No the soccer stadium going on the West side downtown by union station the riverfront property is still empty
Not good for the Chargers
- Thread starter Loyal
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
We've heard a lot of different things about the arrangement with all the revenue streams so it's still a bit cloudy.
Kroenke can void the lease any time he wants to..........and if the NFL decides to move the Chargers that is exactly what will happen. If the league wants the Chargers out of LA and into another market or back to SD that lease will evaporate.
The NFL can let Spanos off the hook for the LA relocation fee if they move them to a different market, but he will still pay to move. How much will be the question, obviously less than the move to LA.
I don't know why you would mention letting the Rams out of the relocation fee.
Did the city actually purchase or just negotiate deals that then would have fallen through.
not sure what you mean. The land for the riverfront stadium is already purchased and owned by the city. The land for the MLS stadium is already purchased and owned by the family that owns Enterprise and I forget the guy name but he is owner or CEO of World Wide technology the only thing they’re waiting on is approval from MLS that STL is getting a team.
My point was that just letting Spanos leave town screws Stan out of millions upon millions of dollars in contracts. All naming rights, advertising, etc is signed to contracts contingent on two teams worth of home games at the stadium. So Stan isn't going to just let the Chargers leave. He can't unless he's going to pay for the breach of contracts all by himself... which he won't do. So my point was that in order for the Chargers to leave now some money is going to have to be thrown Stan's way to let them. And vice versa, the owners won't do that unless there is definitive research showing that they'll be better off for it dollar wise. I just mentioned the relocation fee since it's the most direct, tangible thing that Stan owes the NFL... straight cash. Simply saying if the owners thought they'd get more money by essentially giving Stan money to breach all of his contracts and let Spanos leave that they would. And if Stan feels that is a better deal he'd do it.
Otherwise, the owners couldn't care less if the stadium is empty at this point if its going to cost them more money than it'll save. And I don't see that being the case (them moving again) at the moment. The Chargers and LA are stuck with each other.
I didn't know the city owned the land I thought they had to buy some lots or whatever to have enough acreage.
The money from contracts the Chargers put together would not fall on Kroenke and so he wouldn't get money to settle them. That would be on Spanos. But really right now it's PSL money and I don't think anyone has cut checks (and possibly won't right now) for anything yet.
There isn't much to refund.
Naming rights and a lot of other stuff has nothing to do with who is playing, performing etc. I don't think the stadium would have two different names.
Naw all of that was already in place I think it was just one biker bar on Broadway they had to work with but the land was already pretty much empty just had some vacant warehouses on it
It wouldn't have two names... it would have one name and it'd be paying Stan with a contract stating there'd be 20 games played in it a year. Thus twice the exposure as a normal naming right for NFL games. Same for all advertising linked to the stadium. Yes there might not be contracts in place for all of this yet but I'm sure there's a few. I'm not saying all of this is set in stone. Just stating that the Chargers leaving might be a lot more complicating than Stan just tearing up a lease and saying cya out of the kindness of his heart. There is a lot of money now tied to the Chargers being there for 20 years. One way or another a lot of money or handshakes would have to happen to let them just leave. And that won't happen unless everyone is happy about it... Stan, NFL, Spanos, etc.
Might not be a ghosttown but it will still be sixteen road games for the chargers all year.
Well that doesnt bode well for san diego residents obviously unless the NFL came to their senses and decided not to do that.the NFL changes their rules all the time so that would be possible.Not saying they would but they could i am guessing since again,they change their rules all the time.
If their is no way of getting around it,then looks like it will be 20 years before the san diego fans get them back. Too bad for the SD fans if there is no way of getting around it because looks like they will have to suffer same as every LA Ram fan like us did and go through the exact same thing everybody in california and all Los Angeles Rams fans had to go through,suffer through 20 years of having to wait.Thats too bad for SD fans,they will have to suffer same as we did.my heartt goes out to them,i know how depressed i was having to wait 20 plus years to get them back.
goodel and the NFL are fools if they think the chargers will ever have a big fans base there.Not going to happen.only fair weather bandwagon fans will embrace the chargers out there other than the same group out in LA that does.san diego fans will never drive out there.Goodel is a fool if he thinks they will get over it and make the drive.not happening.
at least one person has made the false assumption that the plan was for two teams not getting it that it was just for the Rams and it was built for TWO teams so they could continue to use the threat of LA for leverage for other teams but THIS is the story I got from the administrater of BBTLAR site. He KNOWS his stuff trust me.so this ends the nonsense we have heard from a certain poster they wanted the chargers in LA.
1. The plan was for the Rams ONLY in Los Angeles. There is no sharing.
2. Every fan the Chargers get in Los Angeles is one less fan for the Rams. Any minute of airtime they get on TV or radio is one minute less for the Rams. If people are talking aboutthe Chargers, then they are not talking about the Rams.
3. Dean Spanos did EVERYTHING in his power to prevent the Rams from coming back to Los Angeles. Where's his apology to us? Had he won with his stupid Carson stadium, would he have cared one whit about what we wanted? Would you be applauding him had he won and screwed us all out of getting the Rams back home?
