and

Editorials by Nick Canepa and
other U-T San Diego Beat Writers
and the Voice of the Fans
 RUMOR CENTRAL  

Beat Writer Stays in Touch with Fans

ChargerTom's Blog-RANTS

 Support This Site

VOICE OF THE FANS AND OUTSIDE MEDIA

 THE FANS SAY ....

ON THE NEW GM HIRE ....

Richard Novick

"Real organizational change, more times than not, requires bringing in someone from outside the organization. Although we don't know exactly how Telesco will fare in San Diego, Spanos at least passed the first critical test of the retooling period. Now regarding Jimmy Raye...my hunch is that he'll find employment elsewhere. The Chargers' "party line" is gushing over with praise for him--more than likely deserved--but also meant to paint him as an attractive candidate to other teams. It may have occured to Mr. Spanos that it might be slightly poisonous to have two rivals for the same job in the same front office."

James Bleyer

"No wonder they made a sound decision....Ron Wolf was a consultant."

Joe Heatherly

"Good move. I'm more excited about what's going on with the Chargers right now than I am in the NFL playoffs. This is getting interesting..."

ON THE NEW COACH ....

jonnymac

"Another offensive coordinator turned head coach... didn't we do that with Norv. I hope his results are better. Too bad we couldnt hire a seasoned head coach. Lets cross our fingers and hope for the best."

J

"IDK about this hiring, in the past 20 yrs. we've only had 2 good, reputable coaches with a history of success prior to joining the Chargers; Bobby Ross and Marty Schottenheimer. Norvell was handed a contending team and he basically squandered it, ouch!! This hiring of McCoy makes me nervous, very nervous. It's a #$%$ shoot when you decide to hire an assistant as opposed to a veteran head coach who's had success. I'm trying to keep a positive outlook but I'm very concerned about another half-decade of heartache and despair.

Cheers.."

Monty

"Dean Spanos has proven over again and again that the reason he runs the Chargers is that his dad doesn't want him anywhere near the real family business. The Spanos family hires good coaches about every 12 years who take them to the playoffs before being fired and the start of the next cycle. We are about 5 years into this cycle so another 7 years before you can expect the Chargers to make the playoffs."

Kid_surf

"OK MCCoy and Telesco....the honeymoon starts NOW. I'm ready to be impressed....

<As an aside to the majority of Charger fans out there....I understand the frustration more than most since i've been a fan since Gene Klein...but let's at least give these guys a fair chance.>"

 

ON THE NEW TICKET PRICES ....

Some outraged by Chargers ticket price hike
By Matthew T. Hall, Staff Writer, UT-San Diego, .JAN. 11, 2013

The headline seemed too matter-of-fact: “Chargers lower some ticket prices, raise others.”

The Chargers, without a playoff appearance or winning season in three years and with a front office in turmoil, actually raised ticket prices?

Boy, did they.

The Chargers jacked up season ticket prices by 11 percent to 22 percent on 24,000 of their most loyal customers — those with the best field, plaza and press-level seats at Qualcomm Stadium. That $900 season package? It now costs as much as $1,100.

And that’s for 10 discounted tickets, bought in bulk. Single-game seats in those same sections went up by a whopping 33 percent, from $98 to $130.

To be fair, 45,000 seats in the venue will cost the same or less this year. For example, nearly 10,000 seats will cost about $50 as the team tries to fill a stadium, win more games than it has and prevent a recurrence of the four TV blackouts that were caused by poor ticket sales in 2012.

The Chargers also are trying to bring ticket costs in line with other National Football League teams, most of whom have been increasing their prices.

“We needed to make some adjustments there so we could remain a viable and competitive team financially, but also find a way to fill as many seats as we can,” Chargers spokesman Bill Johnston told me. “Obviously, it’s never a good time.”

But couldn’t this calculus work the other way, creating more empty seats by alienating fervent but cash-strapped fans and leaving a bigger glut in the secondary market where $98 tickets don’t fetch face value now?

I threw the question to a couple dozen fans. But first, I did some math.

Since the team’s 14-2 high-water mark in 2006, it has lost about 16,000 of its 62,000 season ticket holders in a stadium with room for 70,000.

The good news? Until now, ticket prices hadn’t risen since 2008. The bad? The cost for parking and beer had.

When you add in these expenses, Chargers games were the seventh-most expensive in the 32-team NFL last year and the average ticket price was 10th. A family of four paid $466.20 per Chargers game last year, according to the company Team Marketing Report. The league average was $443.93, but still.

Worse for fans? A cup of beer at Qualcomm was the NFL’s priciest — $9. The only other team that charged $9 a cup were the Bills, but their fans got 20 ounces instead of 16.

