|
Post by jdredd on Feb 2, 2015 2:09:45 GMT -5
So another Superbowl has come and gone, and next year will be #50. But there was one small victory for sanity this year. My daughter, who always previously went to Superbowl parties, boycotted the Superbowl this year because of football's physical injury problems. Really, what is professional football except young black guys bashing each others heads in for the entertainment of old white farts?
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Feb 20, 2015 16:05:07 GMT -5
So the city of Carson is having a footballgasm over the prospect of being the hometown of both the Chargers and the Raiders. I wouldn't want to be them when the NFL pulls the rug out from under them. But heck, their new stadium will be privately financed while San Diego's will require taxpayer money. Would it pay for itself in the end? Maybe, but only maybe. I would love to have time to follow all the dirty dealings going on between cities and the NFL, but I don't.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Feb 21, 2015 21:39:38 GMT -5
www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2015/02/20/city-of-carson-leadership-unequivocally-supports-stadium-project-to-lure-nfls-san-diego-chargers-and-oakland-raiders/23754099/"Carson civic leaders showed up en masse for some cameras and reporters including a large assortment of union workers, who seemed to be split among Raiders and Chargers allegiance. Despite not being able to promise a commitment from either team that it is definitely moving to Carson, the city supporters spoke in spirited terms about their excitement for the proposal that includes a 168-acre site and a sleek stadium seating 68,000 and costing $1.7 billion. Goldman Sachs executive Tim Romer was on hand to guarantee to the roughly 92,000 citizens of Carson, located south of Los Angeles near the intersection of the 405 and 110 freeways, that no taxpayer money or city general funds would be used in the stadium construction. Romer was also involved in the financing of the San Francisco 49ers' Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara. "The financing here is viable and doable," Romer said. "The financing will follow the model of Levi's (Stadium). The financing, which we will provide, will all come from revenues generated by the stadium." So, is Carson just a pawn in the NFL's evil Game of Stadiums? Is Goldman Sacks in on the scam or also a dupe? This is American Culture at its modern best, the "Art of the Deal" as Trump called it.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 18, 2015 14:23:34 GMT -5
www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-aeg-letter-carson-nfl-stadium-20150318-story.html"The process to approve an NFL stadium in Carson is “deeply flawed” and “an open invitation to litigation,” AEG Vice Chairman Ted Fikre warned Carson Mayor Jim Dear in a letter sent earlier this week. In the six-page letter obtained by The Times, Fikre called the proposed home for the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders “potentially exciting” but also “of great concern to us” because of the ballot initiative being used to move forward with the project. The tactic, also used by a rival stadium concept in Inglewood, bypasses lengthy environmental review." "The safety of the proposed stadium in Inglewood has also been the topic of two reports by AEG, which owns the 27,000-seat StubHub Center and the L.A. Galaxy in Carson. The sports conglomerate earlier this month abandoned longstanding plans for a downtown NFL stadium after investing five years and more than $50 million in the effort." God, I love this stuff. It's like watching the Gambinos vs the Gottis (Or the Lannisters vs. the Martells).
|
|
|
Post by Turk on Mar 20, 2015 23:14:56 GMT -5
So the city of Carson is having a footballgasm over the prospect of being the hometown of both the Chargers and the Raiders. I wouldn't want to be them when the NFL pulls the rug out from under them. But heck, their new stadium will be privately financed while San Diego's will require taxpayer money. Would it pay for itself in the end? Maybe, but only maybe. I would love to have time to follow all the dirty dealings going on between cities and the NFL, but I don't. I don't care so much for the Chargers but I do care about my Aztecs. SDSU has 7 years renaming on their lease to play at the Q. So even if the Chargers jump ship the city is still on the hook for the Q. And there is not a mayor on the horizon that would dare to take football away from SDSU. Kiss of death. It would not be as convenient for me but a downtown stadium makes logical sense.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 20, 2015 23:52:04 GMT -5
So the city of Carson is having a footballgasm over the prospect of being the hometown of both the Chargers and the Raiders. I wouldn't want to be them when the NFL pulls the rug out from under them. But heck, their new stadium will be privately financed while San Diego's will require taxpayer money. Would it pay for itself in the end? Maybe, but only maybe. I would love to have time to follow all the dirty dealings going on between cities and the NFL, but I don't. I don't care so much for the Chargers but I do care about my Aztecs. SDSU has 7 years renaming on their lease to play at the Q. So even if the Chargers jump ship the city is still on the hook for the Q. And there is not a mayor on the horizon that would dare to take football away from SDSU. Kiss of death. It would not be as convenient for me but a downtown stadium makes logical sense. Isn't there one scenario where SDSU takes over the Q? Sounds like a plan to me. And I hope they give it a better name. But another stadium downtown doesn't make a lot of sense to me considering the traffic problems. Objectively, I think South Bay would be a much better solution. I used to pray the Chargers would leave SD but I'm mellowing with age.
