By Doug Porter
There are a boatload of people who’ve declared their intention to run for Mayor of San Diego.
The Daily Fishwrap has hammered home the meme that ours is a city teetering on the edge of ruin following nine months of bullying and grabbing on the eleventh floor of city hall. Hotel executives are metaphorically scattered throughout the Gaslamp District with tin cups in hand trying stave off the looming economic disaster brought on by the former Mayor’s insistence that taxpayers be protected.
Into this power vacuum have stepped the San Diego Chargers, a professional football team owned by an ultra-wealthy family that believes it’s entitled to taxpayer assistance in building a new football stadium.
In case you haven’t noticed, there’s been a full court media press on over the last few days extolling the virtues of a recycled proposal for a downtown venue that would turn San Diego into a world class city overnight. Former Mayor Jerry Sanders was on KUSI TV this morning saying, “We’ll find the Chargers a new stadium in the not-too-distant future, I predict.”
Yes indeedy, a new stadium will make everything okay. Our long regional nightmare will be over.
Gone would be our collective horror at the antics of the masher Mayor. Gone would be the need to mar our city’s waterfront with an expanded Convention Center build expressly to serve the needs of those freaks of nature otherwise known as Comic-Con. Gone would be poverty, as the economic miracles trickling down from this behemoth would miraculously restore neighborhoods, eliminate racism and end homelessness.
Today we’ll look at this well-oiled campaign. First they needed to alert the public to the seriousness of the crisis…
The Monday Morning Quarterback blog on Sports Illustrated.com trotted out a stadium horror story so scary it should have been prefaced with a warning against letting small children near any screen displaying it.
Entitled “An Insult to Dumps Everywhere”, the SI account ladles up heaping helpings of civic shame:
Actually, calling Qualcomm a dump really is an insult to dumps. The JumboTron is so old that some replacement parts can only be found on eBay. There’s no capacity for a hi-definition video board or for new electronic signage. In an era in which the NFL is trying to heighten the stadium experience to allow fans to keep up with scores and stats from other games via their smartphones, connectivity is limited in part by structural issues within the stadium. (At the preseason opener this year, one Chargers exec could not communicate via email with his staff during the game because of poor wifi.) White trash bags cover large electrical connectors that hang from a lower wall, and cracks are visible in the concrete in various places. Heavy rains often cause the drainage systems to back up, which is why the team has rubber boots on hand for fans whose seats are flooded. It’s not uncommon for sewage to leak onto the field and into the visiting locker room. According to an independent audit performed for the city, the stadium needs $70 million in maintenance and repairs.
Whereupon the writer follows up with the eminent reasonableness of the Spanos family’s ideas for building a new facility. A mere $300 million in public funding is needed for the $1 billion project, monies that could easily be raised if it wasn’t for the FACT we’ve had the “most dysfunctional city government in the country” for the past God-only-knows-how-long.
City Attorney Jan Goldsmith is quoted : “The city needs mayoral leadership for big projects, and right now it is not there. But, we will get through this turmoil.”
A ‘New’ Plan Emerges
The Chargers repackaged an old stadium plan and rolled it out last week via a “selfie” interview on their own website. Contrary to rumors spread via social media, they did not promise a free pony for everybody in San Diego.
From KPBS:
As the plan for the $520 million convention center expansion nears a crucial hearing before the California Coastal Commission, theSan Diego Chargers are reviving the multi-use stadium plan. They say their plan could actually be completed more quickly, and bring more revenue to San Diego.
Mark Fabiani, general counsel for the San Diego Chargers said in an interview published Thursday on the Chargers web site, “there is a more cost-effective and environmentally-sensitive way to expand the convention center as part of a multi-use stadium in the EastVillage. And that’s the concept we presented to the Coastal Commission.”
Here’s the UT-San Diego’s Nick Canepa using a made up source (my guess is that it was UT CEO John Lynch dictating over the phone) to explain away any objections:
“The Convention Center expansion doesn’t have to be contiguous; that’s a total lie,” says someone close to the situation (not Fabiani or a member of the Chargers). “Even if you take the Chargers out of this completely, you’re looking at a total catastrophe if the city’s plan goes through. We have experts and engineers who say it isn’t going to work.
“They built a beautiful terminal, but on the wrong side of the airport, now this. I can’t tell you how many people don’t think it will work, but they allowed labor to just push it through. It’s just terrible land use, blocking the waterfront and the bayside park.
