What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Chargers move to L.A., where Rivers is now burning TOs due to crowd noise (1 Viewer)

bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Mike Smith pulls his name out of the coaching search........ Rumor is the team wants the incoming coach to keep Whisenhut and the Offensive staff.

Cheap ### owners......good luck finding a two year stooge.

embarrassing this franchise.....
Click to expand...
:lmao:

You as well? I am proud you and TGunz immediately disown them. I bet they don't fill 30,000 seat...it's hard not to though. Visiting teams could fill half of it...I wish horrible things on them as the LA Chargers...not injuries to the players, gawd bless those guys but I hope they miss the playoffs next 50 years, F'em

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is just a sad deal.....I know die hard chargers fans who are heart broken......and how exactly is LaLa land supposed to support two crappy teams?

 
What a joke. It would be like the Jets moving to Miami. How is that ever going to work. There are no Charger fans in LA and I don't see any coming in the near future. The logic is ridiculous.

 
FreshiZ said:
What a joke. It would be like the Jets moving to Miami. How is that ever going to work. There are no Charger fans in LA and I don't see any coming in the near future. The logic is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
More like the Jets moving to Boston. Still ridiculous

 
FreshiZ said:
What a joke. It would be like the Jets moving to Miami. How is that ever going to work. There are no Charger fans in LA and I don't see any coming in the near future. The logic is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I think the Jets draw a bigger crowd for their games in Miami than the Dolphins do.

 
Local news made a big deal about fans showing up and burning or tossing Charger gear and whatnot. Then proceed to show video with about 20-25 people yelling and carrying on some shirtless lol...Quite the "mob".  The night before someone egged the front windows..wow..calm down "mob"...lol.

 
Quite a bit of an over-reaction. People in here wishing horrible things on the franchise... people acting out like children in person in SD... just kind of silly. Do people react this way when the local Subway moves? Yeah people take their sports seriously, but come on. The owner has every right to do whatever he wants with the Chargers. He can move them to London and rename them the Silly Nannies. 

This was a panic move for an owner whose bluff was called by the tax payers and he had no choice but to move to a city where there is already a stadium being built where he has no fan base. It's a financial disaster of a move... he's given up almost just as much money as it would cost for a stadium to move his team where he will get very little fan support. I would see the Chargers eventually moving again at some point. 
This seems very much an emotional, panicked decision instead of a well thought out business decision that will net him more money and success. In the end it could result in him losing money and selling the franchise. The beauty of capitalism; supply and demand, vote with your wallet.

Wishing horrible things on a business for leaving.... eh... kind of an overreaction IMO. Now I almost find myself hoping they are successful just to stick it to the snowflakes who can't handle their team moving few miles away. Green Bay is about the same, 2 hours, from my home... I don't view them any less "my team" because they are in a different city than me. Calm down people... 
 

 
Dr. Brew,

I didn't realize that the Packers had moved to Green Bay from another city.  I thought they'd always been there.  I'm sure the people of Green Bay, being the polite northerners they are, would not mind at all if the team moved to Madison.  Certainly, the people who own restaurants and shops near the stadium would just close up shop and move with them.  Moving a multi-million dollar business out of the city has a much larger affect than people just having to drive further to attend a game.  Many people make their living serving the people who go to those games. 

They weren't just the Chargers.  They were the San Diego Chargers.  There are many teams in California.  It's not like Wisconsin where there is only one pro football team that everyone in the state roots for.  They weren't the California Chargers.  The sense of 'our team' is no longer there when they move to LA. Now, they are LA's team.  LA has a much different feel to it.  I'm not from San DIego (or even California) but the move still changes the way I feel about the team.  They aren't a small venue team now.  They're a large venue team in a city that I would have no desire to visit.  That is coming from someone who lives halfway across the country at a time when the team hasn't rebranded.  If they change the team name and colors they will lose a lot of whatever fan base they have left. 

