful for the school to develop detailed plans, complete with color renderings and models, of a West Campus development including a stadium seating 40,000 to 45,000. These renderings and models should be on display far and wide to convince San Diegans that we mean business. Right now, most of those people are clueless with respect to the exciting possibilities that a West Campus would entail.
If we don't stake our claim and make clear that we intend to achieve our goals, we will have no influence on what happens.
AzWm
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Nov 25, 2015 11:42:34 GMT -8
I'm sure some will dispute this, but I really think it is important for the university to announce, publicly and forcefully, that there is no way in hell that Aztec football will ever play in any stadium built downtown. We have to state a clear goal and begin working diligently to achieve that goal. First would be to work hard to convince the community that the current stadium is no more a Chargers venue than it is an Aztec one. That SDSU, as the linked article states, is going nowhere. It would be helpful for the school to develop detailed plans, complete with color renderings and models, of a West Campus development including a stadium seating 40,000 to 45,000. These renderings and models should be on display far and wide to convince San Diegans that we mean business. Right now, most of those people are clueless with respect to the exciting possibilities that a West Campus would entail. If we don't stake our claim and make clear that we intend to achieve our goals, we will have no influence on what happens. AzWm Why would you do any of this before the chargers situation is resolved? Why burn bridges, whether with the Chargers, the Padres or the city as a whole?
You explore avenues, have options & then pounce when the timing is right. All the background digging has been done. Options are in place.
Now you wait until the chargers situation is resolved & go from there. If they stay & go DT, then maybe you have to play there a year or two until MV can been changed & a stadium built there. If chargers stay in MV, then you're options change. If they leave, then you have your MV (or other) options. Why do anything beforehand. It doesn't change where we're playing next year or the year after. The only thing it does is resolve someone's curiosity, which isn't their job.
They're handling the situation perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by sleepy on Nov 25, 2015 11:48:04 GMT -8
Marty Block For President of the United States!
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Nov 25, 2015 12:00:36 GMT -8
www.kpbs.org/news/2015/nov/25/could-chargers-departure-mean-better-stadium-aztec/Fantastic Article!!! "For many San Diego sports fans, the No. 1 question on their minds is whether the Chargers stay or go to Los Angeles. But the Aztecs aren’t going anywhere. If the Chargers abandon San Diego, you might say that’s bad news for SDSU. But you might also say it’s a chance to finally get a right-sized collegiate stadium for the Aztecs."“I think the stadium ultimately gets knocked down," said Block, a San Diego Democrat. "I don’t think anybody wants it for anything, and frankly it’s too big for San Diego State. And San Diego State as the sole tenant couldn’t make a go of it anyway. “So instead of the stadium, you put in the classrooms and housing and everything else I’ve mentioned. In a part of this huge parking lot you could build a much smaller stadium. Hopefully you’d bring in a major league soccer team. San Diego would be a great market for major league soccer, and it would be a public-private venture.” Take special note of this comment... "Neither MLS nor the San Diego State athletic department would not comment for this story."Its coming... Go Aztecs! I would love to see this, but the words, "public-private venture", concern me for some reason. I certainly would like to see if SDSU could build a stadium on their own but if that is not possible then I am all for a partnership with MLS. So long as it is a true partnership; unlike what we currently have with the city/Chargers. It seems to have worked out for the LA Galaxy/AEG/CSU Dominguez Hills with the Home Depot/StubHub Center.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Nov 25, 2015 12:05:50 GMT -8
I would love to see this, but the words, "public-private venture", concern me for some reason. It would be better if the MLS just paid rent and had no ownership. But maybe that's why the MLS didn't want to share the stadium with U of Minnesota. Of course everyone wants to control their own stadium; they can make more money. I am sure it is a whole lot easier to get a stadium built in Minnesota than it is in San Diego, CA. San Diego is a market that MLS wants to get into. Depending on the investors they may be willing to form more of a true partnership with SDSU via a "public-private venture." Particularly since this may be one of their best & only opportunities to get into the San Diego market.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 25, 2015 12:07:24 GMT -8
I'm sure some will dispute this, but I really think it is important for the university to announce, publicly and forcefully, that there is no way in hell that Aztec football will ever play in any stadium built downtown. We have to state a clear goal and begin working diligently to achieve that goal. First would be to work hard to convince the community that the current stadium is no more a Chargers venue than it is an Aztec one. That SDSU, as the linked article states, is going nowhere. It would be helpful for the school to develop detailed plans, complete with color renderings and models, of a West Campus development including a stadium seating 40,000 to 45,000. These renderings and models should be on display far and wide to convince San Diegans that we mean business. Right now, most of those people are clueless with respect to the exciting possibilities that a West Campus would entail. If we don't stake our claim and make clear that we intend to achieve our goals, we will have no influence on what happens. AzWm Why would you do any of this before the chargers situation is resolved? Why burn bridges, whether with the Chargers, the Padres or the city as a whole?
