OT: Raiders/Chargers Potentially Making Joint Stadium... in Carson

Submitted by OccaM on

http://www.chargers.com/news/2015/02/19/joint-statement-raiders-and-cha…

 

So....2 division rivals... 1 stadium... this is going to go over well if it comes to fruition. Al Davis is probably rolling over in his grave at the thought of it. Not to mention what are the Chargers' owners thinking? There's no way the Raiders are less popular than the Chargers in LA. 

LA Raiders straight outta Compton/Carson? 

LA Chargers of San Diego by way of Carson? 

 

Maizenblueball

February 20th, 2015 at 1:20 AM ^

as others have said. On AM radio down here in San Diego, this stadium discussion has been nonstop lately. Chargers want the taxpayers to pay for it. I hate the thought of paying any more in taxes than I already do in this expensive state. I'm not really a Charger fan, but I have many friends here who are, and they would be heartbroken if the Chargers did leave SD.

OccaM

February 20th, 2015 at 1:31 AM ^

Isn't it shown that cities/taxpayers never recoup the money lost in debt that they use to fund sports stadiums with? 

The Chargers owner should just sack up and pay for it himself or split it evenly. This just seems like a crappy attempt at a shakedown to get SD to capitulate. 

The Mad Hatter

February 20th, 2015 at 8:50 AM ^

If I recall correctly there is still a federal tax of some sort still being collected to pay for the Spanish American War.  Back when we paid for wars in cash instead of on the national AMEX card.

If the public is paying for these stadiums with tax revenue, they should get a guaranteed % of revenue until the initial capital outlay is repaid.  Goddamn corporate welfare queens.

ca_prophet

February 20th, 2015 at 5:14 PM ^

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/11/stadium-finan… http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/governmentfunded-stadiums-n… Or Google "taxpayer funded stadiums" - the top ten results are highly negative, with data from the Marlins and Nationals in baseball, and numerous football examples as well. Hell, the Raiders alone have screwed Oakland for years on the Coliseum deal. FieldOfSchemes.com is pretty convincing on the subject - Neil DeMausse has written about the real cost for years. Stripped of the frippery, taxpayers are being asked to give millions of dollars to a private enterprise in return for the emotional benefit of having their municipality associated with a sports team, at a time when those same municipalities are closing schools and cutting services. The only recent stadium deal I can think of where the city feels like it did ok was the San Francisco Giants new park, and that was almost entirely privately financed - not a coincidence, I assure you. Hopefully San Diego will ask Santa Clara how it feels about that deal now that ownership has what it wants, and give the Chargers a blunt No.

snarling wolverine

February 20th, 2015 at 11:18 AM ^

 

Isn't it shown that cities/taxpayers never recoup the money lost in debt that they use to fund sports stadiums with?

Never is too strong a word.  If a franchise is genuinely on its way out if it doesn't get a stadium, it's probably worth building one when you consider the economic impact franchises have on a city (creating jobs and spillover business, and some tax revenue).  I think this is especially true for baseball, with its 81 home dates.  As much as Detroit is struggling, if you took away those 81 days when tens of thousands come into the city and spend money, it would be in even worse shape. 

For the NFL, with only 10 home games (counting the preseason), it's probably a more questionable proposition.  Still, there is the intangible, emotional aspect of having a franchise that is important to a lot of people.  

If an owner is just bluffing and has no plans to move, then a new stadium isn't worth it.  The problem is that you can't usually tell in advance.

 

 

 

DY

February 20th, 2015 at 4:33 PM ^

What percentage of Tigers fans spend money (and how much) outside of Comerica on gameday. Most are probably spending $10-20 on parking, but I'd like to know how many go to tha bar or to eat downtown before and/or after the game. It's probably more than I think because there after definitely a few bars that are only in business due to game traffic but my sense is a significant portion of the Tigers' crowd drives in and out and that's it, especially on weeknights. Plus, I feel like most of the parking lots are owned by one or two companies. My personal experience is usually driving in and out and I even know of a free parking spot, so if I do spend money outside of the stadium it's like $1 for cajun peanuts. 

Mr. Owl

February 20th, 2015 at 1:52 AM ^

It's a sad society where billionares can successfully extort hundreds of millions from common taxpayers to build them staduims that are barely used as a showcase where you pay hundreds to watch millionares play a game.  Oh, and they are counted as a not-for-profit.

UofM626

February 20th, 2015 at 3:27 AM ^

We just got rid of all those damn Raider flags here in LA! I can't stand the Raiders and there fans, to be honest the Charger fans are just a step below the Raider fans.

Gimme the Rams all day! What they need to do is just start a expansion team here in LA! Start over already.

Please no Raiders here

CoachBP6

February 20th, 2015 at 3:45 AM ^

Nothing more than a bargaining ploy here. Living near buffalo I have witnessed this first hand. The raiders / chargers are older franchises with history. I doubt either one of them would actually agree to share a stadium, but I wouldn't put it past Oakland to re-locate to LA, again. The raiders have been down for 11 years, but now have really made a great effort to turn the whole thing around. Another good draft and a well spent 70 million dollars they have in cap space, should see the raiders as a competitor once again.

Sleepy

February 20th, 2015 at 7:44 AM ^

...the Broncos & Seahawks would be the first pair of franchises to announce a joint stadium.

Thank you, I'll be here all week.  Please remember to tip your servers.

LSAClassOf2000

February 20th, 2015 at 8:34 AM ^

The Los Angeles Times has concept renderings of the proposed site right here - LINK

“We're thinking about the project as a 21st century, next-generation stadium,” said architect David Manica, noting that the venue and renderings are still in the early conceptual stages. “We want it to be the ultimate outdoor event experience, which includes both sports and entertainment. And we want it to be uniquely L.A.”

Manica represents the same firm that did the renovations of Dolphin Stadium as well as Wembley Stadium. The Texans' stadium is their handiwork too.

Wolverine In Exile

February 20th, 2015 at 9:51 AM ^

Concourses will be mishmashed all around the stadium and weave to God knows where with too little room, the hot dogs will be $10-15 depending on if you want all organic grass fed humanely killed beef, or a vegan fair trade Boca Dog from the in-house Whole Foods. Suites will have real grass seating areas watered by the leftover spillage from cokes in the bleacher seating, and you'll have to take a 30-yr mortgage out to pay for season tickets. But HEY! Steve Martin, Iggy Azalea, and some guy who playeda Stormtrooper in ALL THREE ORIGINAL TRILOGIES(!!) will be in the same stadium as you! Cue Randy Newman!

*Music* I loooovvee LA!

funkywolve

February 20th, 2015 at 11:32 AM ^

if you put a good product on the field the fans will come.  Moving to LA might solve the attendance problem for the first couple of years because of the novelty but if they continue to churn out 4-12 type seasons, attendance will start to tail off.