While I don't wish the team ill I don't know if I'll continue to root for them either.  It's likely I won't and if they rebrand I definitely won't.  I don't blame Spanos or the city for not getting a deal made but I wish they'd come to some sort of agreement to keep the team where they belong.

 
Dr. Brew said:
Quite a bit of an over-reaction. People in here wishing horrible things on the franchise... people acting out like children in person in SD... just kind of silly. Do people react this way when the local Subway moves? Yeah people take their sports seriously, but come on. The owner has every right to do whatever he wants with the Chargers. He can move them to London and rename them the Silly Nannies. 

This was a panic move for an owner whose bluff was called by the tax payers and he had no choice but to move to a city where there is already a stadium being built where he has no fan base. It's a financial disaster of a move... he's given up almost just as much money as it would cost for a stadium to move his team where he will get very little fan support. I would see the Chargers eventually moving again at some point. 
This seems very much an emotional, panicked decision instead of a well thought out business decision that will net him more money and success. In the end it could result in him losing money and selling the franchise. The beauty of capitalism; supply and demand, vote with your wallet.

Wishing horrible things on a business for leaving.... eh... kind of an overreaction IMO. Now I almost find myself hoping they are successful just to stick it to the snowflakes who can't handle their team moving few miles away. Green Bay is about the same, 2 hours, from my home... I don't view them any less "my team" because they are in a different city than me. Calm down people... 
 
Click to expand...
You spend a lot of time rooting for sandwiches?

 
Gr00vus said:
You spend a lot of time rooting for sandwiches?
Click to expand...
If it's a Jersey Mike's then yes.   Subway not so much.   They haven't fielded a decent sandwich sense the early 90's.  But it's a whole different sandwich game now.  You've got to evolve or get left behind in today's sandwich game.  

 
Evilhomer3k said:
Dr. Brew,

I didn't realize that the Packers had moved to Green Bay from another city.  I thought they'd always been there.  I'm sure the people of Green Bay, being the polite northerners they are, would not mind at all if the team moved to Madison.  Certainly, the people who own restaurants and shops near the stadium would just close up shop and move with them.  Moving a multi-million dollar business out of the city has a much larger affect than people just having to drive further to attend a game.  Many people make their living serving the people who go to those games. 

They weren't just the Chargers.  They were the San Diego Chargers.  There are many teams in California.  It's not like Wisconsin where there is only one pro football team that everyone in the state roots for.  They weren't the California Chargers.  The sense of 'our team' is no longer there when they move to LA. Now, they are LA's team.  LA has a much different feel to it.  I'm not from San DIego (or even California) but the move still changes the way I feel about the team.  They aren't a small venue team now.  They're a large venue team in a city that I would have no desire to visit.  That is coming from someone who lives halfway across the country at a time when the team hasn't rebranded.  If they change the team name and colors they will lose a lot of whatever fan base they have left. 

While I don't wish the team ill I don't know if I'll continue to root for them either.  It's likely I won't and if they rebrand I definitely won't.  I don't blame Spanos or the city for not getting a deal made but I wish they'd come to some sort of agreement to keep the team where they belong.
Click to expand...
If the Milwaukee Brewers suddenly became the Wausau Brewers I would still root for them. 

Comparing businesses/restaurants/hotels in GB to San Diego is a little short sighted... It's not like San Diego does not have other attractions: Padres along with 70 and sunny every day. GB is a small town that thrives on tourism. San Diego is a big city that, correct me if I'm wrong, people don't drive hundreds of miles in July to visit the Charger's stadium and tour the HOF. You really mean to tell me that restaurants and shops will go out of business in San Diego because the Chargers are leaving? No one goes to San Diego for any other reason? 

the LA Rams were also the LA Rams. The Houston Oilers were the Houston Oilers. The Cleveland Browns were from Cleveland, not Baltimore. 