You explore avenues, have options & then pounce when the timing is right. All the background digging has been done. Options are in place.
Now you wait until the chargers situation is resolved & go from there. If they stay & go DT, then maybe you have to play there a year or two until MV can been changed & a stadium built there. If chargers stay in MV, then you're options change. If they leave, then you have your MV (or other) options. Why do anything beforehand. It doesn't change where we're playing next year or the year after. The only thing it does is resolve someone's curiosity, which isn't their job.
They're handling the situation perfectly.
I reject utterly your contention that we should avoid "burning bridges." What "bridges" would we burn by announcing the start of a campaign to take over the Mission Valley site and turn it into a much needed expansion of San Diego State University? Whose feelings are you afraid we will hurt? Surely not those of the Chargers, a group that cares nothing whatsoever for SDSU. We are probably at best a minor annoyance to the Spanoses. The feelings of the city council or the mayor? Please! State politicians? Likewise. We need to convince the community that there is a much, much more important use for the Q site than a new NFL stadium for a rich family that deserves not one cent of public money. Only if the public is aware that the Chargers are not the only, or even the most important, consideration in the stadium dispute will SDSU have a chance to make the West Campus a reality. Keeping our mouths shut helps only those who want to cater to the Spanos family. If it were up to me, I would develop the renderings of a proposes campus expansion I mentioned in my previous post and put them in a full page ad in the UT; As well, as I would create a website devoted to a detailed presentations of the proposal. Proponents of the proposed project could make public presentations to local civic groups. I suspect that there are plenty of influential SDSU grads hereabouts who would be happy to spread the word. This has to be an all-out campaign. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by Montezumas Revenge 88 on Nov 25, 2015 12:16:36 GMT -8
Marty Block For President of the United States! I highly doubt that his foreign policy would be on par but for Mayor possibly even Governor, sure why not!
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Nov 25, 2015 12:51:08 GMT -8
I reject utterly your contention that we should avoid "burning bridges." What "bridges" would we burn by announcing the start of a campaign to take over the Mission Valley site and turn it into a much needed expansion of San Diego State University? Whose feelings are you afraid we will hurt? Surely not those of the Chargers, a group that cares nothing whatsoever for SDSU. We are probably at best a minor annoyance to the Spanoses. The feelings of the city council or the mayor? Please! State politicians? Likewise. We need to convince the community that there is a much, much more important use for the Q site than a new NFL stadium for a rich family that deserves not one cent of public money. Only if the public is aware that the Chargers are not the only, or even the most important, consideration in the stadium dispute will SDSU have a chance to make the West Campus a reality. Keeping our mouths shut helps only those who want to cater to the Spanos family. If it were up to me, I would develop the renderings of a proposes campus expansion I mentioned in my previous post and put them in a full page ad in the UT; As well, as I would create a website devoted to a detailed presentations of the proposal. Proponents of the proposed project could make public presentations to local civic groups. I suspect that there are plenty of influential SDSU grads hereabouts who would be happy to spread the word. This has to be an all-out campaign. AzWm I don't think your competing positions are radically different. The administration has already stated very emphatically that downtown is absolutely not an option for the Aztecs (they just aren't hammering that point lately). And 3rd parties are already ramping up their own stories about alternate uses to the Q site. I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone affiliated with the university is contributing behind the scenes to those stories. If these stories WEREN'T getting out there right now, perhaps I'd stand with you looking for more direct statements by the university... but for now so as long as others are making the case for us... better to just stand back and let that percolate.
