IceCap Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 The thinking seems to be that the Chargers will drop the Carson deal if the NFL is able to negotiate a favourable lease for them in Stan's Inglewood stadium. You don't need to own the building. Just ask the Clippers. PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 So if San Diego does start some last-minute plan to keep the Chargers but they leave anyway, is there even the slightest change that they'd leave whatever deal it was on the table and we'd see the San Diego Raiders? "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Probably not the exact framework; I don't know whether the Raiders could afford to cover the percentage of costs that the Chargers were being asked to cover. If the Raiders were interested in coming, I'm sure San Diego would at least listen. EDIT: $362.5MM is what the Chargers would pay ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still MIGHTY Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Raiders would be DOA though. Would the new contrarian anti-Chargers contingent and whatever Raiders fans live in San Diego (maybe they could use the LA ticket base too ) be enough to actually support the team?A team leaving and being replaced with a blood rival doesn't seem like it would go over extremely we'll. | ANA | LAA | LAR | LAL | ASU | CSULB | USMNT | USWNT | LAFC | OCSC | MAN UTD | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Raiders would be DOA though. Would the new contrarian anti-Chargers contingent and whatever Raiders fans live in San Diego (maybe they could use the LA ticket base too ) be enough to actually support the team? No, probably not, which is why this relocation roundelay is so stupid and the only team that should be leaving its home is the one that's going back to where it played for 49 years, is about to put shovels in the ground it already owns, and is paying out of pocket to do so. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 The thinking seems to be that the Chargers will drop the Carson deal if the NFL is able to negotiate a favourable lease for them in Stan's Inglewood stadium. You don't need to own the building. Just ask the Clippers.I get the thinking. And it does feel like at this point that's where "insiders" have things trending. I just thought "almost certainly" was quite the overstatement at this point. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Well, the premise was that the Chargers would move and the Raiders would stay put. I don't see the Chargers as building the Carson stadium on their own. The financing doesn't work unless there are two teams to sell PSLs. So yes, if they move and the Raiders don't, it would seem "almost certainly" to share the Inglewood stadium. Not saying anything more than that. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Well, the premise was that the Chargers would move and the Raiders would stay put. I don't see the Chargers as building the Carson stadium on their own. The financing doesn't work unless there are two teams to sell PSLs.So yes, if they move and the Raiders don't, it would seem "almost certainly" to share the Inglewood stadium. Not saying anything more than that.Ah. That certainly makes sense. My bad. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Why do you think the Chargers will move to LA ahead of the Rams? That scenario would almost certainly involve them becoming tenants in Kroenke's building. Worst case is they announce both moves simultaneously.What I meant is that it's likely that TWO teams will be moving to LA. If it's the Chargers over either the Rams or Raiders (In either the Carson scenario or the Inglewood scenario, which has been mentioned) then it's totally stupid. Sacrificing a VERY solid San Diego market for either St. Louis or Oakland would be downright foolish because it's head and shoulders above both of those spots. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 The thinking seems to be that the Chargers will drop the Carson deal if the NFL is able to negotiate a favourable lease for them in Stan's Inglewood stadium. You don't need to own the building. Just ask the Clippers.I get the thinking. And it does feel like at this point that's where "insiders" have things trending. I just thought "almost certainly" was quite the overstatement at this point.I'm of the same mindset... that's why ultimately I see the Chargers and Rams making a deal, putting both teams at Kroenke's site. It could be a 50-50 ownership deal like the Jets/Giants, or the Chargers could be willing to settle for simply having a piece of ancillary revenues (parking, concert revenues, etc.) without an ownership stake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 And in that scenario, the Raiders end up, where, exactly? San Antonio? St. Louis? Freaking San Diego? All stupid solutions. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 And in that scenario, the Raiders end up, where, exactly? San Antonio? St. Louis? Freaking San Diego? All stupid solutions. Hold the "Los Angeles Raiders of Oakland" jokes, but maybe they could split a schedule between L.A. and one of the Bay Area college stadiums two to six while renovating or replacing the Oakland Coliseum. But I don't know, what has to be or can be done to the Oakland Coliseum other than making it not spray poo everywhere? ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Oakland is flat broke. Unless they can find a private investor (HA), they can't even renovate what they already have. That's why the Chargers turning their noses up to $350 million in public funds from San Diego is so damn ridiculous. There are other cities out there that couldn't offer near that, and it shows that the situation in San Diego is FAR from dire when it comes to a funding standpoint (unlike Oakland). Why are the Chargers even in the running for a move like that in the first place when there are two other teams who have MUCH more dire financial situations who would instantly thrive from a move like that? (Which is FAR from a guarantee with the Chargers) It's a case of the Chargers being as selfish and shortsighted as they possibly could be. The Spanos family have shown themselves to be as cheap as they possibly can be, and it'll be such a shame if the NFL gifts them that market because they're trying to shoehorn themselves into a market they only want a part of due to the extra cash flow. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 And in that scenario, the Raiders end up, where, exactly? San Antonio? St. Louis? Freaking San Diego? All stupid solutions.Hold the "Los Angeles Raiders of Oakland" jokes, but maybe they could split a schedule between L.A. and one of the Bay Area college stadiums two to six while renovating or replacing the Oakland Coliseum. But I don't know, what has to be or can be done to the Oakland Coliseum other than making it not spray poo everywhere?As long as the A's are there with a lease through 2018 at the short term (2024 long term), and the Raiders are year-to-year, nothing to assist the Raiders is really going to occur.As for the college stadiums, take Cal Memorial Stadium in Berkeley off the list. Berkeley Municipal Code 9.04.175 allows the city to collect 10% of the gross on professional sporting events. Plus, the university is limited something like eight "non-university" events every three years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 We'll see, Buc. You may be right. But I'm not sure the league is in a position to "gift" anybody anything. Any team that ends up in LA will do so because they took it, not because it was given to them. I've said for a while that Rams/Raiders makes the most sense from a marketing standpoint. If the Chargers move to LA they seem destined to be the little-brother franchise unless and until they win a Super Bowl, and then again four years after that. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Oakland is flat broke. Unless they can find a private investor (HA), they can't even renovate what they already have. That's why the Chargers turning their noses up to $350 million in public funds from San Diego is so damn ridiculous. There are other cities out there that couldn't offer near that, and it shows that the situation in San Diego is FAR from dire when it comes to a funding standpoint (unlike Oakland). Why are the Chargers even in the running for a move like that in the first place when there are two other teams who have MUCH more dire financial situations who would instantly thrive from a move like that? (Which is FAR from a guarantee with the Chargers) It's a case of the Chargers being as selfish and shortsighted as they possibly could be. The Spanos family have shown themselves to be as cheap as they possibly can be, and it'll be such a shame if the NFL gifts them that market because they're trying to shoehorn themselves into a market they only want a part of due to the extra cash flow.Why is St. Louis far more dire than San Diego?More people agree with you, so you have that going for you, but I think you're as emotionally swayed as I am in this whole thing. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Haha is that even possible?I'd say that despite the old stadium, San Diego is still a FAR better market than at least a 3rd of the league. It's the biggest city in California with an NFL team right now and politicians are willing to just fork over $350 million in public funds. Trust me. It's a better market than St. Louis. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Just on market size, the area has almost a third again as many people as St. Louis. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 You weren't talking about markets, you were talking about "dire financial situations." St. Louis is (potentially—just as San Diego's offer is still not concrete) offering more public money than San Diego.The market debate isn't one I'll really go into again because I'm just destined to be shouted down. But I do believe San Diego is a good market, and I do believe it is a more proven market. And I'll say no more. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 The market debate isn't one I'll really go into again because I'm just destined to be shouted down.Disagreeing with you is not "shouting you down". Even if your fellow posters overwhelmingly disagree with you, that's not "shouting you down". It just means your arguments haven't always been terribly compelling. I'm not aware of any effort to prevent you from making your points. If there has been, there should not have been and it has to stop now. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.