Now back to the Jan. 4 announcement of the 2013 Chargers ticket“rescale.” A news release downplayed the increases as $10 or $20 a game, and a separate email to ticket holders framed the higher-priced packages in terms of how much “you save!” over new single-game ticket prices.

Some business model, I thought. After bleeding fans for years, the team’s now bleeding them dry? San Diego’s laid-back, but shouldn’t there be outrage?

I found some in Coronado at the home of Roy Gayhart, whose two seats at the 30-yard line would cost him $400 more a year if he renews.


OTHER MEDIA OUTLETS SAY ....

Mike McCoy and Ken Whisenhunt will revive the San Diego Chargers’ offense
By Kenny Gardner, Contributor, Rant Sports, Jan 19, 2013

The San Diego Chargers ranked 20th in points per game, 22nd in receiving yards, 30th in yards per reception, 31st in yards per rushing attempt and were tied for last in the NFL with four rushing touchdowns.

San Diego’s front office named former Denver Broncos offensive coordinator Mike McCoy as the team’s head coach.  Former Arizona Cardinals head coach Ken Whisenhunt was named the team’s offensive coordinator.

Denver ranked 16th, 12th and sixth in yards per play in 2009, 2010 and 2012 with McCoy as their offensive coordinator.  The Pittsburgh Steelers ranked 10th and seventh in yards per play with Whisenhunt as their offensive coordinator in 2005 and 2006.

San Diego’s key to being dominant on offense again will depend on improvement to the offensive line.  San Diego’s offensive line allowed 49 sacks in 2012, and only three teams allowed more than them.

Ryan Mathews is capable of being a big key to San Diego improving their rushing attack because he averaged 4.9 yards per attempt in 2011, but he also averaged a career-low 3.8 yards per attempt in 2012.

If San Diego is able to get the right pieces to put together their puzzle, McCoy and Whisenhunt will revive an offense that ranked first in total yards in 2010, and sixth in yards per play in 2011.

I expect the offensive line problems to be solved in the 2013 NFL Draft.  There are free agent wide receivers like Wes Welker, Dwayne Bowe or Greg Jennings who could help San Diego’s receiving game.

San Diego’s front office had to make improvements on their offensive coaching staff and they did this by signing McCoy and Whisenhunt to deals.

There is still work to be done by going after free agents and selecting dependable offensive linemen, but San Diego’s front office is headed in the right direction.

 

San Diego Chargers Should Think About Parting Ways With Ryan Mathews
By Kenny Gardner, Contributor, RantSports, Jan 11, 2013

The San Diego Chargers completed a trade with the Miami Dolphins to move up from the 28th pick in round one of the 2010 NFL Draft to the 12th pick and chose Ryan Mathews that year.

Mathews played in 12 games during his rookie season, had 158 attempts, 678 yards and seven touchdowns on 4.3 yards per attempt. In 14 games during the 2011 season, Mathews had 222 attempts, 1,091 yards and six TDs with an average of 4.9 yards per attempt. Mathews ranked 10th in the NFL with 1,091 rushing yards and no one in the top 10 equaled his 4.9 yards per attempt.

Mathews had a disappointing 2012 season which started with a broken right clavicle against the Green Bay Packers that caused him to miss two regular season games. Mathews broke his left clavicle against the Carolina Panthers and missed the last two games. Mathews finished his 2012 season with 184 attempts, 707 yards and career lows in yards per attempt at 3.8 and touchdowns with one.

According to Michael Gehlken of utsandiego.com, Mathews said “It’s time for me to show them why they bumped up all the spots they did to draft me.”

Mathews would go on to say “I’ve shown greatness at times, and I’ve shown I can be the worst player at times. You’ve got to be consistent, and that’s what I plan to do.”

San Diego’s top priority in the draft will be to improve on an offensive line that allowed 49 sacks which ranked fourth in the NFL.  The rushing offense was even worse because they averaged 3.6 yards per attempt which ranked 31st and their four rushing touchdowns ranked last.

A major reason why San Diego will look to improve their offensive line before the run game is because Mathews has shown that he can be great at times. However, Mathews has a history of injuries which goes back to his sophomore year in college when he missed five games with a knee injury.  Mathews missed four games in 2010, two games in 2011 and four games in 2012.

Mathews has two years left on his contract heading into the 2013 season.  San Diego’s front office has to think about parting ways with Mathews if he suffers another injury which causes him to miss games. 



CHARGERTOM RECOMMENDS:
Team One Tickets Link
FOR YOUR CHARGERS TICKETS
AND FOR ALL
OTHER NFL TICKETS!!!