“From a land-use perspective, we know this is a stupid way to expand the Convention Center. The Chargers’ proposal makes more sense. It pulls activity into the community, rather than the railroad tracks. Remember all the crap about Comic-Con leaving? Totally fabricated. Comic-Con never was leaving; it’s going nowhere.
“The lack of scrutiny on this thing is mind-boggling. Do we know the Convention Center is not able to operate to full capacity during Padres home games? Do we know there’s a 30-percent hold in the financing of the Convention Center expansion? The new proposal can be financed without hotel tax. It could be dynamic, really exciting and cool and much more marketable. The economics of it are compelling and the Chargers will be an asset rather than a liability. But I don’t know if there is one creative mind down there.”
Neil deMause, who writes about such things over at Field of Schemes, calls it what it is:
So, basically what’s going on is that the Chargers management has decided that in all the chaos over the mayor of San Diego resigning over sexual harassment charges and nobody much wanting to take his place, this would be a perfect time to throw out a new stadium proposal, this one to build a new stadium and convention center complex at a different downtown site than the existing convention center. Which nobody knows how to pay for, and no one in elected office seems too excited about, but hey, the city’s plan to expand the current convention center comes up for a hearing next month, so best to throw a monkey wrench in that now, right?
Meanwhile, there’s a wide open field for journalists wanting to investigate whether this Chargers proposal is workable in the slightest. Normally I’d turn to the Voice of San Diego for this sort of thing, but they seem to have only just noticed that it’s football season, so maybe they’re preoccupied with other things. Seriously, anybody?
Last night on ESPN Monday Night Football we got The Lecture on what a great city San Diego could be if we only had a football field. Then, as if to prove the point about what a bunch of losers we collectively are, the Chargers went into full dis-function mode.
Maybe It’s Not Such a Bad Deal…
I need to throw in the disclaimer here that I’ve yet to see a NFL stadium deal outside of Green Bay that could stand any realistic Return On Investment assessment. It’s always about intangibles…Civic Pride… Potential Tax Revenues… yada-yada. BUT….
This may come as a shocker to some of my lefty friends, I would actually support an honest stadium deal that made a reasonable argument for long-term taxpayer benefit.
I like football. Stadiums and arenas are a necessary part of a mass culture (as long as they have WiFi & Craft Beer). But don’t tell me about the nifty retractable cloth roof. Tell me the truth about the money.
I think I have a better chance of seeing a unicorn than an honest proposal from the Chargers.
One Final Note
The Chargers lost last night to Houston. The whining has already started online. Some “fans” are calling quarterback Philip Rivers a communist because of his way of sharing the ball with other teams.
He’s not. Rivers is a red blooded American, fighting the Mongol hordes on and off the football field. Proof from Buzzfeed:
Conspiracy Theorists Please Note
I will be taking a much needed vacation starting Wednesday, September 11th (coincidence?), and therefore this column will not be published for a week.
My absence is not being caused by either the downtown anti-Filner cabal OR the smug purveyors of “everybody knows” on Twitter. Nor will I be attending brainwashing sessions at Daily Kos.
In reality I’ll be visiting family and attending a wedding.
If for some reason I should not return, it’s most likely because Iowa is granting permits to acquire or carry guns in public to people who are legally or completely blind.
You’ve been warned.
On This Day: 1913 – The Lincoln Highway opened. It was the first paved coast-to-coast highway in the U.S. 1963 – Twenty black students entered public schools in Alabama at the end of a standoff between federal authorities and Alabama governor George C. Wallace. 1996 – Wal-Mart banned Sheryl Crow’s 2nd album because of the song “Love is A Good Thing.”
Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to “The Starting Line” and get an email every time a new article in this series is posted!
I read the Daily Fishwrap(s) so you don’t have to… Catch “the Starting Line” Monday thru Friday right here at San Diego Free Press (dot) org. Send your hate mail and ideas to DougPorter@
Mr. Mike says
The Chargers can have a new stadium when they don’t suck so much. I’d rather sell Doug Manchester to the Russians so they could work him to death in Siberia than give the Chargers anything more then a well-deserved kick in the crotch.
Dana Levy says
Have a good respite. I am sure Iowa is a garden spot to which we all seek enlightenment. I too am for a new stadium downtown, if and when it is in our best interest, but the divided convention center plan, as put forth by some character fronted by Fabiani, just doesn’t fit with a convention theme. If “you can’t get there from here” is built into our local center then I see plenty of party planners that will give proper consideration to “elsewhere”. If San Diego is not THE premier vacation (and yes a convention does fit that category) destination in our country, it will be plans like those proposed by the Chargers, lumping in the tax payers money with their own to get THEIR wants satisfied on the back of the Convention Center expansion, that will be to blame. I think it is time that the 2 issues remain separate and rest on their own individual merits (or not).