If the market dictates that San Diego is a city that can support an NFL franchise, then an NFL franchise will look to move there. That's capitalism at its best

I just think all of this "I hope they burn in hell" type talk is a little over the top... 1. it's a kid's game that people happen to be good at. 2. it's entertainment. 3. It's literally 2 hours away... If you like them that much you will drive to see them, just like many Milwaukeeans do when they go to a Milwaukee Package GB Game. 4.. To quote the great Aaron Rodgers, "R-E-L-A-X." 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993 said:
Gr00vus said:
You spend a lot of time rooting for sandwiches?
Click to expand...
If it's a Jersey Mike's then yes.   Subway not so much.   They haven't fielded a decent sandwich sense the early 90's.  But it's a whole different sandwich game now.  You've got to evolve or get left behind in today's sandwich game.  
Click to expand...
I certainly root for how they cut the bread these days... that stupid middle top part that would always fall off the sandwich always confused me. 

 
GroveDiesel said:
This article is really interesting, mainly in its inference that the NFL is the one that runs negotiations with cities about funding/stadiums rather than the owners/teams themselves. Now I'm really curious just who is really responsible for the demands by teams and all of these teams moving. How much responsibility lies with individual owner versus the NFL management itself?

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18458717/san-diego-chargers-desperate-move-shot-nfl-vitality-2017
Click to expand...
The NFL doesn't run all negotiations.  They have not been involved in the Oakland negotiations at all.

The league owners decided they wanted two teams there, and they basically got together and decided what they wanted.  They wanted to let Kroenke do whatever he wanted, because he had the money to build a crazy stadium.  They let Kroenke screw St. Louis, went behind the Chargers and Raiders backs after they told them the Carson deal looked good, and decided to reward Spanos as best they could.  It wasn't what he wanted, or the Raiders.  But Kroenke and Jerry Jones and others got what they wanted.  

Looking forward to when the Raiders are playing the Rams every 4 years, and get 10 home games a year.  

 
I have lived in SD for the last 14 years so I root for them but I am an primarily an Eagles fan (perennial letdowns from both franchises).  I was fortunate to attend the final game at the Q. In terms of the reaction, locals are pissed and feel disrespected mainly because they changed the logo within an hour of the announcement.   I think a large impact not really being talked about is the community involvement the team had with youth organizations, Rady's children's hospital, charities, etc.   Hopefully the Padres and other teams can fill the void being left but this is larger impact than just fans losing their team. Hopefully the NFL comes back at some point because its a great city for catch a football game, especially superbowls. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993 said:
True,  but being born and raised in SD (dispite being a Rams fan) and I can tell you that the last bill proposed cost the people of SD nothing.   It was a hotel tax, I was absolutely shocked the people didn't approve it to keep their team.  
Click to expand...
... except for the fact that that tourism is a pretty big deal in the SD economy and if you start making the cost to tourists higher it has a ripple effect throughout the rest of the local economy, not just the tourists staying at hotels. 

The Chargers are estimated to be worth over $2 BILLION. They play in a league where the smallest market team made close to half a BILLION in total revenue last season. Serious question: How high would either of those numbers need to be before the owners can pay for their own ####### stadium without begging for tax hikes? We aren't talking about schools, or defense, or air quality here. We are talking about taxes to subsidize a football league that is doing just fine financially. Is there a number, or are the owners just entitled to tax dollars no matter how much money they are making?

 
BoltBacker said:
... except for the fact that that tourism is a pretty big deal in the SD economy and if you start making the cost to tourists higher it has a ripple effect throughout the rest of the local economy, not just the tourists staying at hotels. 

The Chargers are estimated to be worth over $2 BILLION. They play in a league where the smallest market team made close to half a BILLION in total revenue last season. Serious question: How high would either of those numbers need to be before the owners can pay for their own ####### stadium without begging for tax hikes? We aren't talking about schools, or defense, or air quality here. We are talking about taxes to subsidize a football league that is doing just fine financially. Is there a number, or are the owners just entitled to tax dollars no matter how much money they are making?
Click to expand...
How many times do you take a look at the local hotel tax rates when you travel?  I never do and I would suspect 99% of others don't either.  It would have minimal effect on tourism.  

