OT: ESPN Reporting Chargers Set To Move To L.A.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18455802/chargers-expected-announce-move-san-diego-los-angeles
Likely would play in L.A. Coliseum until stadium is built in Inglewood (always up to no good).
January 11th, 2017 at 11:58 PM ^
Suckers will be lessees just like the Jets.
Anyone else cringe all season while ESPN NFL guys were advocating for public funds by saying things like "San Diego do you really want to lose the Chargers?" before games?
January 12th, 2017 at 12:15 AM ^
1. Why would Stan Kroenke want to have any competition in LA for his own team? LA barely cares about having their own NFL team as it is. I'm not saying LA doesn't care about the NFL because there are so many transplants here that love their "hometown" teams.
And to take this a step further with the way the Rams fucked up the Goff pick it's more likely than not that the Chargers are going to be the better short-term team. So it's more likely than not that the casual fan that cares about wins/losses will become a Charger fan than a Rams fan.
Also, it's not like Stan needs the money that it will receive from the Chargers to essentially rent the venue for games.
So why would he allow a second, better team to come to his house to steal all the attention/fans?
2. It would seem to be in the NFL's best interest to have as many fans as possible in as many places as possible. But this move does the opposite. It takes an already viable team/fanbase and stuffs it into an area that is already sort of saturated. Again, Rams fans are pretty marginally interested already. So now you expect another team fanbase to just sprout out of nowhere to support a second team? While at the same time basically losing all of the Chargers fans that loved their team for years?
It all just makes so little sense, unless I'm missing something....
January 12th, 2017 at 12:38 AM ^
1) Kroenke will make so much money off of a second team he probably doesn't care about the fan attention. Rent, sure, but he'll also get a piece of the gate/concessions and all of where the fans shop and stay in the surrounding complex. Probably the biggest benefit will be in the property value of the development.
Even if he did care about sharing the spotlight the NFL approved this stadium deal under the condition he give a second team the option to play there.
2) The NFL represents the owners, not the fans or the players. The Chargers owners get what they want here and the rest of the NFL gets to tell their cities "we will move if you don't build our stadiums" and use a potential future move to SD as leverage for years to come.
It's all bad and short-sighted, but that's how they do business.
January 12th, 2017 at 6:25 AM ^
Was LA dying for an NFL team so much that they need two now? I don't recall the Rams being all that popular this year and now the Chargers think they're just gonna roll in and potentially do better?
January 12th, 2017 at 12:13 PM ^
1. Their option to become a tenant in the Rams stadium expires this week. It's widely assumed the Raiders would jump at the chance to move to LA rather than Vegas.
2. Just being in LA probably increases the value of the Chargers franchise by about 25%.
3. I don't think anyone in LA, or the NFL besides the Chargers' owner, is particularly excited or interested in the Chargers moving. (This can be seen by the fact that they're not going to play at the Coliseum but at the Galaxy's stadium in Carson, ie they're going to be the tenant of a MLS team). This is about the Chargers owner thinking that it's far better for his bottom line to move to LA.
January 12th, 2017 at 8:55 AM ^
I don't know about this one. L.A.'s a big market, but there's something to be said for having a market all to yourself, so you don't have to compete for local fans. The Lions can attest to that one.
January 12th, 2017 at 10:12 AM ^
Is that if (cross fingers) the Chargers flop in LA, it may discourage this game of stadium hardball that keeps happening. It's becoming bipartisan for people to realize publily funded stadiums are a huge boondoggle and waste of taxpayer money.
January 12th, 2017 at 12:13 PM ^
What a disgrace!
If you put a crap product on the field in LA or San Diego or Ann Arbor, then the results are predictable.
Los Angeles is the most apathetic city on earth when it comes to sports. The residents can barely maintain sufficient attention span for the Lakers, Trojans, Bruins and Dodgers and Angels. Adding the Chargers into the mix is just dumb.
If you haven't been to San Diego before, then I recommend that you go visit. I think it's one of the best cities in the United States. We must not be told to f#$$* ourselves!!!!
January 12th, 2017 at 12:15 PM ^
It's hard to support a team that you know won't be there next year.
January 12th, 2017 at 12:35 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad