No, they'll eventually end up building a new stadium adjacent to LA Live/Staples. The next released memo will state that stadiums are now required to have skyscrapers in the background. I wouldn't be surprised if they razed the convention center and stuck it there.
The Coliseum neighborhood is a crime infested dump. I still don't understand why they keep on are trying to put lipstick on this pig. The traffic alone in the area is a fiasco.
Fix that first, to ensure a quick escape from that hole.
The Coliseum Commission has had twenty-five to so something. And the only thing they've accomplish is driving away competition that had a better idea. The NFL has said they were not returning to the Coliseum for the last thirteen years, this whole thing has been a waist of time. It's up to Anaheim now.
I am very proud of our city. We will not be held hostage to any league. In order to get a team in here, they want the taxpayer to fork the bill. Why? It doesn't make sense financially. Numerous studies have shown that even with an occasional Super Bowl the economic benefit of 16 games a year does not balance to the cost of a new or upgraded stadium to the taxpayer.
I am happy with the status quo. Although, I would be happier if the NFL would not consider this market as part of the San Diego market for broadcasting purposes so that the networks wouldn't be required to carry Chargers games every week regardless of the quality of the game into this market. We are as close to San Diego as NYC is to Philadelphia. Why consider us as part of the San Diego market?
I'm proud that our city hasn't caved-in to those yokels at the NFL. The NFL has never been serious about bringing a team here. Instead, they've use our city to leverage demands of new stadiums and other concessions on the cities who question them. And don't get me started on multi-millionaires using public monies to build their cushy hobby teams. Not in my lifetime, I'll vote out my city council member in a heartbeat if they move in that direction. Lastly that comment on Anaheim, your kidding right? I'm sticking to college ball
Re Andre: Unless you have direct TV or the NFL network you can only watch the games the TV stations want you to watch.
Re Marucio: No I'm not Kidding, Anaheim completed the Environmental Impact Report two years after the Rams left and it's still good today. The proposed area to build a stadium is in the parking lot of Angels Stadium called the Platinum Triangle
Ron Dee why are you happy with the Status Quo!? The difference between NYC (New Jersey actually) and Philadelphia and here is that BOTH CITIES HAVE TEAMS) The Chargers are the only NFL team in this region, so if you want to stop Charger games from being broadcast in LA, then a team needs to be here. I can't think of a stadium in the NFL or even the LA Mausoleum that is strictly used for football, they have other events as well. I agree that public funds shouldn't be used for the financing, There are other means to build a stadium, though private companies and even naming rights and if the city wouldn't like that then an owner can sell naming right back to the city.
LarrySB, I don't necessarily want to stop Charger games from being broadcast into this market. I would like the NFL to free the LA market from San Diego so, for example, on a typical Sunday at about 1:12PM during an early game that's tied with 2 minutes to go in the 4th quarter, the network suddenly cuts away with an announcer stating "Due to contractual obligations we now switch over to the beginning of the San Diego Chargers game."
RonDee, Thus far the only time a local station has cut away to a different game is if it's a blow out regardless of who's playing. The LA market is free from San Diego, when you consider that there is a radio station that broadcast OAKLAND Raider games as well as a local station that promotes them.
Has it really come down to this!? Let's set aside the TV market aspect for a moment. This is the second largest city in the nation and when talking about the NFL knowing that the city isn't represented, is a weird feeling.
I'm aware what the NFL has done in the last 13 years, but at the same time, the people who've been involved in this haven't learned many lessons beyond the "subsidizing billionaires" aspect of this.
RSS
Comments
I am shocked.
Posted by: Rick | October 21, 2007 05:03 AM
No, they'll eventually end up building a new stadium adjacent to LA Live/Staples. The next released memo will state that stadiums are now required to have skyscrapers in the background. I wouldn't be surprised if they razed the convention center and stuck it there.
Posted by: gerstle | October 21, 2007 06:21 AM
The Coliseum neighborhood is a crime infested dump. I still don't understand why they keep on are trying to put lipstick on this pig. The traffic alone in the area is a fiasco.