Cynthia says
Good points, Dana.
La Playa Heritage says
Please see our Solution to pay for a NFL Stadium and CONTIGUOUS Convention Center Expansion on the Waterfront. The same Special Hotel Tax could be used for construction because the site is Contiguous.
However, the Port and City refused to analyze requested alternative projects in the Draft EIR.
thoughtfulbear says
PLEASE.
Haven’t we been here before?
A TRUE Championship Team will play like one, be it in a palace or a parking lot – and so will a truly CRAPPY Team.
The venue has NOTHING TO DO with it.
Don’t believe it? Well, just where ARE those World Series pennants, Padres?
John says
It’s disingenuous to use the Pads as an example when their owners have long been a revolving door of opportunists and capital ventures groups with an eye on short term returns and trading promising players just as they were about to mature. For all the bad press about the Spanos family the above is not what they are about.
David Lundin says
Even I would support a new chargers Stadium, IF:
1. The Spanos family and business partners would pay 100% of the cost, including fair market value for land and actual costs ofancillary improvements for traffic, transit and access, OR as an alternative, The Chargers would convey a percentage ownership interest in the team and all associated income rights [Ticket sales, broadcast rights, income from NFL, logo merchandise, premium seat licenses and corporate boxes, etc.] to the City equal in value based on an independent appraisal to the City contribution to site and construction costs;
2. The stadium is located in a central part of the city accessible by mass transit and NOT surrounded by a parking lot;
3. Individual seat prices are reduced by 20 % or more; and
4. The stadium is submitted to an international design competition to attract the best, brightest , most creative and cost-effective designers..
Andy Cohen says
My preliminary $.02 on the stadium thing:
I don’t know anything about the Moscone Center and it’s non-contiguous space, but it seems to work. I do, however, know a little bit about the situation in Indianapolis because I’ve been there many times.
History lesson: The Old RCA Dome was a part of, and completely attached to, the Indiana Convention Center in Downtown Indianapolis. Fans attending sporting events would enter the stadium through the stadium gates. But at the NFL Scouting Combine, we would usually enter the stadium through the convention center. There were various exhibit rooms in the stadium portion of the center that could be used for events of various sizes, including much larger events by opening up retractable dividing walls. The stadium floor itself was often used as exhibition space.
Technically, the convention center and the stadium were one big building, despite appearances to the contrary.
Just a few years ago, Lucas Oil Stadium opened up just a couple of blocks away from where the old RCA Dome once stood. That stadium was torn down, and an expansion of the convention center was built.
AND YET…..Lucas Oil Stadium, a detached facility no more than three blocks away from the convention center proper, is still considered part of the convention center, and the stadium floor is still used as convention space, and is still used for trade shows and other similar events. This in addition to the expanded convention center proper.
Believe it or not, the Indiana Convention Center is a pretty busy place, and the model clearly works for them.
Personally, I would much rather see the stadium built as a contiguous part of the existing San Diego Convention Center, where people could walk from the existing structure directly into exhibit space within the stadium, including the stadium floor. The ultimate “kill two birds with one stone” scenario. But Indy has clearly demonstrated that the non-contiguous plan can work, too.
My stipulation is and has always been that if the city/county is going to help fund the new stadium, then it must do so as an INVESTOR, and not a donor…..the difference being that the city/county directly benefits from revenue streams generated by the new stadium. For example, the Chargers get all of the revenue generated from their games, the city and the Chargers split the rent paid by the Aztecs, and the city gets total control over revenue generated by certain specified events held at the stadium, such as concerts, monster truck rallies, conventions, etc. The Chargers and the City/County split the revenue from other agreed upon events. Plus, the City/County gets the tax revenue generated by stadium events.
…..or, the city/county gets ‘X’ amount or percentage of dollars out of every ticket sold to every event held at the stadium……or something like that.
How do these types of arrangements get worked out? I don’t know. I’m not that smart. But I do believe that there’s a way to do it to where both parties benefit fairly.
