Jerry Brown kills stadium deal for Chargers (San Diego: lofts, layoffs) - California (CA) - City-Data Forum

1AngryTaxPayer · 01-06-2011, 01:56 PM

Probably the last gasp too.

Redevelopment funds on chopping block | 89.3 KPCC (http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2011/01/06/brown-redevelopment/ - broken link)

Beware_of_Dog · 01-07-2011, 01:03 PM

On the surface I must admit that building a new football stadium doesn't seem like a priority in severe economic times, anymore than going out to buy a new car when you are about to lose your house. And I live for sports and would love a new stadium. But I suppose there is a time and place for everything. Until someone could prove that redevelopment projects would actually add instant money in the coffers of the state, I couldn't see a bankrupt state having to pay for it.

loveautumn · 01-07-2011, 01:18 PM

were state funds involved in the Charger stadium plans? I thought it was city taxes and money from the owners.

BacktoBlue · 01-07-2011, 01:26 PM

The state was going to give SD more redevelopment money so we could build a new stadium.

The Chargers should have gotten the new stadium, not the Padres

loveautumn · 01-07-2011, 03:02 PM

I can totally agree with you on that one. The only reason Petco was build was on the euphoria of the Padres going to the World Series that year. I rememer it all too well, the taxpayers got suckered into thinking we were going to have teams in the playoffs every year. If the owners aren't going to put a winning product on the field, it doesn't matter how nice the downtown stadium is, IMO.

Having Super Bowls here (whether SD is in them or not) brings in a tremendous amount of revenue and prestige to our city...unfortunately, we will never see it again.

shmoov_groovzsd · 01-07-2011, 03:11 PM

I wouldnt mind getting new ownership here that does not want to play games. The Charger fans are loyal and any owner of a team would love to have that type of base to work with.

Why not do what other franchisees have done in the past? I am talking about what the Browns did (in the 90s?) when they moved for a year and became the Ravens. They eventually went back to Cleveland however under new ownership I believe. The same thing with the Houston Oilers and became the Titans. The Oilers came back and then eventually changed to the Texans.

I am pretty certain that there would be no love lost for the Spanos's if they left SD.

BacktoBlue · 01-07-2011, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shmoov_groovzsd

I wouldnt mind getting new ownership here that does not want to play games. The Charger fans are loyal and any owner of a team would love to have that type of base to work with.

Why not do what other franchisees have done in the past? I am talking about what the Browns did (in the 90s?) when they moved for a year and became the Ravens. They eventually went back to Cleveland however under new ownership I believe. The same thing with the Houston Oilers and became the Titans. The Oilers came back and then eventually changed to the Texans.

I am pretty certain that there would be no love lost for the Spanos's if they left SD.

Some Angelinos I have talked to claim themelves that the Chargers won't move, there just isn't the fan base up there they said ( I agree, theyre all Raiders fans)

We Charger fans don't have strong positive feelings for the owners but we still do love the team and if they left, it would hit hard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by loveautumn

I can totally agree with you on that one. The only reason Petco was build was on the euphoria of the Padres going to the World Series that year. I rememer it all too well, the taxpayers got suckered into thinking we were going to have teams in the playoffs every year. If the owners aren't going to put a winning product on the field, it doesn't matter how nice the downtown stadium is, IMO.

Having Super Bowls here (whether SD is in them or not) brings in a tremendous amount of revenue and prestige to our city...unfortunately, we will never see it again.

Totally agree. We could also have World Cup games and other large events. (San Diego is in the running to host a World Cup game)

Now Petco park may not have been as sucessful as people thought but look what happened to the area around petco. It boomed and grew with first class lofts and housing as well as the Gaslamp. Baseball stadiums are harder to make for multiple events unlike a Football stadium is. With Football stadiums, they can be used for Super Bowls, concerts, Soccer games etc. Much more can be used with a Football stadium then a Baseball stadium.

djxpress · 01-07-2011, 03:31 PM

Since when has building a new, expensive stadium for a losing team been a good economic decision? The Chargers suck, they proved it time and time again. The one time they actually MADE it to the Superbowl, they got their asses handed to them on a platter.

Hey Chargers, thanks for promising to stay in 2011-2012, the year of the lockout, must have been a tough decision to decide to stay for that.

How about winning some games, maybe a championship, then the citizens of San Diego can be asked to pay for your stadium?

Gentoo · 01-07-2011, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loveautumn

I can totally agree with you on that one. The only reason Petco was build was on the euphoria of the Padres going to the World Series that year. I rememer it all too well, the taxpayers got suckered into thinking we were going to have teams in the playoffs every year. If the owners aren't going to put a winning product on the field, it doesn't matter how nice the downtown stadium is, IMO.

Having Super Bowls here (whether SD is in them or not) brings in a tremendous amount of revenue and prestige to our city...unfortunately, we will never see it again.

I'm with you on this too. The Chargers deserved a new stadium, and still do more than the padres did. This is only the first time in 5 years they didn't make the playoffs. Can't say much for the Padres. I am confident that the Chargers are a future Superbowl champion team.

You really think SD won't have another Superbowl?

Gentoo · 01-07-2011, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djxpress

Since when has building a new, expensive stadium for a losing team been a good economic decision? The Chargers suck, they proved it time and time again. The one time they actually MADE it to the Superbowl, they got their asses handed to them on a platter.

Hey Chargers, thanks for promising to stay in 2011-2012, the year of the lockout, must have been a tough decision to decide to stay for that.

How about winning some games, maybe a championship, then the citizens of San Diego can be asked to pay for your stadium?

in 1995 the Chargers were up against a 49er team that was almost unbeatable. The 49er's are the only team I support over the Chargers but since then, it's them who have sucked, not the Chargers. I don't recall seeing the 9er's in many playoffs recently. The Chargers may not get to the Superbowl but to make the playoffs 5 years in a row is not exactly sucking.