 


NICK CANEPA'S EDITORIAL
Sports Writer, U-T San Diego, Jan 15, 2013 

 

 

 


RUMOR CENTRAL
Rumors from the Web

Could Chargers target Larry Fitzgerald?
By Bill Williamson, Writer, ESPN.com, Jan 21, 2013

I’ve been asked often in the past few days whether the San Diego Chargers could target Arizona receiver Larry Fitzgerald in a trade. 

I get the reasoning. 

Fitzgerald is tied to new San Diego offensive coordinator Ken Whisenhunt. He was Fitzgerald’s longtime head coach in Arizona. New San Diego quarterbacks coach Frank Reich was Fitzgerald’s position coach last season. Fitzgerald’s father tweeted Friday that his son was a fan of Reich, and it was a good hire for the Chargers. 

Also, the Chargers could badly use an offensive weapon like Fitzgerald, a future hall of famer. He’d be a perfect gift to quarterback Philip Rivers, who has seen so many talented offensive teammates leave him in recent seasons. 

So, those are all the reasons why it could work. 

Getting Fitzgerald wouldn’t be so easy, however. He signed a monster contract with the Cardinals two years ago and the Cardinals have not shown any indication they want to get rid of Fitzgerald. I’d imagine Fitzgerald was a major reason why Colts offensive coordinator Bruce Arians took Arizona’s head coaching job. 

Even if the Cardinals wanted to deal Fitzgerald, he’d cost the Chargers a ton in trade compensation and cap money. The Chargers have a lot to do. They are not one player away on offense. So, fitting Fitzgerald in wouldn’t be easy. 

In a perfect world, this paring makes sense, but there are way too many obstacles to make this an easy connection.


 What’s wrong with that Powder Blue we’ve all grown to know and love?

Now that the NFL has made an agreement with Nike to become the new jersey provider to the 32 NFL teams in place of Reebok, it looks like they have decided to take them all in a new direction. Here’s what ProFootballTalk had to say on the subject.

"On the day that the NFL announced Nike will replace Reebok as the league’s uniform supplier in 2012, a Nike official said changes are coming to NFL jerseys.

Nike Brand President Charlie Denson told Darren Rovell of CNBC that the change would be similar to changes that Nike has made to college football jerseys.

“We plan on changing the NFL jersey dramatically just like we’ve done with the college programs, using new thinking and the greatest technology available,” Denson said. “The NFL program hasn’t had the same type of advancement in recent years.

After years of Reebok leading the way on NFL jerseys, it will be interesting to see what dramatic changes Nike comes up with. I just hope no NFL team follows the hideous example of Oregon in college football."

If these really are what Nike has in store for the Chargers, I’m a little disappointed. Email me your thoughts: chargertom@aol.com


STADIUM

Cushman: Qualcomm site could still be Chargers' home
FORMER MAYORAL ADVISER ENDORSES NEW LOOK AT MISSION VALLEY SITE
By Roger Showley, Business News, UT-San Diego North County, Jan 3, 2013

Qualcomm Stadium, where the Chargers have played since 1967, may still make sense as their future home, according to Steve Cushman.

Former Mayor Jerry Sanders’ point person on convention center expansion, Cushman endorsed the present 166-acre site Thursday as a potential “real asset for the city” if it could be redeveloped with a stadium, housing and commercial buildings.

“I think it would be a great project, a real project that could happen,” Cushman said.

Cushman spoke the day after he made similar remarks on KPBS-TV, when he endorsed U-T Publisher Douglas F. Manchester’s recent estimate that $200 million could be enough to fix the stadium’s many issues.

The estimate seems accurate, Cushman said, because it is line with the $520 million convention center expansion cost. He recommended the city hire the same Phoenix consultant used on the convention center to verify the costs of refurbishing the stadium.

“Maybe it isn’t feasible,” Cushman said. “Maybe it’ll take $400 million to do it, maybe $100 million.”

But he said the point is that “nothing should be off the table.”

“I do not want to see us lose the Chargers,” he said.

Chargers consultant Mark Fabiani, who has been advising the team on stadium issues, said in an email, “We remain open minded about all ideas, but there are no new developments on the ground at Qualcomm.”

The team has been searching for a decade to fix or replace Qualcomm, which it considers subpar when compared to other NFL stadiums.

It proposed a $400 million replacement in 2003 as part of a mixed-use redevelopment on the site.

When that received mixed reviews, the team looked into sites in Chula Vista, Oceanside and other locations and settled on an East Village site in 2010 on the city bus yard at 14th and K streets.

But with the state-ordered end to redevelopment agencies last year, a city-Chargers partnership seemed financially infeasible and Sanders was seeking funding alternatives when he left office last month.

