Morrissey Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetrider Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Watch RGIII go to the Rams . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powpow Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Back where they belong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyLV Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Well, it sounds like the Charges will ultimately stay in San Diego. With $100 million, plus the additional normal money teams get to build a stadium that puts them at $300 million. Then the city and Chargers need to work on the split for the rest. No way Chargers can come up with $1.4 billion on their own to split the Inglewood stadium. and Chargers are not super likely to move just to have a nicer stadium they are in it for the team valuation and additional revenue which is locked out if they do not split. Plus Inglewatts is an additional 20 miles from San Diego making it even less likely San Diego fans will trek all the way up there. Chargers have already stated as such. Essentially, the NFL wanted the Chargers in LA, somewhat because they feel SD has not bent over far enough without lube for the Spanos. However, the owners definitely did NOT want the Raiders there. The Chargers are not rich enough to do the $1.7 billion Carson stadium themselves. So it moved back to Kroenke who can foot the $2.7 billion for this stadium alone. If Inglewood was around the same as the Carson Chargers would probably be OK, but they cannot foot $1,4 billion alone either. So in the end, Kroenke gets his way because he has the money to make it happen. And as is already happening with their statement, the Chargers slink back to San Diego and have to negotiate in good faith with the city this time on what will likely be a solid but unspectacular stadium in San Diego. People forget how small of a market San Diego is.1.4 million people, with under 2 million effective potential fans in surrounding areas. The team is actually very strongly supported when you think about it. Contrast that to well over 10 million fans for the LA Rams to draw from. I am a San Diego resident. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet9 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Well, it sounds like the Charges will ultimately stay in San Diego. With $100 million, plus the additional normal money teams get to build a stadium that puts them at $300 million. Then the city and Chargers need to work on the split for the rest. No way Chargers can come up with $1.4 billion on their own to split the Inglewood stadium. and Chargers are not super likely to move just to have a nicer stadium they are in it for the team valuation and additional revenue which is locked out if they do not split. Plus Inglewatts is an additional 20 miles from San Diego making it even less likely San Diego fans will trek all the way up there. Chargers have already stated as such. Essentially, the NFL wanted the Chargers in LA, somewhat because they feel SD has not bent over far enough without lube for the Spanos. However, the owners definitely did NOT want the Raiders there. The Chargers are not rich enough to do the $1.7 billion Carson stadium themselves. So it moved back to Kroenke who can foot the $2.7 billion for this stadium alone. If Inglewood was around the same as the Carson Chargers would probably be OK, but they cannot foot $1,4 billion alone either. So in the end, Kroenke gets his way because he has the money to make it happen. And as is already happening with their statement, the Chargers slink back to San Diego and have to negotiate in good faith with the city this time on what will likely be a solid but unspectacular stadium in San Diego. People forget how small of a market San Diego is.1.4 million people, with under 2 million effective potential fans in surrounding areas. The team is actually very strongly supported when you think about it. Contrast that to well over 10 million fans for the LA Rams to draw from. I am a San Diego resident. . Thats all well and good, and I can appreciate your perspective. But if the market isn't big enough than they should move. These deals that use public moneys never pan out the way the proposals say that they will. Have a look at Xanadu Mall at the Meadowlands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southparkcpa Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Or Vegas? The NFL could finally admit to being in bed with gambling. games are tacitly rigged in favor of Patriots, Steelers etc... So yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slats Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Kroenke forced this deal. He was moving to LA whether the league approved it or not. The NFL went with the Rams' proposal to prevent three teams moving to the city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Watch RGIII go to the Rams . the eternal quest to find the crappiest qb ever after trying out Foles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Kroenke forced this deal. He was moving to LA whether the league approved it or not. The NFL went with the Rams' proposal to prevent three teams moving to the city. yeah he bought the property in LA a couple years ago. Writing on the wall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Obviously the place needs to be repainted and who has any time for that? I ain't gonna paint it. You gonna paint it? "outdated" = not enough luxury boxes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcat Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-82455005/ WTF is that big pool of water there for? You know, a large pool/fountain or whatever it is and drunk football fans are a very bad mix. 10-1 odds that the fountain/pool you see in the artist rendering gets scrapped. Nothing good could ever result from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodeawhodat Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 In other news, the Tampa Rays look like they will finally move from St.Pete to downtown Tampa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warfish Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 I don't particularly feel anything for St. Louis fans tbqh. /shrug. With that said.... If the Chargers move, IMO, they should be forced to leave the name (Chargers) and the team history in San Diego, and operate as an expansion team. This is my view for just about all team relocations, barring those (like the Rams) where the team already took it's name with them once and is moving back where it came from. And no, the few irrelevant year the Chargers played in LA do not count, they've been in San Diego since 1961, that's over half a century, "Chargers" belongs to San Diego. Second, I'd love to see Federal law passed banning local jurisdictions/states from funding NFL Stadiums. Taxpayers get shafted, and a few years later the team wants to leave? That's something the Feds should fix. NFL teams simply do not provide enough to their local jurisdictions to justify the extortion