Cynthia says
Andy:
I second the investor stipulation.
bob dorn says
How do all the SUVs, vans, cars and buses get in and out of the peasant-like East Village on game day? How many villages in this world could handle 100,000 fans, two football teams and their entourage, press and cops, food and beverage supply workers and Spanos knows who else swooping down on this “east village” all at once? It’s a question without an answer because it’s never even asked,
We’ll know only AFTER City Hall approves the $300 million tax increase. That’s because it’s going to take billions more they’re not talking about now to accommodate those swooping on- and off-ramps needed to accommodate the crowds assemblying just 8 games a year. Our leadership does not address this question because it is public money that builds freeways.
The emperors of San Diego are mad. Mad, mad, mad. We’ll see if the peasants are too.
Brent Beltran says
No taxpayer funds for one percenters! And no stadium close to Barrio Logan. My community has been getting screwed for far too long. This would be another screwing as fans would use our streets for parking and pissing. If the Chargers want a stadium they should buy the land and finance it themselves. I’ve been a lifelong Chargers fan but my fanaticism is finite.
After reading Phillip Rivers support for Santorum I’m probably going to have to drop him from my fantasy team now. That’ll teach him!
And I resemble that freak of nature crack, Doug. Proudly.
micaela porte says
brilliant article, thank you for making us laugh at ourselves; it is good for us…
have a nice get-away
xoxo
Brian Brady says
“I like football. Stadiums and arenas are a necessary part of a mass culture (as long as they have WiFi & Craft Beer). But don’t tell me about the nifty retractable cloth roof. Tell me the truth about the money.”
Let’s start here; NASCAR is a better deal for the taxpayers. It costs less to build a track and the economic impact is greater than a Super Bowl is. I don’t care for NASCAR but, if you look at the numbers, it’s the best deal out there…
I LOVE pro football but I just don’t see how my personal entertainment choices should be a subsidized by all. The same would go for NASCAR.
Also, if you want to do the fans a favor, you oppose public-funded NFL arenas. Money is fungible. If you force owners to make good economic decisions, they’ll prick the salary bubble, post-game fireworks (and assorted hoopla) and bring ticket costs down
bob dorn says
Relax, Brady, you’ll get your NASCAR races… at Qualcomm. The MONSTER Trucks are already there, too. And so are those Interplanetary Used Car Sales. It just seems Qualcomm is to be the Lakeside-Santee Performance Center.
At least there are three major freeways and a rail system nearby to carry the load of private and public vehicles to Qualcomm and back. Downtown can’t take advantage of that enormous public conveyance system.
Hmmmm…. maybe Qualcomm can be torn down so that we can stick with that site for the new Charger stadium. Does that make sense?
Andy Cohen says
There’s already a racetrack in Fontana. There won’t be another one built. Period. With only one NASCAR race per year, there is no need for another.
There’s also a race held annually in Sonoma, but it’s a Grand Prix type of race….a road race, not an oval track.
John says
As a fan I think the oval is a better experience, you can see most of the race going on. I remember going to the Del Mar (poor excuse for a) Gran Prix and even with good seats had a view of one corner. Whoopee. Never saw a pass or a wreck or nuthin. The “F1 is better than NASCAR” camp never gets that. A keg on the roof of an RV in the infield of an oval. Doesn’t get any better.
And yeah not in San Diego, we couldn’t draw the fan base to keep Cajon Speedway alive.
Nice comment about the reason for the success of Indy’s center, one would hope the wisdom of multi-use wouldn’t escape the planners that be but is this all dependent upon having a domed facility, even in mostly sunny S.D.? It’s all fun and games until the one event that sees a downpour on electrified booths and convention goers. Of course if it were a GOP convention I guess that isn’t a bad thing.
Andy Cohen says
Yes, a soft, retractable/removable roof. Have to have it in order to host NCAA events and most convention events. The kind of roof we’re talking about would be much less expensive, as that’s all that would be needed in this climate. But yes, a roof is necessary in this case.
Brian Brady says
PS: Have a safe trip. Iowa is a great place with some of the nicest people I’ve met
John Lawrence says
I’m against any taxpayer money going to build the Chargers a new stadium. Taxpayer money should go to repair the potholes and infrastructure. The fact is that professional football would not make a profit if it wasn’t for taxpayer money. The Chargers can go out of business for all I care. Let it be a testament to Junior Seau and all the others that have “had their bell rung” and are dying from Alzheimers. The professional concussion business can go down the drain, and life would be better as far as I’m concerned. San Diego does not need professional football to be a world class city.
Cynthia says
John, I used to call pro football “millionaires in tights”, but I think I might switch to your synonym, Professional Concussion Business. I like it.