In 2009 Perry Dealy, a consultant to Manchester on another project, independently led a team of civic leaders to look again at the Q and developed an $800 million stadium replacement plus housing, San Diego State University housing and academic buildings and parkland. The Chargers did not endorse that plan and nothing further came of it.

Last year, U-T San Diego ran a front-page editorial promoting the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal on the downtown waterfront as an alternative that could include hotels, convention space and other amenities and replace both Qualcomm and the convention center expansion.

The San Diego Unified Port District, which operates the terminal, rejected the idea and extended a long-term lease for part of the terminal to Dole Fresh Fruit.

Manchester said he was not interested in being the developer the Qualcomm site -- “I’ve got my hands full doing other things” -- and was speaking at the site’s potential from a developer’s standpoint.

“If there’s a way of doing it, maybe that should be considered,” he said. “If you gave me $200 million, I probably could do it.”

But he said was not giving up the waterfront site or any option and remains committed to keeping the Chargers in San Diego.

The only new wrinkle in the stadium debate is the state of pollution at the site from gasoline tanks operated by Kinder Morgan and the recent outcome of a lawsuit by the city against that company.

Both U-T CEO John Lynch and Fabiani mentioned the lawsuit’s outcome as a new factor in what new development might be feasible.

“I am convinced that no stadium will ever be built on the Qualcomm site,” Lynch said. “If it doesn’t happen downtown, you may see the L.A. Chargers.”


Revamped Qualcomm Site

Will new mayor work with Chargers on stadium?
By Brent Schrotenboer, USA TODAY Sports, Nov 7, 2012

The San Diego Chargers' decade-long quest for a new stadium almost certainly won't be submitted to voters until at least 2014.

But even that possibility appeared less likely this week with the election of new mayor Bob Filner, a Democrat who has vowed to be "the toughest negotiator the Chargers have ever faced."

Without a solution, the Chargers remain a perennial candidate to move to Los Angeles – even as soon as next year, though the team has shown a commitment to San Diego as long as viable options are on the table.

"We've waited this long, and if we have a path to success, we can wait until 2014," said Mark Fabiani, the Chargers point man on the stadium search. "Right now we don't have such a path, but we hope to find one with the new mayor."

Even if it goes to voters in 2014 and is approved, a new stadium probably wouldn't be ready for play until 2018.

Both mayoral candidates had opposed public financing of a new stadium, but Filner's opponent, Republican Carl DeMaio, had said he was open to creating a public-private partnership for the project.

Filner, a Congressman, states on his campaign website that "our city has been held ransom by our sports teams, a fact we cannot forget." He states "the only deal" he would make "is one that will give something back to the city and its taxpayers." He states that could include "partial ownership of the team" and "greater involvement and support of our public schools."

Filner's office didn't immediately return a message seeking comment. He is to be inaugurated on Dec. 3.

Still, there may be common cause for Filner and the Chargers, particularly with the labor unions, a staunch supporter of Filner's. The unions generally have supported a new stadium for the team on the basis that it would create union jobs.

"We look forward to working with Mr. Filner," Fabiani told USA TODAY Sports Wednesday. "We have mutual allies in the labor community, and our proposed project would create thousands of jobs and major construction in three separate sections of the city, so we hope to be able to find common ground here."

The city's current mayor, Jerry Sanders, had tried to make progress toward a new stadium, even touring stadium districts in other cities last year to gather ideas for San Diego. He had hoped to submit a downtown stadium plan to voters in 2013.

But that is not likely now because of entanglements involving the state's dissolution of redevelopment agencies.

The stadium is projected to cost around $1 billion, with money coming from the NFL, the team and taxpayers if they approve it in a vote.

The team wants to boost its revenues with a new stadium. It currently plays in 45-year-old Qualcomm Stadium, a city-owned facility that needs $80 million in repairs, maintenance and improvements, according to a city-commissioned report last year. The report also said the city would lose at least $10 million a year on Qualcomm Stadium through 2020. Even so, other financial problems for the city have kept the stadium issue on the backburner in recent years.

According to their lease with the city, the Chargers can negotiate with other cities and relocate during a three-month window each year starting Feb. 1. To leave in 2013, they would just need to pay the city $22 million.

Meanwhile, 120 miles up the road, Los Angeles is on the verge of building a new NFL stadium, pending a commitment from a team willing to move there. The goal is to have the stadium built by the 2017, but the stadium's developer, Anschutz Entertainment Group, has indicated it could be ready to accommodate a team in a different Los Angeles facility as soon as next year while the stadium is being built.


