Oso planning to go pro
It's always an interesting discussion when it comes to public money going toward stadiums.On the one hand, it's never easy to justify giving hundreds of millions of dollars (or more) toward a stadium or arena for a team owned by a billionaire. There isn't a single city in which those funds wouldn't have been more useful elsewhere.On the other hand, it's simply the way the game is played now. With very few exceptions (and there have been a few, thankfully), if you want to keep your team, you have to play ball with the billionaire. So you have to decide, "Do we want to be a 'major-league city' or not?" If you decide to let the team go, that's OK, that's your decision, but will you regret it forever? If you decide that the team is a major part of your city's "psyche" or "worth," then you'll have to play the game and pony up.When I was in Minneapolis, the owner of the North Stars wanted a few million dollars to connect Met Center to the new Mall of America. The state and city of Bloomington told him no, so he moved the team to Dallas. And a few years later, the state paid up big-time to bring an expansion team to St. Paul. So they sure showed that North Stars' owner, who became even richer in Dallas. Sometimes a city (or state) doesn't realize how important a franchise is until it's gone. But it's certainly understandable to not want to hand zillions to a zillionaire. We might be facing the same difficult choice here with the Panthers within a few short years.
Yep. Just go get yourself a Lamar Jackson.
It won't happen, but the Chargers should move to Chicago. I say this below knowing it'll never happen.There's a story out there that there's an unnamed person who has a standing offer to the McCaskey family for $4 billion for the Bears. Whoever this person is, should I offer $3 billion to Spanos, and then work with the city of Arlington Heights to buy the racetrack, and figure out a way to build a dome there. Yes, the Chargers would always be the stepchild to the Bears, but I always thought Chicago could support two NFL teams, and a smart and innovative owner would put the Bears ownership to shame in this market.
but your Lamar Jackson has to stay healthy. Cam Newton was able to survive many of the massive hits on him because of his size but eventually (thanks to officials looking the other way and letting Cam be absolutely abused), he broke down RGIII had one good year before he was done as a starter.
Chargers response to London rumors:https://twitter.com/Chargers/status/1191794254294634496
Also agree with this. It's great to get a mobile QB until he can no longer be effective as a mobile QB. Still, the Panthers did get 7 mostly outstanding seasons from Cam, including an MVP/Super Bowl season and 3 division titles. But I don't think I'd ever get a smaller QB with the intention of asking him to run the ball 10-15 times a game. Jackson is quite a bit bigger than RG3 and a couple others, but obviously not as big as Cam. And of course, no matter how big you are, your head can still get cracked open and your knee ligaments are no stronger.
Considering they just left SD, probably not the best choice of meme.I think a better comp for Jackson is Vick, who except for the year he broke his leg in the preseason, was fairly healthy most of his career until his 30s, free of the injuries that normally plague mobile QBs. Cam is built like a TE so he welcomed hits and used his brute force and size to his advantage, Jackson by and large does not. Also, beyond any size differences, Shanahan had no idea what to do with RG3 and let him get brutalized and further played him on injuries he should have not. His whole time in Washington was a baffling comedy of errors as far as he was concerned. Harbaugh and Greg Roman seem to know what they are doing with Jackson and I imagine the outcome is different.
LA’s newest stadium is privately financed. Opens next year. As was Staples center last decade.
The Rams stadium is unique due to multiple tenants and attached amenities that together are valued at more than the stadium itself. That circumstance isn't likely to be replicated elsewhere. Also, while privately financed, Kroenke is getting tax incentives that have been valued at as much as $180 million, so it's not without public money.It's a far better deal than most - Vegas, for example - but there's definitely tax dollars going to Kroenke here.
Interesting, but the Bears would fight it tooth and nail and I imagine they'd get enough old-school owners to side with them to block that. Also, I think the league would much prefer opening up a new market, i.e. London, Portland, than double up in an existing market.
Apparently the $4 billion rumor is widely known in NFL circles (according to Forbes). I have no idea if it's true, who the person is that has had that offer to the McCaskey's.
How old is the rumor? My thought would be Ken Griffin or the Pritzkers, in conjuction with Pat Ryan perhaps. Ken Griffin doesn't seem to be a sports fan, but he has very much shown a vanity in real estate purchases, so its the kind of BSD move that would make sense. And the one or more of the Pritzkers one-upping the Rickett's seems like the sort of Chicago royalty move that I could see as well. Either way, it subsided for a year, but I can't express my excitement for the McCaskey ownership era to come to a close. I hope Ted Phillips is retained and then shipped to head of International Scouting in Yakutsk
And it looks like London may only be one alternative being considered. Including St. Louis.Should have never left San Diego. A new stadium would have happened eventually there.
Pat Ryan makes sense, given that he already owns a chunk of the team.
I don't think the Vegas deal was ever offered to the Chargers. That whole thing was put together by the Raiders and Sheldon Adelson.And if the NFL allowed the Raiders to move the LA instead if the Chargers, they'd be the most popular NFL team in that city right now.I thought Spencer Strasmore was involved too.Could’ve sworn Spencer Strathmore was involved too.https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/31/sports/los-angeles-raiders-rams-fans-national-football-league.htmlhttps://www.latimes.com/sports/rams/la-sp-rams-raiders-hernandez-20180818-story.html
Fair enough, though I was talking about direct contributions for construction, land usage, etc...maybe that's what you are also including. I'm trying to honestly remember the last stadium built in California that got straight gov't funding. I'm sure there are some, maybe one of the Nor Cal ones, but it has largely been a huge no-no in this state in an ironic twist.
https://www.espn.co.uk/nfl/story/_/id/28019240/green-bay-packers-visit-key-london-nfl-uk-mdSo the Packers are the only team to not play in London? Didn't realize that.The problem is the Packers will never give up a home game. And teams don't want to give up games with the Packers travelling fans. Looking out to next year, would Tampa want to give up a game? Houston? Indy? I don't think the Saints or a division opponent are a possibility.