4. We want it ALL. There is no reason to accept them. Spanos only deserves scorn, ridicule, and shame while they are here in L.A.
5. They BELONG in San Diego.
Point number three of his is WHY kroneke would love spanos to go back.He wanted LA to himself but he had to conform to the rules of the NFL to bring the Rams to LA so he had no choice.
1. The plan was for the Rams ONLY in Los Angeles. There is no sharing.
2. Every fan the Chargers get in Los Angeles is one less fan for the Rams. Any minute of airtime they get on TV or radio is one minute less for the Rams. If people are talking aboutthe Chargers, then they are not talking about the Rams.
3. Dean Spanos did EVERYTHING in his power to prevent the Rams from coming back to Los Angeles. Where's his apology to us? Had he won with his stupid Carson stadium, would he have cared one whit about what we wanted? Would you be applauding him had he won and screwed us all out of getting the Rams back home?
4. We want it ALL. There is no reason to accept them. Spanos only deserves scorn, ridicule, and shame while they are here in L.A.
5. They BELONG in San Diego.
Point number three of his is WHY kroneke would love spanos to go back.He wanted LA to himself but he had to conform to the rules of the NFL to bring the Rams to LA so he had no choice.
Last edited:
This article backs up what i was saying earlier,that the 20 year lease agreement is not a locked done deal,that they can easily get out of it if they wanted to.
Don't believe the report that the Chargers are locked into L.A. for at least 20 years. That "firm" lease is anything but. No, the league doesn't want to admit yet the Chargers are a mistake
https://cbssports.radio.com/article...oPA2YODlhF5DoMxyQ5f4KNf-gbitljJUYeKDfmpsFrj8Q
A two team stadium was part of the deal to do the move to LA according to people in the room, meaning the owners, and Kroenke agreed. And the "threat" of a move by other teams was removed when they gave the Chargers AND the Raiders the right to move to a city they were as a team planning on building a stadium to share.
1. No that wasn't the plan.
2. That may or not be true, but most of us aren't butthurt by that.
3. Spanos doesn't owe you jack. If anyone, ANYONE, involved in this owes fans in LA an apology it would be Kroenke. Remember, he only agreed to buy 30% of the Rams under the condition they moved OUT of LA to STL. The Rams spent 25 years out of LA in large part because of Kroenke. Email him and ask for your apology.
4. I'm chuckling at your fits and tantrums over someone else sharing a stadium with the Rams..........it's become boring and infantile. It's such a non-issue that the media isn't even talking about it.
5. Yup, the Charger do belong in San Diego.
So your closing line there confuses because first you say that the 2 team stadium was just to use LA as a threat, then you say the reason , in your opinion, that he wants Spanos to leave is because he had to "conform to the rules of the NFL to bring the Rams to LA". Kroenke KNEW either Spanos or Davis would be coming. You choose to ignore that the NFL gave two teams the first and second right.
One other thing you probably aren't aware of..........there is evidence that Spanos and Kroenke were planning to build a stadium to share years ago and had looked at the land Kroenke eventually bought as the site for this stadium. So there is more to this than maybe meets your eye.
Anyway you have some unhealthy obsession with this, it's at a level I can't imagine giving a fuck about but whatever.
I hope you can let it go, or find something else to dwell on and go on and on and on about.
This is giving Spanos way too much credit. Move to LA, have it be a spectacular failure, then get more monetary help from the league to slink back to SD?
Yeah, maybe this scenario could happen, but it sure wouldn’t be because of a “plan.”
Spanos is so darn stupid, he screwed over his city, his fans, and himself.
As screwed up as the situation may be, I can’t see the Chargers’ situation resolved in less than two years. I think the league will give the Chargers a chance to at least make a respectable showing in Stanadu Stadium, then take it from there.
Hey, I’d be happy if the Bolts left town, I just can’t see it happening before 2021 at the earliest.
Because Oakland didn’t cough up $, and Vegas did.
Davis wanted to stay in Oak, but $ won out.
To me, this gets to a central question which I still don’t know the answer to.
My question is, “Does Kroenke WANT a second team as a tenant in his new stadium?”
On the one hand, it would seem that he does, since he gets a cut of game day revenue (at least partially, I think, from parking, etc.), as well as increased advertising, etc. Over the next 20 years or so, wouldn’t Kroenke make more money having a viable 2nd team as his tenant in Inglewood?
On the other hand, my understanding was that initially, Kroenke very much wanted LA all to himself. Kroenke only made the Inglewood stadium capable of hosting two teams because the owners forced him to do so. As I understand it, the owners basically said to Kroenke, “If you want to leave St Louis and build your new stadium in LA, you must also be willing to allow the Chargers to join you in LA if they choose.”
I guess I still don’t feel sure about what Kroenke wants NOW. My guess is that he still would prefer what he wanted initially— one city, one team— the LA Rams, and no one else.