STADIUM SITE NOW IN QUESTION
By Craig Gustafson, Beat Writer, UT-San Diego, Sep 14, 2012

Fred Maas, the mayor’s point man on the stadium issue, said it doesn’t make sense to put out any plan until the fate of Tailgate Park is determined.

“The big issue is it throws a wrench into the whole financial evaluation of the site and, ultimately, presenting a report,” he said. “In an environment in which people are cynical to begin with, the last thing you want to do is release something that raises more questions than answers.”

The team is focused on the possibility of building a stadium in East Village on a site that includes a bus yard owned by the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System and part of Tailgate Park. The financing plan would likely involve several public agencies, including the San Diego Association of Governments, which could help pay for a replacement bus yard or other transportation-related infrastructure improvements.

An alternative plan has been proposed by U-T San Diego ownership for a waterfront stadium at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal as part of an integrated complex that would include a sports arena, expanded convention center and a public park and beach.

Complications over the East Village property began when Gov. Jerry Brown and state lawmakers approved the end of redevelopment agencies across the state as of Feb. 1, determining that the money reinvested by the agencies was needed to balance the state budget. Critics also argued that redevelopment in some cities had failed to remove blight and promote development as intended.

Many cities, including San Diego, chose to assume control of all the former redevelopment agency’s obligations and properties through a successor agency, a separate legal entity. But, in June, the Legislature changed the rules on how former redevelopment agency properties could be developed, sold or transferred to the city. Any decision on the properties can only occur after a long-range asset management plan for all the properties is developed and approved by the San Diego Oversight Board — a seven-member panel appointed by city, county, school and special district officials — and the state Department of Finance. That approval process can’t begin until April 2013 and a final resolution isn’t expected until the following fall.

The Department of Finance will have the final say, which takes the ultimate decision out of local hands.

“The Legislature’s decision to wind down redevelopment has thrown a lot of projects into limbo,” Sanders said in a statement. “We won’t know the status of this parcel until next fall when the state makes a decision on a long-range asset management plan. Once a determination is made, the next mayor will be able to take the work that has been done so far and incorporate it into a financing plan that works for both the Chargers and the taxpayers.”

Sanders and the Chargers had hoped to put the stadium financing plan before voters in 2013, but the uncertainty over Tailgate Park almost certainly pushes a public vote into 2014. It also shifts responsibility for leading the stadium push to the next mayor. Two candidates competing in the November election — Republican City Councilman Carl DeMaio and Democratic Rep. Bob Filner — have ruled out the possibility of using taxpayer money from the city on any stadium deal.

By Matthew T. Hall, Reporter - San Diego Union-Tribune, April 9, 2012

All the stadium stories you missed since my last roundup while you were poring over each line of AEG's must-read 10,000-page Farmers Field environmental impact report....

In San Diego, sports fans couldn't stop discussing (or would that be dissing?) Los Angeles, where despite all the smog, the grass often seems greener.

Thursday morning, Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG, for short) dropped some long-awaited light reading material, the 10,000-page draft environmental impact report for Farmers Field. Then the Dodgers took three of four from the Padres at Petco Park. Oh, and the Los Angeles (by way of San Diego) Clippers continued to be one of the NBA's hottest teams. (At least some Coachella bands are choosing San Diego over Los Angeles for their pre-weekend desert concert shows....)

Such sports and music conversations certainly won't be pre-empted by talk of a new San Diego football stadium any time soon since the Mayor's Office moved its deadline to release a financing plan from March to September. In discussing the Farmers Field EIR, Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani sounded optimistic a San Diego deal would be struck eventually, but with Mayor Jerry Sanders leaving office in December, its prospects seem as uncertain as ever. A new mayor would be the third that the team has lobbied to get a new stadium, and, if it comes to it, Sanders' inability to get a stadium financing plan on a ballot measure for voters would turn years of team talks with him into one unsuccessful drive. (At least Chargers fans are used to those....)

"We wouldn't have any comment on the release of an environmental document on a proposed stadium in another city," Fabiani said. "We hope to one day have our own such document to release on our proposed new stadium in downtown San Diego."

A U-T San Diego editorial scolded Sanders for his financing plan delay.

"Efforts to put together a deal for a new stadium in downtown Los Angeles that could lure the Chargers away from San Diego came back to life this week with the release of a key environmental report, after months of not much happening," the editorial noted. "That L.A. lull should have been a blessing giving San Diego time to put together its own stadium plan. There is still time. But this city is squandering the opportunity."

A Facebook comment from former San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre was more pointed in its criticism of Sanders.

"When confronted with a difficult choice he did what he does when confronted with a difficult choice, he misled those involved to believe he was going to do something about the issue," Aguirre wrote. "Those who want to get something done on this issue have to deal with reality and not empty rhetoric."

