Lights Out Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Translation: Dean to spend the next year refusing to negotiate with the city, then try to shift all the blame on Faulconer and the fans he just put through a lame-duck season while the moving vans are packed for LA. Every word of that statement was carefully crafted to give him excuses to blame the city when the deal doesn't get done. Telling them they need to work out "our stadium dilemma" that he is solely responsible for creating was a nice touch. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 52 minutes ago, Lights Out said: Translation: Dean to spend the next year refusing to negotiate with the city, then try to shift all the blame on Faulconer and the fans he just put through a lame-duck season while the moving vans are packed for LA. Every word of that statement was carefully crafted to give him excuses to blame the city when the deal doesn't get done. Telling them they need to work out "our stadium dilemma" that he is solely responsible for creating was a nice touch. Perhaps, but I think if that were true, why the delay in moving? Why stretch it out yet another year, especially when you already have league approval to go? What's going to be the 2016 Chargers ticket base in San Diego if significant progress isn't made on some front, and fast? 5,000, maybe? This is a huge gamble for Spanos. He still thinks a stadium deal in San Diego is possible. If he didn't? No way does he keep them there for what could be a truly disastrous lame duck season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 15 minutes ago, Mac the Knife said: Perhaps, but I think if that were true, why the delay in moving? Why stretch it out yet another year, especially when you already have league approval to go? What's going to be the 2016 Chargers ticket base in San Diego if significant progress isn't made on some front, and fast? 5,000, maybe? This is a huge gamble for Spanos. He still thinks a stadium deal in San Diego is possible. If he didn't? No way does he keep them there for what could be a truly disastrous lame duck season. My guess for why he's dragging it out? The Coliseum might be refusing to host a third team this year, leaving him with nowhere to play in LA yet, and/or his inner circle has finally clued him in to how bad he's looked during this whole process and he's buying time to do damage control. The fact is, between the deal with Kroenke and the land he purchased in Orange County for the practice facilities, Dean has all his bases covered in LA. He has nothing in San Diego other than a lame-duck year at the Q, and reportedly, he's ignored several phone calls from Faulconer over the past couple weeks. I hope I'm wrong, but it's pretty obvious which direction Dean really wants to go in. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Was there a deadline he was facing? Sounds to me like he can't work out a decent deal with Kroenke. He's amazingly ed, a mess totally of his own making. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Yeah, the Chargers are staying in San Diego. No way they play a completely lame duck season at QualComm next year. Spanos is going to eventually cave and work out a reasonable(ish) deal with the city because otherwise next season that stadium is basically going to resemble this. 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 January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 2 hours ago, Lights Out said: My guess for why he's dragging it out? The Coliseum might be refusing to host a third team this year, leaving him with nowhere to play in LA yet, and/or his inner circle has finally clued him in to how bad he's looked during this whole process and he's buying time to do damage control. The fact is, between the deal with Kroenke and the land he purchased in Orange County for the practice facilities, Dean has all his bases covered in LA. He has nothing in San Diego other than a lame-duck year at the Q, and reportedly, he's ignored several phone calls from Faulconer over the past couple weeks. I hope I'm wrong, but it's pretty obvious which direction Dean really wants to go in. Okay, except that if that holds true, he doesn't have anywhere to play in the Los Angeles market in 2017 or 2018, either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 17 minutes ago, Bucfan56 said: Yeah, the Chargers are staying in San Diego. No way they play a completely lame duck season at QualComm next year. Spanos is going to eventually cave and work out a reasonable(ish) deal with the city because otherwise next season that stadium is basically going to resemble this. We sorta called this: On 8/27/2015 at 5:53 AM, Bucfan56 said: On 8/27/2015 at 1:46 AM, the admiral said: Am I nuts for thinking there's going to be a hard eleventh-hour push from San Diego to keep the Chargers? Soliciting responses from people who aren't bosrs1. No you're not nuts at all. It's what should probably happen, too. Having the Chargers move to LA ahead of the Rams or Raiders would make both the Spanos family and the NFL look incredibly shortsighted and stupid. Sacrificing the San Diego market for EITHER Oakland or St. Louis makes about as much sense as putting an NHL team in Las Vegas ahead of putting one in Quebec. ♫ 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 January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 14 minutes ago, the admiral said: We sorta called this: Yeah I think we did, but these "11th hour deals" are pretty commonplace among pro sports teams looking to get a new facility on the government's dime. In my lifetime, Basically every single California pro team has had a "dire" stadium situation at one point or another. 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...