John says
That’s amusing, when you can get a symphony, or a library, or a street full of potholes to pack 70,000 in a stadium 8 or more times a year at $98-160 a head (more for luxury boxes) you let us know. Let us know how you make out with concession sales and the boost in alcohol sales you get when they win a playoff game, and the local businesses that sell their licensed merchandise in stores- never mind the boost in tourism you’ll get when the city gets the free advertising of our splendid early February weather rubbed in the noses of the rest of the country while they’re freezing at home watching a Super Bowl here- which we haven’t had because of our crappy stadium.
Yes all these things do seem intangible to folks who believe civic/corporate partnerships are all inherently evil, and we don’t need an NFL team to be a “worlds class city”. We never were and likely never will be, I think it’s realistic enough to strive to be “America’s Finest” city and that generally includes having a team involved in the sport with the most watched televised sporting event on the planet.
It’s safe to say we’re fortunate not many leaders share such condemnation for the most fundamental tenets of business ventures as expressed. People come from all over the county, and even further, to attend Chargers games. They buy merchandise, fill the stadium, and eat and drink here. The city gets a slice of all of it and this brings revenues to fill potholes.
I don’t suppose you were one of those Prop D proponents that looked forward to quiet beaches without all those damn drunk tourists making noise and commotion, and now wonder why we had to lay off lifeguards and police?
As for the concussions, the sport will march along with or without San Diego, if you’d like to crusade against that fine, will you take on Freestyle Motocross, Wingsuit Base Jumping, nude rock climbing, and full contact badminton next?
Cory Briggs says
No matter how people feel about the Chargers or anyone else weighing into this debate, it is important that the public know exactly what’s going on and not dismiss the facts when dismissing the messenger.
Here are some facts to consider:
1) The city and port lied about needing the expansion to be contiguous. A non-contiguous expansion, just across the street (already connected by a $25 million footbridge), would generate 97% of the annual revenues that the city/port hope to achieve with a contiguous expansion. The only convention promoter who said that it needed a contiguous expansion or wouldn’t come to San Diego was anonymous, and that’s right in the city’s/port’s own economic study.
Basically, Jerry Sanders told a big fat lie to his colleagues on the city council, and being lazy they were all-too-happy to trust him because it meant they wouldn’t have to read a few pages of analysis.
2) The total cost of the proposed contiguous expansion is in excess of $1 billion, including debt-servicing etc., and the $520 million construction costs are now several years old (even Fabiani admitted that the Chargers’ proposal has gone up by a couple hundred million in the last few years).
3) The Navy Broadway Complex Coalition is reviewing some alternatives that, from what we can tell so far, would accomplish the city’s/port’s goals for many HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of TAYPAYER dollars LESS than what the city/port are proposing and solve some of the port’s biggest parking problems.
4) There’s no reason not to take a few months to take a serious look at the alternatives; the city/port blew off all calls to look at non-contiguous alternatives because of the one anonymous convention-promoter who said it wouldn’t come any more if the expansion weren’t contiguous. The lawsuit challenging the special tax that will fund the current plan will not be decided until the middle of next year at the earliest–and that’s assuming it doesn’t also go to the California Supreme Court, which many onlookers expect.
5) Among the politicians and former pols, Todd Gloria and Jerry Sanders are pushing this thing now. They hired the state’s top lobbyists to schmooze coastal commissioners–even one they fired a couple years ago because of her nasty comments about some of the commissioners. They want to make this a fight between the city and the Chargers. The public needs to take back the debate. It’s about how we develop OUR waterfront and how much money the TAXPAYERS shell out for an expansion designed almost entirely to benefit the downtown hoteliers.
John says
FWIW what idiot would hinge their Presidential vote on the endorsement of the local football team’s QB? It might make sense to choose the brand of sneakers you wear or even where you go on your next vacation, but c’mon, what does this jughead know about politics or even how government should work in the interests of the common man?
Makes as much sense as those ads I heard on the radio with Tony Gwynn endorsing an El Cajon car dealership. Umm…. if Tony even drove that brand of car surely it was part of the ad contract, he’d have no purchasing experience… when it gets serviced we know he doesn’t bring it in personally, if it breaks down he’d be happy as he could drive his Mercedes or Porsche instead.
What part of this dealer’s services can he speak for besides “I got paid handsomely to cater to your moronic sports hero adulation…”?
I’ll choose another brand that doesn’t insult my intelligence, thank you.