Said Sanders' spokesman Darren Pudgil: "The mayor is going to keep moving the ball down the field in pursuit of a financing plan that works for the taxpayers and the Chargers. He wants to make sure it's a solid plan in which the costs are fairly shared and the return on investment is clear."


Other older stadium stories you might have missed:

In San Diego, where the season's end was as anti-climactic as a Raiders win can be, there was no doubt what the big stadium news of the week was. It was the death of redevelopment.

Which is funny, because the day that the California Supreme Court ruled that the state Legislature's decision to wind down redevelopment was legal, the story on the ruling wasn't our website's most popular until late in the afternoon.

Instead, for most of Thursday, as one politician after another grumbled that they'd been "raided," the top spot on our site belonged to news that Chargers center Nick Hardwick might retire....

The elimination of San Diego's Centre City Development Corp. and the state's other 400 redevelopment agencies, threw into question how the East Village site being studied for a new football stadium would be cleared of tenants and cleaned of massive fuel contamination from the buses that currently call it home.

The cleanup and relocation of the Metropolitan Transit System bus yard and other tenants is estimated to cost $150 million, a tidy sum that's excluded from the Chargers' $800 million projections for a new downtown stadium.

The assumption had been that redevelopment funds could cover the site preparations. Now those assumptions are being revisited.

City officials expect to release the stadium financing plan they're working on with Chargers brass by the end of March. Here's the relevant section of colleague Roger Showley's story on the court ruling.

Many high-profile projects, as well as park and sidewalk improvements, count on redevelopment funding and their future now is in doubt.

The biggest is the proposed $800 million Chargers stadium downtown.

"We had assumed last fall that redevelopment funds would not be available, and so we proposed a combination stadium-convention center expansion concept which we believe could be financed without redevelopment dollars," said team counsel Mark Fabiani.

However, the city has rejected a combination as Fabiani sketched out in favor of moving forward now with a $520 million convention center expansion.

At the same time, the Centre City Development Corp., the city's downtown redevelopment arm, had set aside $150 million in additional funds for site preparation of the East Village site eyed by the Chargers, now occupied by the city bus yard.

While that money for the stadium site and millions more were identified in a cooperation agreement with the city earlier this year to secure future funding, it is not clear how secure that agreement now is.

Fabiani said he and other Chargers lawyers are "analyzing the opinion" from the court.

"We are not prepared at this point to offer anything definitive on that question" about the $150 million, he said in an email.

The impact in Los Angeles is less certain. It's unclear how much redevelopment money, if any, might have been spent on infrastructure improvements surrounding the sites of dueling stadium projects proposed in downtown Los Angeles and 20 miles away in City of Industry.

This is how the U-T’s Tim Sullivan summarized his current level of concern about the Chargers moving to Los Angeles: “The threat is conceivable, but it is not yet close, and it does not appear to have moved any closer as a result of the California Supreme Court’s decision upholding the state legislature’s right to dissolve redevelopment agencies.” Kinda like that one scene with the security guard in Austin Powers, he wrote. Yeah, this one.

Want more on the redevelopment ruling? San Diego Rostra compiled nearly two dozen stories from around the state here.

In other local stadium news, voiceofsandiego.org’s Scott Lewis continued to discuss the idea of potential public ownership of the team, which would require changing the National Football League bylaws, i.e. moving Heaven and Earth.

Meanwhile, Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio is now (sort of) charged up about the issue on his (much larger) platform. In classic, anonymously sourced Florio, he wrote: “As one team executive told PFT on Wednesday, plenty of franchises would love to have the ability to ‘print money.’”

In Los Angeles, ESPN.com's Arash Markazi at least waited until the day after Christmas to drop this piece of coal on Chargers’ fans. He tweeted, “I still think the Chargers make the most sense to move in 2013 with the Rams moving soon after in 2014 or 2015.” That’s actually no surprise to anyone who’s following his weekly NFL in L.A. updates, which continually rank the Chargers as the likeliest candidate to go all Hollywood. What’s interesting is that even when the NFL's return to Los Angeles remains a long shot (based solely on an absence now measuring 17 years), Markazi maintains not one, but two teams, could play there. Within three years.

Also in Los Angeles, the Daily News named Tim Leiweke its sports person of the year. In big, bold type, (alright, in the headline....) the paper dubbed the AEG CEO and president “the harvester of hope when it comes to NFL’s possible return to L.A.” Leiweke is the face of the push to put a team in downtown L.A.

The article includes a Q and A with Leiweke and features this exchange:

Q: Are you where you want to be right now in the process, and are you confident whatever gap still exists between Los Angeles and the NFL will be closed?

