qualcomm-story

An Insult to Dumps Everywhere

Qualcomm Stadium, home of the Chargers, is a decrepit hulk, but the city government’s comical dysfunction means a deal for a new venue is as far off as ever

By
Jim Trotter
· More from Jim·

When Peter King approached me about writing a weekly West Coast-centric column for his website, I found it attractive not only because I believe Sports Illustrated’s football coverage has had an eastern bias, but also because it meant shorter flights from my home in San Diego.

But then the reality hit me. It also meant more time in dumps disguised as NFL stadiums, namely O.co Coliseum in Oakland and Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego. (Candlestick Park, thank goodness, has just one more year left; the 49ers move into their new building in Santa Clara in 2014.)

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.

Yes, I know. Stop whining. Things could be worse. I could have to critique One Direction for a living. But what’s especially irritating is that things don’t have to be this way. For the last decade, the Chargers have proposed a variety of plans for a new stadium that would keep the team in San Diego. The latest is a downtown venue near the convention center and the Padres’ Petco Park. Based on the cost of the Niners’ new stadium, the Chargers’ project would come to an estimated $1.1 billion, with $300 million of that from public sources. Whether you object on principle to any public financing for sports venues or not, the simple fact is that the Chargers don’t even have a viable entity to negotiate with. Their management is dealing with the most dysfunctional city government in the country. That is not hyperbole.

The JumboTron is so old that some replacement parts can only be found on eBay. Heavy rains often cause the drainage systems to back up, and it’s not uncommon for sewage to leak onto the field and into the visiting locker room.

At one point in the last decade San Diego had four “mayors” in five years. One announced his resignation five months after a controversial re-election win over an 11th-hour write-in candidate, and his replacement then resigned after three days as acting mayor when he was convicted (though later acquitted in a new trial) of conspiracy, wire fraud and extortion.

In February, former mayor Maureen O’Connor admitted to federal prosecutors that she had taken more than $2 million from the charitable organization of her late husband, Jack-in-the-Box founder Robert Peterson, to feed a gambling habit, and that over the years she had wagered more than $1 billion at casinos across the country. And current mayor Bob Filner has effectively pulled the emergency brake on city business because he faces at least 15 accusations of sexual harassment and mounting calls for his resignation.

The fact that Chargers president and CEO Dean Spanos hasn’t packed up the team already—and there is a gaping NFL void two hours up the coast in Los Angeles—speaks volumes about his sincerity about keeping the Chargers in town, although many of his critics will refuse to accept that. I’ve butted heads with Spanos on multiple occasions over the years, but one thing I’ve never questioned is his commitment to staying in town and doing a deal that’s fair to both sides.

Qualcomm Stadium is in a state of disrepair.
Qualcomm Stadium is in a state of disrepair—the venue is due some $70 million in repairs and maintenance.

His family name means everything to him. As I’ve written before, when his football people are considering a potentially controversial move, his input often is along the lines of: Don’t embarrass my family. He realizes that if he moves the Chargers, he will be to San Diego what Art Modell was to Cleveland. And if he does a deal that gets over on the city while keeping the Chargers in town, well, that would be equally unpleasant.

But how do you do a negotiate with a metropolis that is rudderless? “The city needs mayoral leadership for big projects, and right now it is not there,” city attorney Jan Goldsmith said in a statement to The MMQB. “But, we will get through this turmoil.”

Spanos is clearly frustrated, but not broken. “We’ve been over 10 years in this process, and there have been times where we thought we were close,” he said. “But we may be the furthest we’ve been from getting a stadium done because of what’s happened locally. It’s really a sad situation. But we’re not going to stop trying to get a deal done. I haven’t given up. It’s still the greatest place to live. This is where I’m from. This is where I want to be—and that means a lot. But this is a business, and we have to compete with 31 other clubs. It’s my responsibility to put this organization in the best financial position it can be in to be competitive with the 31 other clubs.”

Spanos recognizes the financial issues facing the city, which is why his group is trying to structure a deal in which any public money (more on that in a minute) would not come from the general fund that’s used for police, fire, road repairs and the like. Some residents are against spending any public money on a proposed project for the Chargers, but the reality is that the city already is spending roughly $15 million a year to maintain Qualcomm and the San Diego Sports Arena, both of which it owns.