|
|
|
Post by Turk on Mar 21, 2015 10:52:01 GMT -5
Traffic is an issue. I have a friend that lives a block from Petco, he says traffic rarely is an issue. Since the Chargers only play 8 home games and the Aztecs another 6 it is unlikely 14 days per year would create much of a problem and those 14 days are on weekends.
The Q has lots of problems. One it is falling apart. A few years ago a small nk of concrete fell hitting me on the head drawing blood from my scalp and I have a sky box for Aztec football. A part from the decay there a many contamination issues with the ground. The city is delinquent 10 years on paying water fees. I could list dozens of other reason why it would be difficult for SDSU to move forward. SDSU would love to have the site extending campus, housing and remodeling the stadium but thanks to Jerry Brown SDSU is broke. I don’t mean that as a commentary on Brown but Brown has done everything in his power to destroy higher education. As a donor to SDSU that is a factual statement. At a minimum it would cost SDSU 40 million (even if the city gave SDSU a 1 dollar 100 year lease) something tax payers can’t pay and donors could never come close. Also since the stadium would be primarily used for football there are Title 9 issues of equality.
Build the stadium downtown. Businesses would flourish. The city would benefit from increased revenues. It would cost tax payers one Starbucks latte per year, otherwise let the Chargers go. Since the Aztec have the Q for 7 more years it would become a liability for the city costing taxpayers more than building a new stadium. Go Aztecs.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 27, 2015 2:24:53 GMT -5
www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/mar/25/chargers-stadium-spanos-fabiani-mayor/"It’s been eight weeks since San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer named the task force charged with devising a plan for a new NFL stadium for the Chargers. It’s been two weeks since the task force announced Mission Valley as the best site for a new stadium and moved on to the thorny issue of how to pay for it. And as reported this morning by U-T columnist Nick Canepa, the mayor and county officials today will announce an alliance to work together on the project. Never before in the 15 years since Chargers ownership first began talking about the need for a new home has so much happened so quickly to get it done. Yet the Chargers are anything but onboard. Chargers president Dean Spanos still publicly insists he wants to keep the team here, but every move the team makes behind the scenes says otherwise." It warms my heart when billionaire Manchester (a Republican donor) goes after billionaire Spanos (also a Republican donor). And hand-picked Manchester puppet Faulconer's stress level must be going through the roof. Who wants to be mayor of a town when the NFL team bails out?
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 28, 2015 20:11:03 GMT -5
www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/mar/27/chargers-los-angeles-stadium-nfl-meetings/2/?#article-copy"Several owners indicated their compassion for the plight Spanos has presented them regarding his 14-year effort to get a new stadium in San Diego. As soon as he was finished registering the obligatory pronouncement that Spanos is working hard in San Diego, Mara said, “But he has to protect himself. We’d all be supportive if nothing is able to get worked out (in San Diego).” That’s the thing to remember. It doesn’t matter if all of San Diego believes the city and county proposed an acceptable stadium financing plan in Mission Valley come the end of May. If the Chargers don’t think so, there is a good chance the NFL and Spanos’ fellow owners won’t think so either – unless the Citizens Stadium Advisory Group, and city and county leaders can somehow convince them otherwise." Oh, I'm sure the billionaire owners of NFL teams have lots of compassion for other billionaire owners. Not a lot of compassion for the non-ultrarich taxpayer though. Like the ultra-wealthy worldwide, they want to socialize the risks and privatize the rewards.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Apr 20, 2015 15:23:52 GMT -5