A: I wouldn't say I am confident but I will say both sides understand the uniqueness of a private company and a private citizen like Phil Anschutz stepping up and saying he is willing to take the risk. But the deal has to make sense for all involved, including him. He is going to have to personally own this team. This will not be an AEG asset. And so, does that get done? I guess if I was confident it would already be finished. So we have work to do. But first and foremost we have to finish the environmental impact report and our goal is to have that finished and improved by June of 2012.

In Oakland, Raiders owner Al Davis’ death last year has some wondering what will happen to the team when his wife dies. Footballphds.com offered a primer on real estate taxes that makes for good, if dry, reading for fans of the Raiders, the Chargers and tax law (and also maybe insomniacs….)

In Santa Clara, with redevelopment over, city officials now must find up to $40 million in redevelopment money pledged toward the 49ers proposed $1 billion stadium, but city leaders emphasized it would not jeopardize the project.

In Minnesota, the Vikings’ stadium quest finally ended! At least, that’s what you might assume from what Sports Illustrated’s Peter King tweeted and said on national television Sunday night. But....

Not so fast, a Vikings spokesman counter-tweeted ... repeatedly the following day.

CBS Sports followed suit with word that King’s "Christmas miracle" was premature. As premature as the thought that writers would finally stop using the holiday trope “Christmas miracle” in their copy.

At Fieldofschemes.com, Neil DeMause had some fun after King and Florio said the Vikings were close to a deal. “A more accurate headline would probably be ‘Vikings continuing stadium talks with state officials,’” DeMause wrote. “But since that's pretty much the same headline that people in Minnesota have been reading for the past five years, you can see why King (and Florio) went with the snappier lede.”

Of the outlets I checked out, NFL.com played the story the most down the middle. The league's site also included the full King quote for those who missed it: "Look for the Vikings to sign a long-term deal and build a new stadium in Minnesota so that they will not be a candidate to move to Los Angeles," King said. "Everybody had been rumoring that they were going to L.A. The Vikings are going to stay in Minneapolis."

What did expire in Minnesota, the team insists, is its lease. The key word there is insists because there is language in the lease that a extends it for a year if the team doesn't play a full season in it and everyone remembers the rupture in the roof of the Metrodome last season that led to a temporary relocation. Again, Fieldoschemes broke it down nicely.

In a personnel change (we’ll be hearing about a few of those in coming days, ey?), the Minnesota senate Republicans named themselves a new majority leader, appointing someone whom stadium supporters expect to be a boost to their efforts. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported that Sen. Dave Senjem (I mean, could a senator have a better surname?!?) “is a supporter of expanded gambling, which could become crucial in negotiations for a new Minnesota Vikings stadium.”

In St. Louis, a blogger pieced together a progression of comments from the Rams’ front office about the team’s lease and future home to show that the Rams' only movement in the team's future would be climbing up in the standings. On Twitter, @losangelesrams (whose bias is there for all to see) linked to the story with editorial whimsy, saying, “And the Winner for the most delusional article yet out of St. Louis...”

With deadlines looming large that should indicate the team's desire to stay, one St. Louis broadcaster put the odds that the Rams could leave at 50-50.

In Jacksonville, an Associated Press report became the latest to declare a Jaguars' move “unrealistic,” at least for now. It surely had football fans there breathing easier (though maybe not smiling, after this season) as longtime owner Wayne Weaver moves on. An interesting excerpt from the story:

Weaver would have liked to have a few more years before walking away. But he had been looking for an exit strategy in recent years, and (new owner Shahid) Khan seems to be a suitable successor.

They have known each other for years, so familiar that the $770 million agreement was initially drawn up on a cocktail napkin. It included a sale price of $660 million plus $110 million in debt.

The final paperwork also included a stability agreement that essentially guarantees that the team will remain in Jacksonville for at least five years. NFL.com has reported that Khan would have to pay $25 million to a Jacksonville charity of Weaver's choice if he moves the team within five years.

The stability agreement coupled with the team's stadium lease and the NFL's hefty relocation fee make a move unrealistic — at least in the short term. The stadium lease runs through 2027 and would have to be bought out for the team to move. That would cost about $65 million right now. And the NFL's relocation fee could top $100 million.

Regardless, Khan has insisted he has no plans to leave Jacksonville.

"We're committed to this community and we are going to keep on carrying the work that was started here in perpetuity and hopefully move it up a notch," Khan said.

Also, the Jags lifted a TV blackout for the team’s last game of the season. Pro Football Talk noted, “It’s not known how many tickets the Jaguars bought themselves, at 34 cents on the dollar, in order to get the game on local TV.” Commentators on the post noted this makes two years straight with zero blackouts in Jacksonville.