We may be the furthest we’ve been from getting a stadium done because of what’s happened locally. But we’re not going to stop trying. —Dean Spanos

Spread those costs over the seven years remaining on the team’s lease after this season, add in the $70 million in deferred maintenance that’s due, and the Chargers believe that by bonding against that money it would cover the $300 million public contribution the team expects to seek. The city also would then be able to sell the 166 acres at the Qualcomm site, as well as the parcel that the Sports Arena sits on.

It’s a significant vision—something the area has lacked for years—because it incorporates three different parts of town: the Qualcomm site in Mission Valley; Point Loma, where the Sports Arena sits; and downtown. But the city needs strong leadership to help get a deal done, and there’s no indication such leadership currently exists at City Hall. Without it, San Diego is sure to lose the team.

My words, not Spanos’s. Just do the math.

The Chargers rank in the bottom quartile in the NFL in revenue. Teams share national television money, but local monies, such as those from TV and radio deals, suite sales, sponsorships and advertising, are kept by the individual teams. The Chargers are among the have-nots in this area.

For instance, if they sell all 113 of their suites at Qualcomm, at an average of $125,000 per suite, that totals just over $14 million. If Dallas sells out its 300 suites, at an average of $250,000, that’s $75 million for the Cowboys. In other words, suite sales alone amount to an advantage of more than $60 million in local revenue. Such differences affect how teams spend on their coaches and how they structure contracts for cash flow.

The 47-year-old Qualcomm was originally built for baseball and football and was more suited to the former—which becomes glaringly obvious when visiting a modern stadium. For one, the seats are closer to the field in new stadiums, whereas they flow away from the field in Qualcomm. The first row of seats in San Diego is approximately 70 feet from the playing field, nearly twice the distance compared to Invesco Field in Denver and the refurbished Soldier Field in Chicago. And many of those front row seats at Qualcomm—great for those old Padres games—are obstructed for football.

With all the turmoil in city government, the Chargers’ path to a new stadium looks just as obstructed for now. So, Candlestick for another year. Qualcomm and the Oakland coliseum for who knows how much longer. Suddenly I’m starting to wonder if this West Coast assignment was a good deal after all.

More from The MMQB
167 comments
ChargerBlue
ChargerBlue

  Man, whatever happened to credible journalism?  You sir have your nose stuck in the posterior of a spoiled teenager.

  I will grant you, the Q is an aged facility and we would all love new digs for our beloved Chargers, but before you go erecting statues siting selfless sacrifice (Mr. Jack Murphy, maybe you've heard of him?) please put down the hookah and let's try to navigate the smoke cloud your stuck in less you step in your own bs.

  Rest assured, NO ONE has taken a lead to improve anything at the Q, especially not the Chargers.   They have treated the Ol' Murph like a spoiled rich kid would treat grandma's hand-me-down sedan after their big brother (Padres) managed to finagle a new 'Vette.  

  They beat the hell out of it and complain to whoever will listen when the truth is they don't know what a dipstick looks like... much less (gasp!) how to change the oil....nor do they want to.  They only hope it breaks down so they can jump on the hood and make a public spectacle and further their argument about how abused they are and how we should buy them a shiny sports car.   

  And you suggest we should cast bronze in their likeness? .  

  The fact is, ‘they’ have more disposable income than the very people who are busting their asses to keep a roof over their head.  We say: You want a new sportscar, go buy it.  Put your skin in the game and spend some of your birthday money you’ve been hoarding.  And PLEEEAAASE quit telling us about how lucky we are you still live at home and threatening to move out.  

GO!   We will stare at your room with fond memories and miss you.   But we will eventually sell the house and realize that we have 800 million in equity and finally get to retire.  You on the other hand will wake up in Smell-A and realize your parents weren't so bad after all.  

  The real question for Mr. Spanos is this:  We will all be dead one day and the only left will be your legacy.  What will be your legacy Sir?  You claim to love this Beloved City that has been so good to you.  Will you be  worthy of bronze... or porcelain.  

   And finally Mr. Trotter, for your efforts, you have secured your credentials to the pressbox for yet another season.  Help yourself to all the frozen pizza, lukewar weiners and absolutely crappy coffee the Chargers are kind enough to provide.  Just please leave your shoes outside, they smell funny.

jfm8000
jfm8000

let it rot and turn to dust before any taxpayer money in any way or in any shape or any loans from taxpayers is spent on stupid sports stadiums. its a business, let the owner pay or shut it down.

