(09-16-2020 11:16 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-15-2020 02:12 PM)TDenverFan Wrote:  Apparently Petco wasn't an option due to the possibility of playoff baseball, but you'd still think they could've worked something out where they play most of their games at Petco, and maybe just a game or 2 in October in LA.

From the article; "The largest local venues for football beyond SDCCU Stadium are located at University of San Diego, Southwestern College and Mesa College and none of them seat more than 7,500 fans. Petco Park seats 40,209, but the field is not large enough to accommodate football as presently configured."

Author didn’t do their homework. Petco can accommodate football.

(09-16-2020 11:27 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 11:16 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-15-2020 02:12 PM)TDenverFan Wrote:  Apparently Petco wasn't an option due to the possibility of playoff baseball, but you'd still think they could've worked something out where they play most of their games at Petco, and maybe just a game or 2 in October in LA.

From the article; "The largest local venues for football beyond SDCCU Stadium are located at University of San Diego, Southwestern College and Mesa College and none of them seat more than 7,500 fans. Petco Park seats 40,209, but the field is not large enough to accommodate football as presently configured."

Author didn’t do their homework. Petco can accommodate football.

According to this, it would take expensive modifications.

Plus the Holiday Bowl would not conflict with Baseball, unless the SDSU regular season.

Why not play at Petco Park?
SDSU floated this as an option when the city considered condemning SDCCU Stadium after the 2018 football season. Padres Executive Chairman Ron Fowler, a big SDSU donor, initially said the Aztecs couldn’t play at Petco Park past 2019 but later clarified his comments to allow them as temporary tenants once the baseball season ended.

That could mean November if the Padres reached the World Series.

Another problem: Petco Park needs to jackhammer the outfield wall to accommodate a football field, which could cost millions. In the ballpark’s current configuration, only about a 100-yard field can fit — 20 to 30 yards short when you include end zones and space behind them. Also, the city’s original memorandum of understanding with the Padres would have to be amended because it states “no amateur or professional football games shall be played at the Ballpark.”

Wicker said he had discussions with Fowler about their current predicament but ultimately couldn’t overcome the scheduling logistics. (Fowler did not respond to a request for comment.)

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spo...cu-stadium

(09-15-2020 06:42 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(09-15-2020 02:49 PM)SDSUguy Wrote:  SDSU fan here. Alienating fans assumes fans will be allowed in stadiums in the fall of 2021. This is California after all. I'm fine with it and will get season tickets despite the travel to have priority seats in the new stadium. Qualcomm Stadium may have hosted multiple super bowls but it was the worst collegiate football stadium in the nation at I won't miss it one bit. The new stadium is going to be INCREDIBLE!

The renderings do look impressive. It will be a great home venue, and should be a help in recruiting too, I'd imagine.

Does Marshall Faulk ever come back?

Its going to be a game changer. Qualcomm was designed with baseball in mind so not only was it an empty tomb for college football the first 12 rows were obstructed as you couldn't see over the players on the sideline.

Marshall lives in San Diego and hits a few games per season.

(09-16-2020 01:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 11:27 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 11:16 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-15-2020 02:12 PM)TDenverFan Wrote:  Apparently Petco wasn't an option due to the possibility of playoff baseball, but you'd still think they could've worked something out where they play most of their games at Petco, and maybe just a game or 2 in October in LA.

From the article; "The largest local venues for football beyond SDCCU Stadium are located at University of San Diego, Southwestern College and Mesa College and none of them seat more than 7,500 fans. Petco Park seats 40,209, but the field is not large enough to accommodate football as presently configured."

Author didn’t do their homework. Petco can accommodate football.

According to this, it would take expensive modifications.

Plus the Holiday Bowl would not conflict with Baseball, unless the SDSU regular season.

Why not play at Petco Park?
SDSU floated this as an option when the city considered condemning SDCCU Stadium after the 2018 football season. Padres Executive Chairman Ron Fowler, a big SDSU donor, initially said the Aztecs couldn’t play at Petco Park past 2019 but later clarified his comments to allow them as temporary tenants once the baseball season ended.

That could mean November if the Padres reached the World Series.

Another problem: Petco Park needs to jackhammer the outfield wall to accommodate a football field, which could cost millions. In the ballpark’s current configuration, only about a 100-yard field can fit — 20 to 30 yards short when you include end zones and space behind them. Also, the city’s original memorandum of understanding with the Padres would have to be amended because it states “no amateur or professional football games shall be played at the Ballpark.”

