L.A. talk should be concern for Bolts fans

[oneinchpunch]

I've been to a Raiders game in L.A. and survived.
A soccer game in London, from a distance, seems far more dangerous. Possibly less chance of getting mouth herpes from the fish and chips at English games than from the stolen hot dogs at Raiders games, but still - English soccer fans seem more fucked up than Raiders fans.

I've been to 8 Raiders home games. For the most part I agree. But I have seen and experienced a lot of violence at their games.

[thelightningwill]

I've been to 8 Raiders home games. For the most part I agree. But I have seen and experienced a lot of violence at their games.

So have I. Hate the Raiders.
But Europeans and their soccer - that seems to be another level of danger.

[Panama]

Let the terds move to London. or is that an intolerable act against England?

No, please, no! It was bad enough having the Turds in LA when I lived in SD, but having them in London would be truly intolerable.

[Panama]

F that, don't ruin England. Let the stay in Oakland or move to San Antonio. Preferably San Antonio.

Can't we just ship them off to Bismarck and forget about them?

[KNSD]

How would people of that mindset react if the family DID build a stadium with their own $ and deleted the name San Diego from the team and all team merchandise and advertising, moved the corporate offices to Mexico to avoid US taxes and hired only people from Stockton to work for the team and banned all public officials and uses from the the place?

They'd probably go to the beach instead of watch the team? How do you think they would react?

[KNSD]

at least you admit it- but how can you be a Chargers fan and not want them to stay while helping vilify the ownership at every turn? :banghead:

As I posted earlier, San Diego Stadium in Mission Valley was a cooperative county-wide venture with a Sports Authority specifically created to get it done because it was a no brainer project for the benefit of the general public. Time for the sequel. The only thing that's changed since then is shrill public hostility from some citizens with more political clout than common sense towards 1 of the main expected permanent tenants (SDSU would obviously be another) simply because they happen to support Republican issues and candidates and are successful capitalists.

You don't see anything wrong with that? What happened to the bigger picture of the public good?

I can be a fan of a team and understand that the NFL is a highly profitable multi-billion dollar industry that needs no subsidies to survive. Governments subsidize promising technologies that need time to develop into something great. They don't subsidize mature industries that already have a well-defined source of income.

And no, the Chargers are not like Civil projects (roads, dams, bridges, water plants). They are a for-profit sports team.

And yes, the alumni of SDSU should help the Aztecs build a new stadium. All those alumni who fill 1/3rd of Qualcomm every time the Aztecs play should be more than enough to get it done. And yes, the city and county should help the Chargers navigate the red tape to get a stadium done. And if there's state tax break loopholes that would help get this done, then they should be used.

However, let's face it. Sports (football) does not anchor the lives of people in this city like it does in other parts of the country. There's like 6 Charger fans at my place of work (100+). Most of them like the team when it wins. The "public good" in San Diego is not the "public good" in Green Bay.

[MakoShark]

I can be a fan of a team and understand that the NFL is a highly profitable multi-billion dollar industry that needs no subsidies to survive. Governments subsidize promising technologies that need time to develop into something great. They don't subsidize mature industries that already have a well-defined source of income.

And no, the Chargers are not like Civil projects (roads, dams, bridges, water plants). They are a for-profit sports team.

And yes, the alumni of SDSU should help the Aztecs build a new stadium. All those alumni who fill 1/3rd of Qualcomm every time the Aztecs play should be more than enough to get it done. And yes, the city and county should help the Chargers navigate the red tape to get a stadium done. And if there's state tax break loopholes that would help get this done, then they should be used.

However, let's face it. Sports (football) does not anchor the lives of people in this city like it does in other parts of the country. There's like 6 Charger fans at my place of work (100+). Most of them like the team when it wins. The "public good" in San Diego is not the "public good" in Green Bay.

So, our Gov't hasn't subsidized the "for profit" airlines with bailouts? How about the "for profit" auto industry? Wall Street? Fannie and Freddie Mae? I realize those are all on the Federal level, but it still doesn't change the point that the Gov't (Fed, State or local) can and will subsidize private ventures if the ROI is palatable. In the case of a new MULTI USE stadium future revenues and job creation would be the benefit that the local economy would receive.

[SDFan]

I can be a fan of a team and understand that the NFL is a highly profitable multi-billion dollar industry that needs no subsidies to survive. Governments subsidize promising technologies that need time to develop into something great. They don't subsidize mature industries that already have a well-defined source of income.

And no, the Chargers are not like Civil projects (roads, dams, bridges, water plants). They are a for-profit sports team.

And yes, the alumni of SDSU should help the Aztecs build a new stadium. All those alumni who fill 1/3rd of Qualcomm every time the Aztecs play should be more than enough to get it done. And yes, the city and county should help the Chargers navigate the red tape to get a stadium done. And if there's state tax break loopholes that would help get this done, then they should be used.