 
BroncoFreak_2K3 said:
New logo being unveiled today.

Michael Gehlken of the San Diego Union-Tribune  reports that reportedly the logo "will feature the letters "LA" arranged similarly to Dodgers logo. Lightning bolt instead of horizontal lining in two letters..." 

May or may not rebrand.  Wont rebrand in time for the 2017 season though.
Click to expand...
Yup.  The Oilers were the Tennessee Oilers for a few years before the rebrand to the Titans.  That might be the case here.  

Then maybe in ten years the Jaguars will move to San Diego and adopt the Charger brand.

 
LA is such a great sports town that the Raiders left and went back to Oakland.  When the Raiders were the home team for the AFC Championship game they couldn't sell enough tickets to get the local blackout lifted.  I might be the only TV Station Manager in modern history to have run a Mary Tyler Moore festival while my network ran a Championship football game.  As has been mentioned here, many people retain loyalty to the teams from cities where they lived before moving to LA.  You can't sell Charger jerseys to die hard Bronco fans.  I keep thinking of the line from the song "New York, New York" "if you can make it here you can make it anywhere."  The Chargers (and the Rams) are competing with the Dodgers, Angels, Lakers, Clippers, Kings, Mighty Ducks, USC Trojans, UCLA Bruins, the Galaxy, and each other for fan interest and loyalty.  Making it in LA isn't easy.  On an afternoon in November or December when the Northeast is getting snow, you can go for a hike in the mountains or get some sun at the beach.  Watch TV? Sure if the game is really important, but if the game is between two losing teams, MEH. 

 
Might need to have powder blue as the royal blue "color rush" uniforms are exactly the same color as the Rams uniforms.

 
Riversco said:
BroncoFreak_2K3 said:
New logo being unveiled today.

Michael Gehlken of the San Diego Union-Tribune  reports that reportedly the logo "will feature the letters "LA" arranged similarly to Dodgers logo. Lightning bolt instead of horizontal lining in two letters..." 

May or may not rebrand.  Wont rebrand in time for the 2017 season though.
Click to expand...
Yup.  The Oilers were the Tennessee Oilers for a few years before the rebrand to the Titans.  That might be the case here.  
Click to expand...
Tennessee changed their name for 2 reasons: 1) because "Oilers" had no historical context in Tennessee, and 2) because the fans demanded a new name. Reason #1 does not apply to the Chargers; Reason #2 could apply, but I doubt that the fans in Los Angeles will care enough to demand change.

 
del mar said:
LA is such a great sports town that the Raiders left and went back to Oakland.  When the Raiders were the home team for the AFC Championship game they couldn't sell enough tickets to get the local blackout lifted.  I might be the only TV Station Manager in modern history to have run a Mary Tyler Moore festival while my network ran a Championship football game. 
Click to expand...
But that wasn't really the Raiders' fault, was it? That was due to backwards NFL policy, where they believed that it was more profitable to get a few more people into the stadium than to have a million people watching on TV.

 
[scooter] said:
But that wasn't really the Raiders' fault, was it? That was due to backwards NFL policy, where they believed that it was more profitable to get a few more people into the stadium than to have a million people watching on TV.

Not the Raiders fault at all.  But it shows the lack of enthusiasm of the LA "fans"
Click to expand...

 
del mar said:
Not the Raiders fault at all.  But it shows the lack of enthusiasm of the LA "fans"
Click to expand...
There were 89,000 people at that game (50% higher than the league average, and higher than almost every other game that year). Seems pretty enthusiastic to me.

 
[scooter] said:
There were 89,000 people at that game (50% higher than the league average, and higher than almost every other game that year). Seems pretty enthusiastic to me.
Click to expand...
Lots of those tickets were sold after the blackout was announced.  NBC looked at buying the remaining tickets before the blackout deadline, but there were just too many to make it realistic to buy the house out.