they routinely wage against those jurisdictions and their taxpayers. Third, Jacksonville somehow manages to stay in Jacksonville? Lol. Least worthy NFL City ever, hands down. Richmond VA deserves a team more than Jacksonville ffs. Last, at least it wasn't the Jets moving, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 WTF is that big pool of water there for? You know, a large pool/fountain or whatever it is and drunk football fans are a very bad mix. 10-1 odds that the fountain/pool you see in the artist rendering gets scrapped. Nothing good could ever result from it. LA culture. The people there love to have parties by a pool. Nobody swims - just like being by a pool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyLV Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Thats all well and good, and I can appreciate your perspective. But if the market isn't big enough than they should move. These deals that use public moneys never pan out the way the proposals say that they will. Have a look at Xanadu Mall at the Meadowlands. market is fine. And San Diego and the Spanos family are both at fault for not getting a deal done. Spanos not only wants SD to foot most of the deal, they want to make all the money off it too. Spanos lost all his leverage now. I would think something gets done now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 WTF is that big pool of water there for? You know, a large pool/fountain or whatever it is and drunk football fans are a very bad mix. 10-1 odds that the fountain/pool you see in the artist rendering gets scrapped. Nothing good could ever result from it. We built a vacant, fake ski ramp next to our stadium. On purpose. I don't think we're in any position to judge here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnitedWhofans Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 We built a vacant, fake ski ramp next to our stadium. On purpose. I don't think we're in any position to judge here. YOU WIN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 WTF is that big pool of water there for? You know, a large pool/fountain or whatever it is and drunk football fans are a very bad mix. 10-1 odds that the fountain/pool you see in the artist rendering gets scrapped. Nothing good could ever result from it. stadium will be on a huge complex. NFL will be building a complex there for the tv network, I believe a west coast Hall of Fame, and likely retail stores and a hotel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 I don't particularly feel anything for St. Louis fans tbqh. /shrug. With that said.... If the Chargers move, IMO, they should be forced to leave the name (Chargers) and the team history in San Diego, and operate as an expansion team. This is my view for just about all team relocations, barring those (like the Rams) where the team already took it's name with them once and is moving back where it came from. And no, the few irrelevant year the Chargers played in LA do not count, they've been in San Diego since 1961, that's over half a century, "Chargers" belongs to San Diego. Second, I'd love to see Federal law passed banning local jurisdictions/states from funding NFL Stadiums. Taxpayers get shafted, and a few years later the team wants to leave? That's something the Feds should fix. NFL teams simply do not provide enough to their local jurisdictions to justify the extortion they routinely wage against those jurisdictions and their taxpayers. Third, Jacksonville somehow manages to stay in Jacksonville? Lol. Least worthy NFL City ever, hands down. Richmond VA deserves a team more than Jacksonville ffs. Last, at least it wasn't the Jets moving, lol. The obvious answer is the Jags have an adequate stadium that they have recently put money into. With the Rams and possibly Chargers going to LA, London will now be the city that teams threaten to move to to get their home cities to finance a new stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgivs21 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 The obvious answer is the Jags have an adequate stadium that they have recently put money into. With the Rams and possibly Chargers going to LA, London will now be the city that teams threaten to move to to get their home cities to finance a new stadium. Would that be an empty threat though? I do not know the laws in England, but is there something that prevents tax payers from footing the bill in London? I'm sure most of that area would be up in arms since soccer is king over there and a lot of Londoners don't watch the NFL nearly enough to vote for funding of a stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rex-n-effect Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 The obvious answer is the Jags have an adequate stadium that they have recently put money into. With the Rams and possibly Chargers going to LA, London will now be the city that teams threaten to move to to get their home cities to finance a new stadium. In a few years STL and SD could "have a change of heart" and get back on that list. I don't know how many cities seriously consider London a threat. I think a lot of team owners would rather not see their teams fly to London routinely through the season. IMO the London and Mexico City games are less about trying to expand the NFL as a league beyond the borders and more about wanting to capture Mexico and Europe as markets for TV deals and products. Possibly also secondary leagues. Additionally there are several large US cities lacking teams that could be interested in a team, such as Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio, Raleigh, Columbus, Austin, Oklahoma City, Albuquerque and Salt Lake City. Even if LA takes a team it would be extremely easy to position for a second or even third team in Orange County or the inland empire area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 Would that be an empty threat though? I do not know the laws in England, but is there something that prevents tax payers from footing the bill in London? I'm sure most of that area would be up in arms since soccer is king over there and a lot of Londoners don't watch the NFL nearly enough to vote for funding of a stadium. there is already a stadium being built for the NFL in London. The primary tenant will be the Tottenham Hotspurs of English Premier League, but all the NFL London games for at least 10 years starting in 2018 will be played in this stadium. There will be a retractable grass field with field turf underneath it for NFL games so field condition won't be a concern. It will also have dedicated NFL sized locker rooms. An NFL team could easily share that stadium with Tottenham full time if they wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warfish Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 NFC Team in the UK......I'd root for it (casually). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Every time I read this stuff it reminds me of that weird old detective show, Buddy Faro that was on for about 3 weeks. Dennis Farina plays some rat pack hardboiled PI that disappeared in the '60's but resurfaces in LA the 90's. He asks something about going to a football game and the kid tells him they don't have a team, well they did, but the Raiders moved. Rams? They are in St Louis? What about the Cardinals? Etc. I remember, even then being surprised about how convoluted it all was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southparkcpa Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 All owners should use their own money to build stadiums. Loser owners are always looking for tax payer handouts. so are half the country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warfish Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 so are half the country He's living in a fantasy world. His Owner tried repeatedly to get his Stadium paid for by public dollars and somewhere other than Foxboro, he simply failed. Pats Stadium only costs ~$325 million. Nothing like the 1.0-1.5 Billion modern stadiums cost today. Be assured, when Gillette is done, and a new Stadium needed, Kraft will not be footing a 1.25 Billion dollar bill on his own, any more than any other team owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 I don't particularly feel anything for St. Louis fans tbqh. /shrug. With that said.... If the Chargers move, IMO, they should be forced to leave the name (Chargers) and the team history in San Diego, and operate as an expansion team. This is my view for just about all team relocations, barring those (like the Rams) where the team already took it's name with them once and is moving back where it came from. And no, the few irrelevant year the Chargers played in LA do not count, they've been in San Diego since 1961, that's over half a century, "Chargers" belongs to San Diego. So there is a 50 year cut off? San Diego to LA is about 2 hours. With traffic, It has taken me longer than that to get to the Meadowlands from Bensonhurst. Never mind the $20+ in tolls. You don't like the legacy names? Utah Jazz? Los Angeles Lakers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgivs21 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 there is already a stadium being built for the NFL in London. The primary tenant will be the Tottenham Hotspurs of English Premier League, but all the NFL London games for at least 10 years starting in 2018 will be played in this stadium. There will be a retractable grass field with field turf underneath it for NFL games so field condition won't be a concern. It will also have dedicated NFL sized locker rooms. An NFL team could easily share that stadium with Tottenham full time if they wanted. There's a big difference between the NFL using the stadium for 2 games a year vs an NFL Franchise playing their home games there. If I was an NFL owner, I'm not going to a foreign country without my own stadium where I can control everything from design to prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex-Rex Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 If they don't win - and do they EVER? - the fans in LA will find something else to do. Then maybe Kroenke can turn his gaze East,.....Tokyo Rams sound sweet. They might have to add Dragon to the name...the Tokyo Dragon Rams.....yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 There's a big difference between the NFL using the stadium for 2 games a year vs an NFL Franchise playing their home games there. If I was an NFL owner, I'm not going to a foreign country without my own stadium where I can control everything from design to prices. Khan the owner of the Jags would sacrifice not being apart of the stadium design process to get his foot in the door to a London NFL franchise. London is a world class city. Fact is there will be a viable NFL stadium available. You can't say that about Richmond, Virginia or Portland, Oregon, ect, ect. After a number or years they could then think about building their very own stadium. By the way, He doesn't own the stadium his team play in now, the city of Jacksonville does. This is true about many NFL teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuscanyTile2 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Well, it sounds like the Charges will ultimately stay in San Diego. With $100 million, plus the additional normal money teams get to build a stadium that puts them at $300 million. Then the city and Chargers need to work on the split for the rest. No way Chargers can come up with $1.4 billion on their own to split the Inglewood stadium. and Chargers are not super likely to move just to have a nicer stadium they are in it for the team valuation and additional revenue which is locked out if they do not split. Plus Inglewatts is an additional 20 miles from San Diego making it even less likely San Diego fans will trek all the way up there. Chargers have already stated as such. Essentially, the NFL wanted the Chargers in LA, somewhat because they feel SD has not bent over far enough without lube for the Spanos. However, the owners definitely did NOT want the Raiders there. The Chargers are not rich enough to do the $1.7 billion Carson stadium themselves. So it moved back to Kroenke who can foot the $2.7 billion for this stadium alone. If Inglewood was around the same as the Carson Chargers would probably be OK, but they cannot foot $1,4 billion alone either. So in the end, Kroenke gets his way because he has the money to make it happen. And as is already happening with their statement, the Chargers slink back to San Diego and have to negotiate in good faith with the city this time on what will likely be a solid but unspectacular stadium in San Diego. People forget how small of a market San Diego is.1.4 million people, with under 2 million effective potential fans in surrounding areas. The team is actually very strongly supported when you think about it. Contrast that to well over 10 million fans for the LA Rams to draw from. I am a San Diego resident. . I'm glad SD will likely keep their team. They have been around for a while now and I still associate them w/ Dan Fouts, "Air Coryell", Kellen Winslow, John Jefferson, Chuck Muncie, James Brooks, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuscanyTile2 Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 There's a big difference between the NFL using the stadium for 2 games a year vs an NFL Franchise playing their home games there. If I was an NFL owner, I'm not going to a foreign country without my own stadium where I can control everything from design to prices. Seems like it would make sense to put a team in London if there were expansion. The NFL doesn't need it and I think the divisions are perfect at 4 teams each. But if the league sees a chance to cash in, they'll expand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 Sorry San Diego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrissey Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 Los Angeles now has two NFL teams, what a crazy two days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.