However, let's face it. Sports (football) does not anchor the lives of people in this city like it does in other parts of the country. There's like 6 Charger fans at my place of work (100+). Most of them like the team when it wins. The "public good" in San Diego is not the "public good" in Green Bay.

The public good is having the venue itself available for use for all citizens- it's simply wrong to focus on the tenants' personal or business finances to determine the viability or worthiness of the project. How much money does Balboa Park bring in? The new central library? Our beaches? The Civic Center? The Broadway pier area with a new public water park + ships that make $ simply by being there and attracting tourists? I could go on, but you should get the idea there. Why was it a great idea in the early 1960's to build a centrally located multi-use venue, but not now? The Chargers already had Balboa Stadium and the Aztecs had Aztec Bowl conveniently located right on campus and it was HOPED we'd get a MLB franchise to go there too, but there was no guarantee it was going to make $ for the region- or even break even without subsidies for maintenance, etc. WHY do that? It's what mature, big cities do that's why. They provide services and structures beyond the basics like schools and firehouses for the benefit of their citizens- even if 100% of the citizens may not use it or some don't want it. I could again mention the free advertising every time our city is shown on TV (priceless) and gushed about by the talking heads which spurs tourism (our #1 or 2 Industry), along with civic pride whose value can't be calculated and how the Q was used for an emergency shelter and OPS center during the big East Count fires that engulfed Scripps, Mira Mesa, Rancho Bernardo as tangible public benefits.

I'm actually not worried about the team fleeing to LA and still think the current Mission Valley site is the ideal location, but its time to replace the crumbling money pit there now and just ignore, run over, silence the critics and obstructionists and just git er done.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

They'd probably go to the beach instead of watch the team? How do you think they would react?

Hmm. Might just be the problem (and I mean even beyond football).

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

I can be a fan of a team and understand that the NFL is a highly profitable multi-billion dollar industry that needs no subsidies to survive. Governments subsidize promising technologies that need time to develop into something great. They don't subsidize mature industries that already have a well-defined source of income.

And no, the Chargers are not like Civil projects (roads, dams, bridges, water plants). They are a for-profit sports team.

And yes, the alumni of SDSU should help the Aztecs build a new stadium. All those alumni who fill 1/3rd of Qualcomm every time the Aztecs play should be more than enough to get it done. And yes, the city and county should help the Chargers navigate the red tape to get a stadium done. And if there's state tax break loopholes that would help get this done, then they should be used.

However, let's face it. Sports (football) does not anchor the lives of people in this city like it does in other parts of the country. There's like 6 Charger fans at my place of work (100+). Most of them like the team when it wins. The "public good" in San Diego is not the "public good" in Green Bay.

It's not about survival. It's about what the Chargers and the stadium mean to San Diego. And by that, I don't mean as an expression of civic pride (though you could throw that log on the fire, as well). The Chargers are part of what makes San Diego major league. It's not cultural outlets and cuisine. If they leave and it's the weather and the beach, it's a nicer Destin with a zoo. And does the city benefit from taxes, employment, trolley usage on a per game basis? How many major national events has the city hosted since the Q was deemed a dumpster fire? Now places like New York, Indy and Dallas are hosting Super Bowls without SD even getting a sniff. Does the city benefit from those events drawing tourists, taxes on rental cars and hotel rooms, employment and free brand advertising? Oh and by the way, what will expansion of the convention center cost? It's supposedly desperately needed as the city loses out on major conventions to other cities. And SDSU? Ok, sure the alumni should fund it. Is that institution and its teams worthy of subsidy? What about the bowl games and the economic benefits coming from them? Should SDSU be the only beneficiary or should the city share in that? And how about some of the other events? Soccer, concerts, monster trucks? If you want a real world parallel, how about the Gaslamp and Little Italy? Those areas were completely dead before PETCO. What economic and civic benefit has the city rived from those revivals? Say whatever you like about the Padres and I'd probably beat you to the punch, but there's no denying the positive impact of PETCO on those areas of town and the SD economy.

Myself, I'm against all subsidies. But insofar as it's a fact of life, I would argue that this subsidy is at least as worthy as some of the foolish things the city subsidizes. I realize that taxes in CA are very high and the cost of living is very high. But look in the mirror on that one. Mismanagement, underfunded public pensions and a decaying public university system that used to be the envy of the world? Look in the mirror. You've got to spend money to make money. Unfortunately, there a lot of free rider mentality in CA and I hate to admit it, a lack of vision and leadership in SD.

[Gwynning_Spirit]

Stadiums could then be built with bonds...

If I build it, they will come.

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

LA talk = Psycho babble!

Have you not heard Moon Units song?