 
Wildcat said:
How many times do you take a look at the local hotel tax rates when you travel?  I never do and I would suspect 99% of others don't either.  It would have minimal effect on tourism.  
Click to expand...
Agreed 100%.   Truth is the real likelihood is most just heard tax and voted no.   Didn't really look into where it was coming from.  

 
Wildcat said:
How many times do you take a look at the local hotel tax rates when you travel?  I never do and I would suspect 99% of others don't either.  It would have minimal effect on tourism.  
Click to expand...
I look at the cost of my trip 100% of the time when I travel. And that cost influences where I choose to travel in the future. Maybe that's strange. I dunno.

So how about a trillion dollars? If the owners are making a trillion dollars will it then be ridiculous for the owners to ask tax payers to chip in for a shiny new stadium? I am honestly curious what the actual number is for some of you folks that think the fans somehow owe this money to NFL owners.

 
dkp993 said:
Agreed 100%.   Truth is the real likelihood is most just heard tax and voted no.   Didn't really look into where it was coming from.  
Click to expand...
True. It's being payed by any folks staying in the city(and spending their money in all sorts of places) whether they give two ####s about football or not.

But hey let's all start going door to door to collect donations to help an NFL owner scrape by. Instead of Sally Strothers we'll get Patrick Ewing to do our ads. "Remeber with just a few billion dollars of donations we can help to support an NFL owner that SPENDS billions of dollars."

 
If a hotel tax was such a great deal for San Diego, why not pass it anyway and use the revenue for local needs other than a football team? 

There has to be more to it than "cavemen that can't understand tax impact."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BoltBacker said:
True. It's being payed by any folks staying in the city(and spending their money in all sorts of places) whether they give two ####s about football or not.

But hey let's all start going door to door to collect donations to help an NFL owner scrape by. Instead of Sally Strothers we'll get Patrick Ewing to do our ads. "Remeber with just a few billion dollars of donations we can help to support an NFL owner that SPENDS billions of dollars."
Click to expand...
I'm not saying you're wrong, everyone has the right to feel how they feel and I'm not trying to defend a billionaire in anyway shape or form.  But this situation is not so black or white.   There is no denying the fiscal impact the local business and community gain by having a football team in town and I can speak to this first hand running a business in downtown SD for 15 years.   Hell the year the Super Bowl was in town alone brought in something like a billion dollars to the community, but it's a moot point now.   The voters shot the lastest plan down and the Chargers went 2 hrs north.   It is what it is.....

 
Are the people of LA now limited to just getting the Rams and Chargers on local over the air TV?

If so I feel bad for them.

 
BoltBacker said:
I look at the cost of my trip 100% of the time when I travel. And that cost influences where I choose to travel in the future. Maybe that's strange. I dunno.

So how about a trillion dollars? If the owners are making a trillion dollars will it then be ridiculous for the owners to ask tax payers to chip in for a shiny new stadium? I am honestly curious what the actual number is for some of you folks that think the fans somehow owe this money to NFL owners.
Click to expand...
You must be in the 1%.   Obviously cost factors into my travel plans, but never hotel tax.  You mean you would change your travel plans based on a hotel tax?  

 
Yenrub said:
Are the people of LA now limited to just getting the Rams and Chargers on local over the air TV?

If so I feel bad for them.
Click to expand...
They will get Thursday and Sunday night games plus two times on local teams bye weeks when they will be treated to real football.

 
1 hour ago, Arodin said:
If a hotel tax was such a great deal for San Diego, why not pass it anyway and use the revenue for local needs other than a football team? [\b]





There has to be more to it than "cavemen that can't understand tax impact."
Click to expand...



That's exactly what I want to do. Our hotel tax is too low. Let's raise it. Ok, now we have more money. No, don't give it to a billionaire. 


