CSNbbs

Official announcement Thursday...

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18455...os-angeles

Spanos has called a meeting of Chargers employees for 8 am, and they've scheduled a news conference in LA later in the day.

No surprise. San Diego residents shot down the stadium funding proposal and simply moving to LA would add $1 billion or more to the Chargers franchise value. The Raiders heading to Las Vegas will be coming next.

(01-11-2017 11:31 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ]No surprise. San Diego residents shot down the stadium funding proposal and simply moving to LA would add $1 billion or more to the Chargers franchise value. The Raiders heading to Las Vegas will be coming next.

And on that front it looks like Adelson is being pushed out in regards to stadium financing.

So stupid. The Raiders should have jumped at the chance to be LA's team, they're still the most popular team there and in California in general. At the very least, they should have shared Levi's Stadium with the 49ers but their pride got in the way (they could always move back to Oakland/East Bay later).

Pretty sure this is the first time any sportswriter for a major paper has ever written a column like this to "welcome" a new major-sport team to town:

We. Don't. Want. You.

(01-12-2017 12:30 AM)_C2_ Wrote: [ -> ]So stupid. The Raiders should have jumped at the chance to be LA's team, they're still the most popular team there and in California in general. At the very least, they should have shared Levi's Stadium with the 49ers but their pride got in the way (they could always move back to Oakland/East Bay later).

I am sure with the public funding deal, the Raiders will need to sign at least a 30 year air tight lease with the new stadium in Vegas. The Raiders will be stuck there for at least 1 generation.

Of course the Rams originally signed a 30 year lease with St. Louis, but cleverly put in an escape clause that the the dome always needed to one of the top rated stadiums in the league. I am sure no city will ever make that mistake ever again.

I kind of get the feeling that Spanos heart is not really in this move to Los Angeles, that he would rather stay in San Diego, even if that decision costs him a billion dollars. But in the end he is gping to take the money.

But in the end the move is still a gamble. LA may never warm up to the Chargers. I wonder if the Chargers would have an easy escape clause if they want to move back to San Diego.

Of course tbe $650M relocation fee to move to LA would show that the decision to move to LA is not just a temporary move.. they are really moving there forever.

San Diego will become the largest metro with just one pro team. If a new arena is built, the NHL will land in San Diego.

(01-12-2017 02:24 AM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]I am sure with the public funding deal, the Raiders will need to sign at least a 30 year air tight lease with the new stadium in Vegas. The Raiders will be stuck there for at least 1 generation.

Of course the Rams originally signed a 30 year lease with St. Louis, but cleverly put in an escape clause that the the dome always needed to one of the top rated stadiums in the league. I am sure no city will ever make that mistake ever again.

Like I said, Raiders in LA and Chargers in Vegas. The Chargers have no fanbase north of Orange County. The Raiders fans had a vocal presence at that last game in San Diego, let alone still being more popular than the Rams in LA. At least with Vegas, the Chargers would be able to start anew in a vacant market.

With the Rams and Chargers sharing a stadium, the naming rights for the stadium has to be owned by Dodge right? It just make too much sense.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxsports...tmobile-us

New report that the Chargers temporary home in 2017 and 2018 will be the Stub Hub Center in Carson. That's the 30k MLS soccer stadium.

It probably makes some sense. If they tried to play at the LA coliseium, they would probably draw only 30k anyway and be playing in front of 60k empty seats.

(01-12-2017 02:23 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure this is the first time any sportswriter for a major paper has ever written a column like this to "welcome" a new major-sport team to town:

We. Don't. Want. You.

I generally find Plaschke insufferable but today, his column is spot on. This is a bad move; there's a reason other owners were trying to convince him to stay in SD. I understand he's counting on LA to jump his team's valuation but a lot of that new equity gets eaten up by $650MM in relocation debt. And if he ends up with 40K in attendance at Kroenkeville? This whole thing will be a wash for Spanos and a big negative for the NFL.

After this shitshow how many SD locals are going to drive up to LA for a Chargers game at an MLS-sized stadium, let alone a game in Inglewood where the tix will cost $200 ea in the peanut gallery? Not this guy...