BBTV Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 I read that he has a deal with Kroenke - but it's for 2017 with an out if he gets a deal in SD. Any deal for 2017 could have been made for 2016, so it might be a sign of legitimately wanting to make it work in SD, while holding the biggest weapon any team has ever had - not just the threat of moving, but a signed paper saying that they are... unless. "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...
FiddySicks Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 The deal that Spanos has in place with Kroenke basically ensures that the Chargers will be the west coast's version of the Jets. Good. If they move to LA, that's what they totally deserve. 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...
STL FANATIC Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 53 minutes ago, Bucfan56 said: The deal that Spanos has in place with Kroenke basically ensures that the Chargers will be the west coast's version of the Jets. Good. If they move to LA, that's what they totally deserve. Do we have specifics of the deal? Also, according to Forbes, the Jets are the 6th most valuable team in the NFL at $2.6 billion. The Giants are just two spots and $0.2 billion ahead of them on the list. I think Spanos would be satisfied with such an arrangement. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 1 hour ago, STL FANATIC said: Do we have specifics of the deal? Also, according to Forbes, the Jets are the 6th most valuable team in the NFL at $2.6 billion. The Giants are just two spots and $0.2 billion ahead of them on the list. I think Spanos would be satisfied with such an arrangement. I believe he means the pre-Met Life Jets. The only saving grace is that Kroenke's going to get so much from naming rights that we won't have a Giants Stadium/Meadowlands or going back to the 60s a Dodger Stadium/Chavez Ravine situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Perhaps. But let's wait and see. It may yet be a scenario where Spanos—should he leave San Diego after 2016—becomes a partner in the stadium. Kroenke will win this deal. Because he always wins his deals. But that doesn't mean any deal struck will screw Spanos over. Although, on second thought, it probably will. Because Kroenke screws over everyone he makes a deal with. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 I think Spanos is nuts if he thinks Kroenke is going to bring him in as a partner. Kroenke doesn't have to include anyone as a partner, and he knows how Spanos operates. Why would he want to include Spanos when he can tap into those LA profits all by himself? If Spanos wants the Chargers to play in the same building as Kroenke's Rams, they're going to have to do that as a tenant. 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...
STL FANATIC Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 We can speculate as much as we like on that. I don't have a clue what the arrangement would be. But at one point Kroenke was offering a partnership in the stadium, and presumably he agreed to a certain level of something when the NFL struck this bargain. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colortv Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Chargers have the option to be a tenant or an equity partner. That is something that has been known since Houston. Details of each option here: http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-nfl-la-chargers-20160129-20-story.html Also: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkJourney Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 I was thinking about the Staples Center. IIRC, it was developed by the owners of the Kings, but the Lakers bought in as equity partners, right? And the Clippers are tenants. So Spanos had a choice to make. He could have agreed to buy in at a cost of between a billion and a half and two billion, including relocation fee. Or he could sign as a tenant and content himself with game day revenue. Either way, postponing the deal reveals that his ultimate preference is to remain in SD. His deal with Kroenke isn't going to get any better, but maybe he can leverage that for something in San Diego. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 So let's see: - the Rams are putting down roots first and getting tons of goodwill, in the meantime, no one in greater L.A. seems to want the Chargers either out of apathy or goodwill toward their San Diego brethren - Good Guy Dean seems to have put away Mark Fabiani, California football's answer to Roy Cohn, for this little letter - moving to Inglewood would cost money he doesn't have for a partnership or take revenue streams away as a tenant - the NFL is giving him $300MM to figure it out in San Diego I think we're going to wind up with what I said the NFL should do all along, which is the Los Angeles Rams and the other two staying put. All these complicated maneuvers, with the 5-1 toxic waste committee and voting down the Rams moving alone and we're just going to get what should have always been for a market that, population notwithstanding, is just not conducive to two NFL teams given the circumstances and on top of everything else there is in the area. One is fine, one is all they needed, glad it's the right one. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 4 hours ago, Gothamite said: I was thinking about the Staples Center. IIRC, it was developed by the owners of the Kings, but the Lakers bought in as equity partners, right? And the Clippers are tenants. . Kind of. Staples Center originally was a 60/40 partnership between AEG and FOX, dba as L.A. Arena Company, but AEG soon bought out FOX. As for the Lakers, Anschutz (with Ed Roski) personally purchased a 25% stake in the team in 1996, before the move to Staples and got another 5% following the death of Bill Daniels. Allegedly, part of the agreement was that the Lakers have no rent for the first 25 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.