Dean Spanos forced to sell Chargers?

[Kiimo]

This is amazing.

Imagine owning a company that prints money for every other owner, in a stadium you didn't even build and still you bounce charity checks.


Watch Jeff Bezos buy this team and move it back to San Diego where he doesn't have to rent out a stadium to a competitor. This is all over the radio in LA right now.

I don't think Fredo would have done worse in the family business ..it's about time we quit insulting Fredo by using his name to refer to Dean@sdutCanepa pic.twitter.com/Vnh7LcPJFc

— Burt Grossman (@burt_grossman) May 25, 2021

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by kccrow

The thread is pretty much about the theory that Spanos is out, someone else in. With that in mind, I don't know that the thought that a city can't afford a stadium really necessarily holds as much weight. At least not full funding. I think the NFL may need to also consider ownership that must partially fund the stadium build. That is, if they aren't insistent the Chargers remain in LA.

It's an unfortunate cluster****. Hell, using a 40,000 seat college stadium in San Diego wouldn't be the worst idea. It's probably their normal attendance.

Dude you suggested ****ing Omaha for a NFL franchise. Just take the L and go on.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by kccrow

The thread is pretty much about the theory that Spanos is out, someone else in. With that in mind, I don't know that the thought that a city can't afford a stadium really necessarily holds as much weight. At least not full funding. I think the NFL may need to also consider ownership that must partially fund the stadium build. That is, if they aren't insistent the Chargers remain in LA.

That's not how the NFL works. Owners are not required to pay for the building of their own stadiums when purchasing a franchise, nor are they required to pay for partial funding.

This is the biggest issue facing the Chargers: The Spanos family did not have the money to build a stadium in San Diego and they certainly didn't have the money to build a stadium in Los Angeles.

Originally Posted by kccrow

It's an unfortunate cluster****. Hell, using a 40,000 seat college stadium in San Diego wouldn't be the worst idea. It's probably their normal attendance.

40,000? They couldn't even get 20,000 fans in a soccer stadium and 70% of those people (or more) were fans of opposing teams. This has been happening for at least 25 years, as I've seen it firsthand. I can't tell you how many times I sat in the Murph to watch the Chiefs, and against good SD teams with guys like Rivers, Gates and LT, that were barely half full. I mean, I could take up a whole row of seats for myself because the stadium was that empty. And if there were 35,000 people in the stadium, 17,500 were Chiefs fans.

The Chargers are just a sad sack franchise. If they want to become successful in Los Angeles, they'll not only need new ownership but they'll need to drop the name, mascot and records, then start over, much like the Titans and Ravens. And even then, there's no guarantee that people will take to them when they already have the Rams, USC Trojans, UCLA Bruins, Dodgers, Kings, Clippers and Lakers filling up their schedule.

There was no void that the Chargers filled, no lack of college or professional football, or any other sport for that matter, which is why no one cares about that team.

[lewdog]

Omaha?!?!?!!

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

Dude you suggested ****ing Omaha for a NFL franchise. Just take the L and go on.

Last I checked, halfwit, I wasn't trying to win anything.

[displacedinMN]

Originally Posted by lewdog

Omaha?!?!?!!

There is a clickbait that pops up....cities that may be getting an NFL team. It has been a while since I have seen it.

It mentioned, Omaha, Duluth and Des Moines. What a crock.



Maybe the Chargers should move to Anchorage, Alaska.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Last I checked, halfwit, I wasn't trying to win anything.

Good thing, because that was a truly horrible take.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

Dude you suggested ****ing Omaha for a NFL franchise. Just take the L and go on.

Originally Posted by lewdog

Omaha?!?!?!!

Where/what would you two cognitive prodigies suggest?

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by tredadda

Good thing, because that was a truly horrible take.

Well, I did say Portland and Salt Lake were better options. I just don't know, myself, where exactly would make the "most" sense. A lot of dynamics in play.

Yes, Omaha may not be the best, especially in terms of taking fans from KC. It would definitely be a smaller market but the only major markets available would struggle too.

I basically view Orlando, Columbus, St. Louis, and Austin/San Antonio as unlikely/no go just because of the amount of teams already in those areas. St. Louis may be the most viable. I can't see Ohio, Florida, and Texas supporting another team. It would be LA part II.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by displacedinMN

There is a clickbait that pops up....cities that may be getting an NFL team. It has been a while since I have seen it.

It mentioned, Omaha, Duluth and Des Moines. What a crock.



Maybe the Chargers should move to Anchorage, Alaska.

Omaha is a horrible option. It's not a very big market, and halfway (roughly) between two entrenched NFL markets. The Chargers would do far worse there than in places like LA and SA/Austin (which aren't exactly great markets for them as is).

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Well, I did say Portland and Salt Lake were better options. I just don't know, myself, where exactly would make the "most" sense. A lot of dynamics in play.

Yes, Omaha may not be the best, especially in terms of taking fans from KC. It would definitely be a smaller market but the only major markets available would struggle too.

I basically view Orlando, Columbus, St. Louis, and Austin/San Antonio as unlikely/no go just because of the amount of teams already in those areas. St. Louis may be the most viable. I can't see Ohio, Florida, and Texas supporting another team. It would be LA part II.

At this point, the best option might be for new ownership to try and heal the relationship with SD. Not sure if that ship has sailed and the relationship is beyond repair, but at this point its better than options like Omaha and Columbus and Orlando and Portland etc....

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by tredadda

At this point, the best option might be for new ownership to try and heal the relationship with SD.

That whole org has been a mismanaged cluser**** for 30 years. When Marty went there and finally got them back to competitive petty personal BS drove him off. They can't find or keep a good GM and even though they're swimming in talent they can't hit .500...

[TEX]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Well, I did say Portland and Salt Lake were better options. I just don't know, myself, where exactly would make the "most" sense. A lot of dynamics in play.

Yes, Omaha may not be the best, especially in terms of taking fans from KC. It would definitely be a smaller market but the only major markets available would struggle too.

I basically view Orlando, Columbus, St. Louis, and Austin/San Antonio as unlikely/no go just because of the amount of teams already in those areas. St. Louis may be the most viable. I can't see Ohio, Florida, and Texas supporting another team. It would be LA part II.

Texas easily could. The main issue for Texas would be if the Cowboys and Texans would allow it.

[Chief Pagan]

Well, it'll be curious to see what happens. To see if a franchise that is brand new to a city with an exciting young QB and a relatively good team can even sell out out the stadium when you would expect the buzz to be strong.

Just wait until they go on a losing streak.

And the Rams have rolled the dice with Stafford. I would suppose they have a short window before they are looking at some type of rebuild.

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by TEX

Texas easily could. The main issue for Texas would be if the Cowboys and Texans would allow it.

San Antonio's problem is lack of major corporations in the city.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

And the Rams have rolled the dice with Stafford. I would suppose they have a short window before they are looking at some type of rebuild.

The Rams are constantly rebuilding, which is to say, they're constantly trying to improve the team through trades and the draft. Giving up 1st and 2nd round picks for players is nothing for them.

Swapping Goff for Stafford is a massive upgrade for the Rams. They have a good offensive line, some nice skill position players and a great defense.