Fix that first, to ensure a quick escape from that hole.
Posted by: Frank | October 21, 2007 07:50 AM
The Coliseum Commission has had twenty-five to so something. And the only thing they've accomplish is driving away competition that had a better idea. The NFL has said they were not returning to the Coliseum for the last thirteen years, this whole thing has been a waist of time. It's up to Anaheim now.
Posted by: Larry SB | October 21, 2007 08:10 AM
lets get our city in shape before we enrich individual mulrimillionaires (nfl owners) with corporate subsidies veiled as civic pride!
Posted by: nick | October 21, 2007 11:25 AM
Who needs 'em!
I have a TV, I can watch any game I want to see. (none)
If the NFL is so great a money maker, why don't they build their own stadium and reap all the profits for themselves???
Posted by: /////ANDRE | October 21, 2007 12:39 PM
I am very proud of our city. We will not be held hostage to any league. In order to get a team in here, they want the taxpayer to fork the bill. Why? It doesn't make sense financially. Numerous studies have shown that even with an occasional Super Bowl the economic benefit of 16 games a year does not balance to the cost of a new or upgraded stadium to the taxpayer.
I am happy with the status quo. Although, I would be happier if the NFL would not consider this market as part of the San Diego market for broadcasting purposes so that the networks wouldn't be required to carry Chargers games every week regardless of the quality of the game into this market. We are as close to San Diego as NYC is to Philadelphia. Why consider us as part of the San Diego market?
Posted by: RonDee | October 21, 2007 02:09 PM
I couldn't agree more with Ron Dee
I'm proud that our city hasn't caved-in to those yokels at the NFL. The NFL has never been serious about bringing a team here. Instead, they've use our city to leverage demands of new stadiums and other concessions on the cities who question them. And don't get me started on multi-millionaires using public monies to build their cushy hobby teams. Not in my lifetime, I'll vote out my city council member in a heartbeat if they move in that direction. Lastly that comment on Anaheim, your kidding right? I'm sticking to college ball
Posted by: Maurico | October 21, 2007 06:23 PM
Re Andre: Unless you have direct TV or the NFL network you can only watch the games the TV stations want you to watch.
Re Marucio: No I'm not Kidding, Anaheim completed the Environmental Impact Report two years after the Rams left and it's still good today. The proposed area to build a stadium is in the parking lot of Angels Stadium called the Platinum Triangle
Ron Dee why are you happy with the Status Quo!? The difference between NYC (New Jersey actually) and Philadelphia and here is that BOTH CITIES HAVE TEAMS) The Chargers are the only NFL team in this region, so if you want to stop Charger games from being broadcast in LA, then a team needs to be here. I can't think of a stadium in the NFL or even the LA Mausoleum that is strictly used for football, they have other events as well. I agree that public funds shouldn't be used for the financing, There are other means to build a stadium, though private companies and even naming rights and if the city wouldn't like that then an owner can sell naming right back to the city.
Posted by: LarrySB | October 21, 2007 06:58 PM
LarrySB, I don't necessarily want to stop Charger games from being broadcast into this market. I would like the NFL to free the LA market from San Diego so, for example, on a typical Sunday at about 1:12PM during an early game that's tied with 2 minutes to go in the 4th quarter, the network suddenly cuts away with an announcer stating "Due to contractual obligations we now switch over to the beginning of the San Diego Chargers game."
Posted by: RonDee | October 21, 2007 09:49 PM
RonDee, Thus far the only time a local station has cut away to a different game is if it's a blow out regardless of who's playing. The LA market is free from San Diego, when you consider that there is a radio station that broadcast OAKLAND Raider games as well as a local station that promotes them.
Has it really come down to this!? Let's set aside the TV market aspect for a moment. This is the second largest city in the nation and when talking about the NFL knowing that the city isn't represented, is a weird feeling.
I'm aware what the NFL has done in the last 13 years, but at the same time, the people who've been involved in this haven't learned many lessons beyond the "subsidizing billionaires" aspect of this.
Posted by: Larry SB | October 21, 2007 10:46 PM