 
Having an NFL team means a lot to a city's economy. Fans locally and from away travel to games, stay in hotels, eat out, buy gas, buy team clothing, get cable and dish subscriptions ... all of which means people spending money in the city. That provides jobs and changes the local economy. Sales tax alone on that spending changes the city's income, and the type and quality of services it can provide. People think about the owners and don't want to line their pockets, but don't think so much about the thousands of jobs and volume of sales a team brings. If a dollar spent in a town typically turns over 17 times (the figure I've heard for years) in follow up sales, the impact is far reaching. A team leaving will cause its own small economic swoon. I don't think most people consider the situation much beyond not wanting to give money to a wealthy owner. 

I think the SD vote lost on several factors. A lot of people see any tax and hate it. They don't want to pay taxes for better roads or for better hospitals or schools (although they often demand those) and they certainly won't agree to pay a tax to have football. All taxes are bad. These folks are awfully close to a majority in the US all by themselves. Others just hate the ultra-rich owners and don't want to pay anything that will make them richer. Having an owner like Spanos that the community hates dramatically increases this group. Finally, there are a lot of people who don't care at all about football. Why would they support a tax to pay for it?

Spanos is just taking the better of his two options. He is certainly no hero, and is certainly greedy and not tied up in fan loyalty, but just a businessman working from pure self interest. He thought he could, or was willing to, stay in SD if the locals were willing to hike hotel taxes enough to lower his investment. He knew what his projections are in LA. San Diegans had a straight up choice. It was pretty clear not approving the hotel tax would mean the Chargers leaving. I'm sorry for the true fans and businesses who were willing to help with the costs to keep the team. For everyone else, you got to spank Spanos. I hope that was worth it. I hope you thought through and are happy to live with that choice. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Catbird said:
Having an NFL team means a lot to a city's economy. Fans locally and from away travel to games, stay in hotels, eat out, buy gas, buy team clothing, get cable and dish subscriptions ... all of which means people spending money in the city. That provides jobs and changes the local economy. Sales tax alone on that spending changes the city's income, and the type and quality of services it can provide. People think about the owners and don't want to line their pockets, but don't think so much about the thousands of jobs and volume of sales a team brings. If a dollar spent in a town typically turns over 17 times (the figure I've heard for years) in follow up sales, the impact is far reaching. A team leaving will cause its own small economic swoon. I don't think most people consider the situation much beyond not wanting to give money to a wealthy owner. 

I think the SD vote lost on several factors. A lot of people see any tax and hate it. They don't want to pay taxes for better roads or for better hospitals or schools (although they often demand those) and they certainly won't agree to pay a tax to have football. All taxes are bad. These folks are awfully close to a majority in the US all by themselves. Others just hate the ultra-rich owners and don't want to pay anything that will make them richer. Having an owner like Spanos that the community hates dramatically increases this group. Finally, there are a lot of people who don't care at all about football. Why would they support a tax to pay for it?

Spanos is just taking the better of his two options. He is certainly no hero, but just a businessman working from pure self interest. He thought he could, or was willing to, stay in SD if the locals were willing to hike hotel taxes enough to lower his investment. He knew what his projections are in LA. San Diegans had a straight up choice. It was pretty clear not approving the hotel tax would mean the Chargers leaving. I'm sorry for the true fans and businesses who were willing to help with the costs to keep the team. For everyone else, you got to spank Spanos. I hope that was worth it. Kind of like with our incoming President, I hope you thought through and are happy to live with that choice. 
Click to expand...
Nailed it

 
Arodin said:
You say this like it's a good thing.

Did you watch any of these this year?  :P
Click to expand...
Yes and they were generally awful, but they carried lots of commercials which is all the NFL cares about.  However, any game without the Rams or Chargers is likely to please the Angelinos.

 
They flashed the Chargers logo on the screen during the Clippers game tonight and the whole crowd booed.  :lol: Spanos is the one who didn't think this through and will have to live with his choice.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Next NFL City in North America
2
Replies
65
Views
6K
sushinsky4tsar
S
Yogibear
Now that there's a 17-game schedule plan in place . . .
Replies
17
Views
995
-OZ-
-OZ-
Yogibear
Time to relocate the Chargers again
2
Replies
70
Views
3K
Leroy Hoard
Leroy Hoard

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top