Sad to see them go...

This is terrible...



...but this is hilarious...

Tampa Bay Lightning ‏@TBLightning 4h4 hours ago
Tampa Bay Lightning Retweeted NFL
*checks mentions*
*squints*
*clears throat*

for the record, us & the @dodgers are just friends

(01-12-2017 12:27 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2017 02:23 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure this is the first time any sportswriter for a major paper has ever written a column like this to "welcome" a new major-sport team to town:

We. Don't. Want. You.

I generally find Plaschke insufferable but today, his column is spot on. This is a bad move; there's a reason other owners were trying to convince him to stay in SD. I understand he's counting on LA to jump his team's valuation but a lot of that new equity gets eaten up by $650MM in relocation debt. And if he ends up with 40K in attendance at Kroenkeville? This whole thing will be a wash for Spanos and a big negative for the NFL.

After this shitshow how many SD locals are going to drive up to LA for a Chargers game at an MLS-sized stadium, let alone a game in Inglewood where the tix will cost $200 ea in the peanut gallery? Not this guy...

It's a real question how much this decision is driven by the prospect of profit in LA versus how much it's driven by spite towards many different groups, including...

San Diego: Obviously. But not just the act of "You wouldn't give me $1 billion for a new stadium, so goodbye." It's the timing of it. The NFL gave Spanos an extension until next Tuesday to announce his move precisely because they didn't want him doing exactly what he did: Announcing it at 8 am today and then immediately flying up to LA right before the San Diego mayor has to give his annual "State of the City" address at 10 am as The Mayor Who Lost The Chargers.

The NFL: Spanos was hoping the NFL would contribute a few hundred million toward a San Diego stadium to close the gap between the city's offer and the small amount the Chargers were willing to chip in. When the NFL showed no interest in that and didn't even put the request on their agenda for this week's meeting, Spanos skipped the NFL meeting and called Goodell shortly after it was over to tell him he was moving the franchise. (And as noted above, Spanos ignored the deadline extension that Goodell gave him, and went ahead and announced this morning to embarrass the mayor.)

Kroenke: Spanos probably dislikes and resents Kroenke more than anyone else, and reserves his greatest act of spite for Stan -- becoming the permanent unwanted tenant in Inglewood, even if the Chargers never sell more than 30,000 seats except when they play the Raiders.

(01-12-2017 04:17 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote: [ -> ]This is terrible...



...but this is hilarious...

Tampa Bay Lightning ‏@TBLightning 4h4 hours ago
Tampa Bay Lightning Retweeted NFL
*checks mentions*
*squints*
*clears throat*

for the record, us & the @dodgers are just friends

This is my favorite response to the Chargers' logo:

Quote:Dallas Stars
‏@DallasStars

new logo. hope this is cool, @dallascowboys



11:34 AM - 12 Jan 2017

(By the way, the NFL says the Chargers' LA logo has not been approved by the league. Gee, ya think maybe the NFL wants to contemplate whether they want to risk being sued by MLB and the Dodgers?)

(01-12-2017 04:31 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2017 12:27 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2017 02:23 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure this is the first time any sportswriter for a major paper has ever written a column like this to "welcome" a new major-sport team to town:

We. Don't. Want. You.

I generally find Plaschke insufferable but today, his column is spot on. This is a bad move; there's a reason other owners were trying to convince him to stay in SD. I understand he's counting on LA to jump his team's valuation but a lot of that new equity gets eaten up by $650MM in relocation debt. And if he ends up with 40K in attendance at Kroenkeville? This whole thing will be a wash for Spanos and a big negative for the NFL.

After this shitshow how many SD locals are going to drive up to LA for a Chargers game at an MLS-sized stadium, let alone a game in Inglewood where the tix will cost $200 ea in the peanut gallery? Not this guy...

It's a real question how much this decision is driven by the prospect of profit in LA versus how much it's driven by spite towards many different groups, including...

