|
Post by Old School on Jun 7, 2017 11:36:49 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Jun 7, 2017 11:42:37 GMT -8
Only if we put our team on the road the first 2 months of the season.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jun 7, 2017 11:48:30 GMT -8
Only if we put our team on the road the first 2 months of the season. Pads are full of shiete.
|
|
|
Post by ignoranus on Jun 7, 2017 11:50:54 GMT -8
I think that the Padres should schedule their last two months as road games; in order to accommodate the Aztecs.
|
|
|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Jun 7, 2017 12:05:30 GMT -8
I think that the Padres should schedule their last two months as road games; in order to accommodate the Aztecs. Good idea, they will probably lose most of those games to the delight of the home team's fans!
|
|
|
Post by ignoranus on Jun 7, 2017 12:22:59 GMT -8
Just what I've been thinkin'
The Padres will be so far out of contention in the last two months that attendance will be in a very steep decline and the team will lose even more $$$$$$$$ by playing @ home. This would front end load the majority of their revenue and stave off huge late season $$$$$$$ losses.
Perhaps some teams will pay the Padres a bonus for those late season home games in order to "pad" their records and please their fans. Could be a potential windfall for both teams...
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Jun 7, 2017 12:25:35 GMT -8
Pads could be pretty good by 2020.
|
|
|
Post by ignoranus on Jun 7, 2017 12:29:01 GMT -8
And the Aztecs might have a stadium by then IF they follow my proposal to increase their revenue.
|
|
|
Post by Old School on Jun 7, 2017 12:36:18 GMT -8
If the Pads played football...they could probably fill Petco a little bit more? Oldie Out
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Jun 7, 2017 14:29:38 GMT -8
SuckerCity is dead and will officially be so on June 19th if not sooner. After that date SDSU and The City will resume talks on a lease extension taking SDSU through at least 2020 as lead tenant.
and if that wasn't going to happen there are lots of creative ways to handle scheduling for 2020...
Move the Sac State game back in the schedule and have that be the "October Opener" and Fireworks show at PETCO. Then host the UCLA game as a "home" game in the new Rams stadium. My guess is that we could sell it out. We could even give all season ticket purchasers a free parking and food voucher for that game to say thank you for sticking with us. Then they could open with two on the road and then another two roadies after the UCLA game. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be doable for a year or two.
|
|
|
Post by ab on Jun 7, 2017 14:40:06 GMT -8
"Fireball" Thompson ---- HUH? :rotflmao :rotflmao :rotflmao
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jun 7, 2017 14:45:52 GMT -8
Carl Starrett appears to have attended a certain Catholic university down Mission Valley to get his B.A. and JD degrees.
The disdain for SDSU so many of that kind of person have knows no bounds.
|
|
|
Post by goaztecs on Jun 7, 2017 14:57:15 GMT -8
Won't there be a weekend or two in September when the padres are on the road ?
|
|
|
Post by goaztecs on Jun 7, 2017 15:05:21 GMT -8
It also wouldn't surprise me if the Q is still available in 2020
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Jun 7, 2017 15:11:01 GMT -8
SuckerCity is dead and will officially be so on June 19th if not sooner. After that date SDSU and The City will resume talks on a lease extension taking SDSU through at least 2020 as lead tenant. and if that wasn't going to happen there are lots of creative ways to handle scheduling for 2020... Move the Sac State game back in the schedule and have that be the "October Opener" and Fireworks show at PETCO. Then host the UCLA game as a "home" game in the new Rams stadium. My guess is that we could sell it out. We could even give all season ticket purchasers a free parking and food voucher for that game to say thank you for sticking with us. Then they could open with two on the road and then another two roadies after the UCLA game. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be doable for a year or two. Disagree. That puts a horrible strain on a football team and is a terrible option for even 1 year. Doing it more than a year would be a joke. Yea, it's 'doable' but at what cost to your football program? Also, keep in mind the WS doesn't even start until late October & runs into November, so we most likely couldn't schedule anything in SD prior to at least the 2nd weekend of November. Even if you get the last 4 games at home you may have cost your team the conference championship before you even get there. You could book the "October Opener" but it'd be conditional upon the Padres season being over in October, and if it's not you'd most likely would need to cancel and/or move any and all "conditional" games to the opposition's field. Or here we come Grossmont. Unless the Pads are willing to operate in 2020 in the same manner as 2019, which they've said is an issue for more than 1 year, the new stadium needs to be resolved very soon or we need to strong arm the city into justify extending the lease. Bottom line, if we care about our football program we're using Petco for just 1 year & ideally we're breaking ground somewhere by January, 2019. PS. Do you really think the Rams, with another tenant already, would affordably rent their stadium to another tenant? We'd basically be giving up all the financial benefits of having a home & home with UCLA in the first place. Fun for the fans, but not something we can afford. Switching years would make more sense, assuming they go for it. I'd rather see us move games to Carson than Inglewood.