Rivers is so clueless, Santorum comes off like another Dan Quayle anyway. Go ahead, doom the party’s chances before it even starts. He just shows his detachment by not grasping how unpopular Santorum is, and is no smarter than (and just as marginalized as) your average Ron Paul supporter.(not that RP doesn’t have a few good ideas, he’s just so out there overall you can’t support him with any credibility)
BTW do “Christian Values” include INTs? LOL.
Pfaff says
This is not about football coaches and players. This is the story of the second most dysfunctional organization in the NFL and greed and wealth.
Stadiumcon: Let’s concentrate on a name change from Stadiumcon to any name that describes, with a much better catchword, expression and pinpoint accuracy, exactly what this is all about.
Before I begin, professional baseball, even prior to the 20th century, had “games that didn’t count” but were played for conditioning purposes and to refresh a ballplayer’s stagnating skills lost during the “winter months.” Because these “games didn’t count” in the various leagues regular seasons’ “standings,” they were named for exactly what they were and continue to be, “exhbition” games. Players are substituted more frequently by their managers so that rookies and recently “traded” players have an opportunity to EXHIBIT their skills, both to the public and their managers and general managers.
However, If professional baseball began play in the year 2000, now the term for baseball played at the highest level would be referred to as MLB – without periods or quotation marks. The games played before the regular season league games “counted,” AKA “standings,” would no longer be referred to as “exhibition” games. It is unimportant what the name of this term would be.
I had never heard the expression Stadiumcon until early this morning. The expression Stadiumcon is so bland and unimaginative, one would surmise it was created by the ad agency employed by Proctor & Gamble. Puhlease, isn’t it possible and the time for some of you very intelligent people to put your collective minds together and become brilliantly creative?
Can’t any of us come up with anything more suitable than the fact that the public already is and will continue to be in the future, really be CONNED by the power brokers about a future STADIUM for San Diego!
Let’s focus on the shoe and not the shoelace. Why are the power brokers and the “Lynch” mob and the Manchester Mess asking for a new stadium to be built? Basically, there are two reasons:
The NFL has, in their inimitable and sensational way, said aloud that if the City of San Diego wants to host another Super Bowl, a new stadium must be constructed. I am a rabid sports fan and really don’t give a damn what happens to any Spanos-owned franchise . . .period.
As Don Bauder, the former FINANCIAL editor of the major Copley publication in San Diego, and other nationally known economists specializing in revenue studies of USA stadiums have pointed out, with 2 exhibition games (Rozelle created the term pre-season games) and 8 regularly scheduled “games that count,” the benefits of a new stadium to the City and the taxpayers are zilch.
It is immaterial what other events could be hosted at this new venue; the City of San Diego is NOT in need of ANOTHER sports stadium, just as the City of San Diego did NOT need PETCO Park!
The Spanos family hired Mark Fabiani for one reason and one reason alone. Yes, that reason was to cheat, connive and lie about the fact that IF the City of San Diego (read taxpayers) do NOT BUILD a new stadium for this NFL franchise which happens to be presently located in San Diego and and was formerly in Los Angeles, this Spanos-owned NFL franchise will “strongly consider” relocating.
Hah! Where could they relocate? Perhaps London, England, or Berlin, Germany however the NFL does not want to consider the European market, England and Germany, until 2020.
There is not one person, including any U-T “journalist,” any electronic (radio & television) media person, or anyone else in the City of San Diego, who could identify one city in the USA where any Spanos-owned NFL franchise would be welcome!
Although the Los Angeles market (read television) is recognized by everyone, especially the NFL, as the SECOND largest market in the USA, the National Football League is not interested in having this second-rate Spanos-owned organization, after the Los Angeles Raider debacle, ruin the Los Angeles market (again) which is and has been crying out for an expansion franchise.
Since this Spanos-owned organization has nowhere to go, forget about the boring and unimaginative term Stadiumcon. Let’s create a term that does NOT focus on a
Stadium con job and does not have the word Chargers associated with the new term.
“Stadiumcon is NOT a STRONG enough term to spell defeat in a Citywide voting referendum. To some naive people who do not realize that football played at the NFL level is a business, not a sport, to defeat this proposition we need a new term with the six letters of this family-owned “operation,” S-p-a-n-o-s, incorporated as a part of this new term.
Even something as silly sounding as Spanosdium or even the awkward sounding
Spanoscannotidentifyanothercitytomovedium; a new term is an extreme necessity and a requirement.
All right everyone, let’s get into a three point stance, snap the pigskin and CREATE that NEW ONE word term to make our endeavor of the STOPPAGE of a new stadium into a touchDOWN; yes voted DOWN.