Wicker said he had discussions with Fowler about their current predicament but ultimately couldn’t overcome the scheduling logistics. (Fowler did not respond to a request for comment.)

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spo...cu-stadium

The city would not obstruct this. The mayor, the only Hispanic on city council, and a majority of the County Board of Supervisors are SDSU alums.

Even if the city wanted to stop it, they'd face a severe public backlash. It was the voters who passed the referendum requiring the city to give the Qualcomm land to SDSU in the first place.

(09-16-2020 04:09 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 01:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 11:27 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 11:16 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(09-15-2020 02:12 PM)TDenverFan Wrote:  Apparently Petco wasn't an option due to the possibility of playoff baseball, but you'd still think they could've worked something out where they play most of their games at Petco, and maybe just a game or 2 in October in LA.

From the article; "The largest local venues for football beyond SDCCU Stadium are located at University of San Diego, Southwestern College and Mesa College and none of them seat more than 7,500 fans. Petco Park seats 40,209, but the field is not large enough to accommodate football as presently configured."

Author didn’t do their homework. Petco can accommodate football.

According to this, it would take expensive modifications.

Plus the Holiday Bowl would not conflict with Baseball, unless the SDSU regular season.

Why not play at Petco Park?
SDSU floated this as an option when the city considered condemning SDCCU Stadium after the 2018 football season. Padres Executive Chairman Ron Fowler, a big SDSU donor, initially said the Aztecs couldn’t play at Petco Park past 2019 but later clarified his comments to allow them as temporary tenants once the baseball season ended.

That could mean November if the Padres reached the World Series.

Another problem: Petco Park needs to jackhammer the outfield wall to accommodate a football field, which could cost millions. In the ballpark’s current configuration, only about a 100-yard field can fit — 20 to 30 yards short when you include end zones and space behind them. Also, the city’s original memorandum of understanding with the Padres would have to be amended because it states “no amateur or professional football games shall be played at the Ballpark.”

Wicker said he had discussions with Fowler about their current predicament but ultimately couldn’t overcome the scheduling logistics. (Fowler did not respond to a request for comment.)

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spo...cu-stadium

The city would not obstruct this. The mayor, the only Hispanic on city council, and a majority of the County Board of Supervisors are SDSU alums.

Even if the city wanted to stop it, they'd face a severe public backlash. It was the voters who passed the referendum requiring the city to give the Qualcomm land to SDSU in the first place.

Who is going to pay the $8 million to modify the stadium?

(09-16-2020 04:16 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 04:09 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 01:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 11:27 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(09-16-2020 11:16 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  From the article; "The largest local venues for football beyond SDCCU Stadium are located at University of San Diego, Southwestern College and Mesa College and none of them seat more than 7,500 fans. Petco Park seats 40,209, but the field is not large enough to accommodate football as presently configured."

Author didn’t do their homework. Petco can accommodate football.

According to this, it would take expensive modifications.

Plus the Holiday Bowl would not conflict with Baseball, unless the SDSU regular season.

Why not play at Petco Park?
SDSU floated this as an option when the city considered condemning SDCCU Stadium after the 2018 football season. Padres Executive Chairman Ron Fowler, a big SDSU donor, initially said the Aztecs couldn’t play at Petco Park past 2019 but later clarified his comments to allow them as temporary tenants once the baseball season ended.

That could mean November if the Padres reached the World Series.

Another problem: Petco Park needs to jackhammer the outfield wall to accommodate a football field, which could cost millions. In the ballpark’s current configuration, only about a 100-yard field can fit — 20 to 30 yards short when you include end zones and space behind them. Also, the city’s original memorandum of understanding with the Padres would have to be amended because it states “no amateur or professional football games shall be played at the Ballpark.”

Wicker said he had discussions with Fowler about their current predicament but ultimately couldn’t overcome the scheduling logistics. (Fowler did not respond to a request for comment.)

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spo...cu-stadium

The city would not obstruct this. The mayor, the only Hispanic on city council, and a majority of the County Board of Supervisors are SDSU alums.

Even if the city wanted to stop it, they'd face a severe public backlash. It was the voters who passed the referendum requiring the city to give the Qualcomm land to SDSU in the first place.

Who is going to pay the $8 million to modify the stadium?

That's another issue. I'm just saying that the city would be more than willing to modify the lease to allow SDSU to play football there for a few seasons.