|
|
|
Post by aztecfan1 on Nov 25, 2015 13:52:30 GMT -8
I remind you all of the conversation several of us had at penn state with pres. Hirshman. There is a stadium plan at its execution depends on the Chargers . He obviously could not tell us details but said strong negotiating position depends on not divulging much now. I took him as very sincere with us as we stood there in the parking lot on sept 26! He gave us real hope that eventually the new stadium will happen.
|
|
|
Post by aztecfan1 on Nov 25, 2015 13:58:50 GMT -8
I reject utterly your contention that we should avoid "burning bridges." What "bridges" would we burn by announcing the start of a campaign to take over the Mission Valley site and turn it into a much needed expansion of San Diego State University? Whose feelings are you afraid we will hurt? Surely not those of the Chargers, a group that cares nothing whatsoever for SDSU. We are probably at best a minor annoyance to the Spanoses. The feelings of the city council or the mayor? Please! State politicians? Likewise. We need to convince the community that there is a much, much more important use for the Q site than a new NFL stadium for a rich family that deserves not one cent of public money. Only if the public is aware that the Chargers are not the only, or even the most important, consideration in the stadium dispute will SDSU have a chance to make the West Campus a reality. Keeping our mouths shut helps only those who want to cater to the Spanos family. If it were up to me, I would develop the renderings of a proposes campus expansion I mentioned in my previous post and put them in a full page ad in the UT; As well, as I would create a website devoted to a detailed presentations of the proposal. Proponents of the proposed project could make public presentations to local civic groups. I suspect that there are plenty of influential SDSU grads hereabouts who would be happy to spread the word. This has to be an all-out campaign. AzWm I don't think your competing positions are radically different. The administration has already stated very emphatically that downtown is absolutely not an option for the Aztecs (they just aren't hammering that point lately). And 3rd parties are already ramping up their own stories about alternate uses to the Q site. I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone affiliated with the university is contributing behind the scenes to those stories. If these stories WEREN'T getting out there right now, perhaps I'd stand with you looking for more direct statements by the university... but for now so as long as others are making the case for us... better to just stand back and let that percolate. My sense of public relations is that you make a big deal of this only when you can answer all the questions and not until. I believe SDSU leaders feel the same. Also remember that we have many friends in high places-- mayor Falconer and Supervisor Ron Roberts for example
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 25, 2015 14:26:31 GMT -8
I don't think your competing positions are radically different. The administration has already stated very emphatically that downtown is absolutely not an option for the Aztecs (they just aren't hammering that point lately). And 3rd parties are already ramping up their own stories about alternate uses to the Q site. I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone affiliated with the university is contributing behind the scenes to those stories. If these stories WEREN'T getting out there right now, perhaps I'd stand with you looking for more direct statements by the university... but for now so as long as others are making the case for us... better to just stand back and let that percolate. My sense of public relations is that you make a big deal of this only when you can answer all the questions and not until. I believe SDSU leaders feel the same. Also remember that we have many friends in high places-- mayor Falconer and Supervisor Ron Roberts for example All right, fine. Let's get the questions answered, and pronto. My guess is that the hour is getting late. The issue (i.e., what to do with the Q site) could swing either way. That being the case, we need to build as much support as possible for the campus expansion plan. Remember, this plan goes way, way beyond where the Aztecs are going to play football. It's a once in a gazillion years opportunity which will not come again if something else is done with the Mission Valley site. Those of use who value SDSU as a school surely see that expanding the campus is a golden opportunity. I realize that in cases such as this, a lot of behind the scenes negotiating is taking place. I just want our side represented effectively in those negotiations. I don't want to have to hope that our case is being made. I want us to build as much public support as possible. As I see it, there is much to be gained if the principal decision makers understand that there is strong support in the community not to see this merely as a question of whether the Chargers get their wish. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by aztecfanatico on Nov 25, 2015 15:40:58 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Nov 25, 2015 15:47:06 GMT -8
On overall sentiment I totally agree AzWm. But I don't think it's an accident that all of a sudden we're starting to see articles in the SDUT, this one on KPBS, etc. all "sort of" presenting an unbiased position... while nonetheless pretty much totally directing the reader to support SDSU taking over the MV site when the Chargers leave. It looks a bit like a shadow PR campaign, that is being run pretty well, I might add. If my guess is right, look for a "feature" story on a local 6pm / 11pm news station in the next couple weeks.
|
|