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Jun 7, 2017 17:22:57 GMT -8
SuckerCity is dead and will officially be so on June 19th if not sooner. After that date SDSU and The City will resume talks on a lease extension taking SDSU through at least 2020 as lead tenant. and if that wasn't going to happen there are lots of creative ways to handle scheduling for 2020... Move the Sac State game back in the schedule and have that be the "October Opener" and Fireworks show at PETCO. Then host the UCLA game as a "home" game in the new Rams stadium. My guess is that we could sell it out. We could even give all season ticket purchasers a free parking and food voucher for that game to say thank you for sticking with us. Then they could open with two on the road and then another two roadies after the UCLA game. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be doable for a year or two. Disagree. That puts a horrible strain on a football team and is a terrible option for even 1 year. Doing it more than a year would be a joke. Yea, it's 'doable' but at what cost to your football program? Also, keep in mind the WS doesn't even start until late October & runs into November, so we most likely couldn't schedule anything in SD prior to at least the 2nd weekend of November. Even if you get the last 4 games at home you may have cost your team the conference championship before you even get there. You could book the "October Opener" but it'd be conditional upon the Padres season being over in October, and if it's not you'd most likely would need to cancel and/or move any and all "conditional" games to the opposition's field. Or here we come Grossmont. Unless the Pads are willing to operate in 2020 in the same manner as 2019, which they've said is an issue for more than 1 year, the new stadium needs to be resolved very soon or we need to strong arm the city into justify extending the lease. Bottom line, if we care about our football program we're using Petco for just 1 year & ideally we're breaking ground somewhere by January, 2019. PS. Do you really think the Rams, with another tenant already, would affordably rent their stadium to another tenant? We'd basically be giving up all the financial benefits of having a home & home with UCLA in the first place. Fun for the fans, but not something we can afford. Switching years would make more sense, assuming they go for it. I'd rather see us move games to Carson than Inglewood. Is it a first option, no... do I think it will be needed, no... my point was that there are options if needed. Yes I do think that the Rams would let us rent it for one Saturday for an affordable price and I am sure that the financial benefit would be greater than a home game at Qualcomm. But even if that is not the case, my point is that there are likely options if we just look for them.
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Jun 7, 2017 17:51:34 GMT -8
Nobody thinks playing at Petco is a good idea. Rather, it is an option if we need it. Why do people keep commenting on this?
|
|
|
Post by goaztecs on Jun 7, 2017 20:33:17 GMT -8
Padres are god awful. No way they make the playoffs anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by ab on Jun 8, 2017 8:28:34 GMT -8
SuckerCity is dead and will officially be so on June 19th if not sooner. After that date SDSU and The City will resume talks on a lease extension taking SDSU through at least 2020 as lead tenant. and if that wasn't going to happen there are lots of creative ways to handle scheduling for 2020... Move the Sac State game back in the schedule and have that be the "October Opener" and Fireworks show at PETCO. Then host the UCLA game as a "home" game in the new Rams stadium. My guess is that we could sell it out. We could even give all season ticket purchasers a free parking and food voucher for that game to say thank you for sticking with us. Then they could open with two on the road and then another two roadies after the UCLA game. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be doable for a year or two. Disagree. That puts a horrible strain on a football team and is a terrible option for even 1 year. Doing it more than a year would be a joke. Yea, it's 'doable' but at what cost to your football program? Also, keep in mind the WS doesn't even start until late October & runs into November, so we most likely couldn't schedule anything in SD prior to at least the 2nd weekend of November. Even if you get the last 4 games at home you may have cost your team the conference championship before you even get there. You could book the "October Opener" but it'd be conditional upon the Padres season being over in October, and if it's not you'd most likely would need to cancel and/or move any and all "conditional" games to the opposition's field. Or here we come Grossmont. Unless the Pads are willing to operate in 2020 in the same manner as 2019, which they've said is an issue for more than 1 year, the new stadium needs to be resolved very soon or we need to strong arm the city into justify extending the lease. Bottom line, if we care about our football program we're using Petco for just 1 year & ideally we're breaking ground somewhere by January, 2019. PS. Do you really think the Rams, with another tenant already, would affordably rent their stadium to another tenant? We'd basically be giving up all the financial benefits of having a home & home with UCLA in the first place. Fun for the fans, but not something we can afford. Switching years would make more sense, assuming they go for it. I'd rather see us move games to Carson than Inglewood. Pads and WS? The only way Kroenke opens up his stadium to a 3rd tenant is if they had artificial turf. I don't expect that's the case though.
|
|
|
Post by namssa on Jun 8, 2017 8:29:18 GMT -8
The playoffs really don't start until October. They will know the Padres scheduled for September well ahead of time. I assume they could play a late August home game and another two or three home games in September when the Padres are on the road. They could then go on the road for 4-5 weeks in October (including a bye or two in there) and then finish off in November and December. Not great but not bad either.
|
|