www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/apr/20/chargers-stadium-experts-citigroup-nixon-peabody/"San Diego — San Diego announced Monday the hiring of investment banker Citigroup and law firm Nixon Peabody to negotiate a possible stadium deal with the Chargers. The announcement comes two weeks after city and county officials agreed to spend as much as $250,000 each hiring such experts to help get a deal done and ensure that the interests of local taxpayers are protected. Citigroup and Nixon Peabody, which have extensive experience negotiating deals for stadiums around the country, will try to forge a deal with the Chargers using the financing framework scheduled to be released May 20 by Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s stadium task force. Meanwhile, momentum also continues for a stadium the Chargers and Raiders have proposed in the Los Angeles suburb of Carson. The Carson City Council is scheduled to vote Tuesday night on the proposal, which would allow a lengthy environmental review to be avoided. The Inglewood City Council took a similar vote in February to approve a stadium that could become home to the St. Louis Rams and possibly a second NFL team." Oh boy, EXPERTS are on the job! I shouldn't have to care whether San Diego borrows big bucks to hand over to the Spanos family, except that San Diego COUNTY has jumped into this boondoggle. On the other hand, as Turk said, it may only cost me the price of one Latte a year for the entertainment value of watching the NFL bully San Diego.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2015 0:58:12 GMT -5
www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/apr/20/chargers-stadium-experts-citigroup-nixon-peabody/"San Diego — San Diego announced Monday the hiring of investment banker Citigroup and law firm Nixon Peabody to negotiate a possible stadium deal with the Chargers. The announcement comes two weeks after city and county officials agreed to spend as much as $250,000 each hiring such experts to help get a deal done and ensure that the interests of local taxpayers are protected. Citigroup and Nixon Peabody, which have extensive experience negotiating deals for stadiums around the country, will try to forge a deal with the Chargers using the financing framework scheduled to be released May 20 by Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s stadium task force. Meanwhile, momentum also continues for a stadium the Chargers and Raiders have proposed in the Los Angeles suburb of Carson. The Carson City Council is scheduled to vote Tuesday night on the proposal, which would allow a lengthy environmental review to be avoided. The Inglewood City Council took a similar vote in February to approve a stadium that could become home to the St. Louis Rams and possibly a second NFL team." Oh boy, EXPERTS are on the job! I shouldn't have to care whether San Diego borrows big bucks to hand over to the Spanos family, except that San Diego COUNTY has jumped into this boondoggle. On the other hand, as Turk said, it may only cost me the price of one Latte a year for the entertainment value of watching the NFL bully San Diego. As I said before! Why should taxpayers foot the rest of bill for new stadium?? I'm not a sports fan It's Fixed anyways, Let the wealthy billionaire owners pay for their own stadium. This is not a govt bail out! either you gain a profit or lose profit, Thats why it's called Investment, because it's a gamble!
|
|
|
Post by Turk on Apr 21, 2015 10:57:59 GMT -5
There are fair arguments on both sides of the fence. As I’ve mentioned before I’m more concerned with San Diego State University Aztecs than I am with the Chargers. The Q is falling apart and IMO approaching dangerous. SDSU has 5 years remaining on their lease. The Aztecs must have a stadium for football. It will take a new facility or a major overhaul of the Q for football to survive in San Diego even if it is just SDSU. The city, the county, taxpayers benefit so I don’t have a problem taxpayers partially funding. A new stadium means jobs.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Apr 21, 2015 15:07:37 GMT -5
There are fair arguments on both sides of the fence. As I’ve mentioned before I’m more concerned with San Diego State University Aztecs than I am with the Chargers. The Q is falling apart and IMO approaching dangerous. SDSU has 5 years remaining on their lease. The Aztecs must have a stadium for football. It will take a new facility or a major overhaul of the Q for football to survive in San Diego even if it is just SDSU. The city, the county, taxpayers benefit so I don’t have a problem taxpayers partially funding. A new stadium means jobs. I would gladly upgrade the Q for SDSU. But not to further enrich the billionaires who run the NFL (and want to rule America to boot). College sports? No problem. Pro sports? No way.
|
|
|
Post by Turk on Apr 21, 2015 16:05:28 GMT -5
The Aztecs play 6-7 home games then there are a couple of bowl games each year. Unless there is a major overhaul the Q becomes pointless as a venue for other activities. Remodeling the Q to a more intimate seating of 42,000-45,000 would make it concert friendly and open it up to many other types of media.
I do find it interesting after all these year Los Angeles doesn’t have a football team. Perhaps it has been a brilliant NFL business decision to use LA as leverage to get stadiums built/remodeled with taxpayer money. Many teams that have threatened to bolt for LA then they got what they wanted.
|
|
|
Post by Turk on Apr 25, 2015 14:52:25 GMT -5
|
|