That's five fewer than the Chargers had in those two years, for those keeping score.

Lastly, here are the season-ending attendance figures for teams linked to a potential new stadium in Los Angeles at one time or another. (Only San Francisco is currently pursuing a new, local stadium on its own.)

Buffalo's attendance plummeted in its final game, pushing San Diego and Minnesota up a spot in average attendance and pushing the Bills down to the bottom of the list in stadium capacity though not much behind the Chargers. In San Diego's case, the team averaged its fewest fans per game since 2004.

NFL average attendance with rank

San Francisco 69,732 (12)

San Diego 65,392 (19)

Minnesota 62,816 (23)

Buffalo 62,694 (24)

Jacksonville 62,331 (25)

Oakland 59,242 (29)

St. Louis 56,394 (31)

NFL average stadium capacity with rank

San Francisco 99.3 (10)

Minnesota 98 (14)

Oakland 94 (22)

Jacksonville 92.8 (24)

San Diego 91.7 (25)

St. Louis 86.3 (27)

Buffalo 85.8 (29)

STADIUM VIDEO
 

Chargers Get Bolt of Inspiration
The design is inspired by the Chargers' iconic lightning-bolt branding
By Gene Cubbison, Sports Analyst, NBC News, San Diego, March 8, 2011


Nobody's "shown them the money" yet. But the Chargers have just been shown a radical new way of planning their proposed downtown stadium.

This novel approach came to the Chargers unsolicited, no money asked.

It's a labor of civic love on the part of a three-member, local design team that wants to keep the Bolts local and put a bold, classy stamp on an unfinished side of East Village.

"There's about 12 acres of 'public experience' around the site, and that actually connects to the existing buildings," says Gaslamp Quarter architect Paul De Bartolo. "It's a stadium that's embracing its city around it."

And it's an approach its creators hope will be embraced in some form by the Chargers, the city and the constituents of both.

Australian-born De Bartolo and his fellow Aussie business partner Ivan Rimanic began collaborating on it late last year with San Diego landscape architect David McCullough.

They finally presented it to the Bolts' brass last week, and posted the schematic renderings on their website.

Their civic message, in part: "The Gaslamp has really transformed with Petco Park, but it's missing something vital, in our opinion," said McCullough. "And if something doesn't happen, like what we're proposing, then it's probably going to remain parking lots and train tracks into eternity."

The stadium itself would be shaped like a volcanic dome -- design inspired by the Chargers' iconic lightning-bolt branding.

"By taking the Chargers logo and mirroring it, you do create a circular coliseum setup for a stadium, and by extruding the form, you start to generate the sides of the stadium, and how it can work in these different wings," explained De Bartolo.

Meantime, the overall site concept -- featuring a vast stretch of green open space with an iconic structure, and elevated trolley tracks -- is erupting in a lot of imaginations as it goes viral online.

"It was extremely important for us to really explore the linkages into the city for this site," De Bartolo said.

While this team of dreamers has no illusions about the difficulties of turning the concept into a reality, they want to jump-start the brainstorming process in hopes that the project makes it farther down the road.

"We feel that we're so close in San Diego to having a city that's comparable to some of the greatest cities in the world. And it's one area that I think we could have this," De Bartolo said.

Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani has forwarded the design package to the team's architects; so far, no feedback.

The principal partner and namesake of London Group Realty Advisers said the new proposal helps focus discussion on enhancing the proposed stadium's visual appeal and connection to its surroundings.

"This throws down the gauntlet," says Gary London, who's worked with the Chargers.  "Unless that aspect of the project is really addressed, (the stadium) probably doesn't get very far."

- OR -


Webmaster Note:  Want to have YOUR editorial comments posted on this page?  Send your article/comments to chargertom@aol.com and if they are well written and applicable, they will be posted and you will be given credit.  Send in your articles NOW.



  ROR


This Web Site is Copyright © 1984-2013, all rights reserved. All names, logos, images, and pictures displayed on this site are the copyrights and trademarks of their respective owners and they retain the ownership and credit unless designated as public domain. This site is not endorsed by the San Diego Chargers, Padres, Gulls, or any other organization mentioned or linked. ChargerTom.com considers the term "Raider Hater" an adjective describing a fan who dislikes the Raiders and their fans and has no intentions of competing for sales with the Oakland Raiders and items should not be construed to be sanctioned by the NFL.  It is the intent of these pages to express positive enthusiasm and support for the teams, the organizations, the leagues, the city, and the sports, from the perspective of a loyal fan. Comments or suggestions regarding this Web Site should be addressed to: chargertom@aol.com