San Diego: Obviously. But not just the act of "You wouldn't give me $1 billion for a new stadium, so goodbye." It's the timing of it. The NFL gave Spanos an extension until next Tuesday to announce his move precisely because they didn't want him doing exactly what he did: Announcing it at 8 am today and then immediately flying up to LA right before the San Diego mayor has to give his annual "State of the City" address at 10 am as The Mayor Who Lost The Chargers.

The NFL: Spanos was hoping the NFL would contribute a few hundred million toward a San Diego stadium to close the gap between the city's offer and the small amount the Chargers were willing to chip in. When the NFL showed no interest in that and didn't even put the request on their agenda for this week's meeting, Spanos skipped the NFL meeting and called Goodell shortly after it was over to tell him he was moving the franchise. (And as noted above, Spanos ignored the deadline extension that Goodell gave him, and went ahead and announced this morning to embarrass the mayor.)

Kroenke: Spanos probably dislikes and resents Kroenke more than anyone else, and reserves his greatest act of spite for Stan -- becoming the permanent unwanted tenant in Inglewood, even if the Chargers never sell more than 30,000 seats except when they play the Raiders.

Those are all great points. There were rumors going around that the NFL was going to pony up some $$ to keep the Chargers in SD but it looks like their "urging" was not all that urgent. I also read that Spanos was going to officially ask for it but I wonder if he did that?

(01-12-2017 04:53 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2017 04:31 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2017 12:27 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-12-2017 02:23 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure this is the first time any sportswriter for a major paper has ever written a column like this to "welcome" a new major-sport team to town:

We. Don't. Want. You.

I generally find Plaschke insufferable but today, his column is spot on. This is a bad move; there's a reason other owners were trying to convince him to stay in SD. I understand he's counting on LA to jump his team's valuation but a lot of that new equity gets eaten up by $650MM in relocation debt. And if he ends up with 40K in attendance at Kroenkeville? This whole thing will be a wash for Spanos and a big negative for the NFL.

After this shitshow how many SD locals are going to drive up to LA for a Chargers game at an MLS-sized stadium, let alone a game in Inglewood where the tix will cost $200 ea in the peanut gallery? Not this guy...

It's a real question how much this decision is driven by the prospect of profit in LA versus how much it's driven by spite towards many different groups, including...

San Diego: Obviously. But not just the act of "You wouldn't give me $1 billion for a new stadium, so goodbye." It's the timing of it. The NFL gave Spanos an extension until next Tuesday to announce his move precisely because they didn't want him doing exactly what he did: Announcing it at 8 am today and then immediately flying up to LA right before the San Diego mayor has to give his annual "State of the City" address at 10 am as The Mayor Who Lost The Chargers.

The NFL: Spanos was hoping the NFL would contribute a few hundred million toward a San Diego stadium to close the gap between the city's offer and the small amount the Chargers were willing to chip in. When the NFL showed no interest in that and didn't even put the request on their agenda for this week's meeting, Spanos skipped the NFL meeting and called Goodell shortly after it was over to tell him he was moving the franchise. (And as noted above, Spanos ignored the deadline extension that Goodell gave him, and went ahead and announced this morning to embarrass the mayor.)

Kroenke: Spanos probably dislikes and resents Kroenke more than anyone else, and reserves his greatest act of spite for Stan -- becoming the permanent unwanted tenant in Inglewood, even if the Chargers never sell more than 30,000 seats except when they play the Raiders.

Those are all great points. There were rumors going around that the NFL was going to pony up some $$ to keep the Chargers in SD but it looks like their "urging" was not all that urgent. I also read that Spanos was going to officially ask for it but I wonder if he did that?

I have no idea if Spanos officially asked for that money from the NFL, or just had "sources" send the message through sportswriters that it was the only way to keep him from moving the Chargers.

It could well be the latter; one way of looking at Spanos' stadium chase in San Diego is that he always asked for a lot but that, unlike NFL owners in other cities, Spanos never found a way of asking for it that was effective and non-clumsy.

Come on, that new Chargers logo looks nothing like the Dodgers logo other than that they both show a silhouette of "LA" in some form.