OK
OK

Jimmy,

Since you tried humping for Dean Spanos, you haven't posted a single thing here on SI.

Could it be that the SI editors grew a veritable set and canned your sorry, Jim Gray Wannabe, worthless backside?

Let's hope so.

Cory3
Cory3

They want the taxpayers to pay for a new stadium and then pay outrageous prices to fill it because if you don't fill it you won't get to see it on tv. It's amazing how you are forced to pay for something that you are entitled to get to watch. Screw that. Taxpayers should never be bilked into having to pay for anything for a 9+billion yearly industry.

Translucent
Translucent

Quote: "The fact that Chargers president and CEO Dean Spanos hasn’t packed up the team already—and there is a gaping NFL void two hours up the coast in Los Angeles—speaks volumes about his sincerity about keeping the Chargers in town..."

No it doesn't. Mr. Trotter, San Diego has perhaps one thing in common with Los Angeles: Neither city has a viable NFL stadium. If Spanos "packed up the team," he wouldn't suddenly find a stadium in L.A.

Anybody willing to build in L.A. will want to buy into the team that comes to town. With the cost of building, they will want to buy in at a discount. Given what NFL teams are worth, no NFL team will be willing (or allowed) to sell shares in the franchise at a discount.

Potential stadium builders want a discount they can not have. We have an impasse. The Chargers not coming to L.A. has nothing to do with Spanos' supposed loyalty.

sjannese
sjannese

the old ''Sullivan-Stadium'' in Foxborough,Mass. makes Qualcomm look like a state-of-the-art/~palace~......!

Phroggo
Phroggo

Dean Spanos is a notorious sandbagger. After showing up at the AT&T Pebble Beach Golf Tournament claiming to be from Stockton and winning the pro-am portion twice, he hasn't been invited back because they, reportedly, believe his handicap wasn't legit.

JimmyAlbin
JimmyAlbin

OK, to start I'm not even a chargers fan, but most of you guys seem to be missing the point.  Have you ever even been to a Chargers game?  This stadium is a disgrace and needs to be repaired.  Plus the revenue generated by having an up to date stadium goes to help out the local economy.  Don't worry I'm by far rich and work 2 jobs to make ends meet.  However when I finally get to go to a football game live, I spend money on a hotel room, rental car or public transportation, food, and finally maybe even some of the local sites the day before.  Imagine how many other people do the same.  This in turn goes to pay for these businesses to pay rent, for supplies and taxes.  Which in turn pay for your local services and local peoples pay checks.  You'd all be surprised how much revenue is actual generated.  Seeing that the NFL is offering to pay almost 80% of the cost, saving the city 70 million in repairs and the cost of maintaining the stadium at 15 million a year.  That savings once again can back into needed projects in the city. 

danb
danb

Public funding should NEVER be used for sports stadiums.  Any talk of these new stadiums benefiting anyone other than the team owners is a crock of s--t.  


LeilaniHernandez
LeilaniHernandez

O CRY!!!!   NOBODY IN SAN DIEGO CARES ABOUT THE CHARGERS. THERE ARE NO FANS IN SAN DIEGO. BURN THE STADIUM AND RELOCATE THE TEAM TO ANOTHER CITY, PREFERABLY IN CHINA!

dcs1256
dcs1256

What a crock of crap.  Those pictures look like the same ones the Dolphins posted to show the "dire" need for the public to pony up and help renovate their stadium.  Their stadium where billionaires own the playground that millionaires play in.  The choices for the Chargers are quite simple.  Sell a controlling interest to Ed Roski and move on up back to LA.  Or, get the cash you need from the NFL and build your stadium and quit whining about it.  

ianlinross
ianlinross

Written by a man who's probably never paid for coffee and pizza at any stadium.

pamperofirpo
pamperofirpo

The building of all of these billion dollar stadiums will prove to be folly. The NFL experience has gotten to be so good at home on big screen TVs that there is little reason to attend in person. And, with the billion dollar stadiums, the cost is just going to get bigger and bigger. Beer will be $20 a cup soon in some venues. The total cost for four people to attend a single game will ultimately approach $1000.

Stay at home people. Save your money.

CommentsRarely
CommentsRarely

Why do these owners think they have to keep up with the Joneses in Dallas and spend a billion dollars on a stadium? I was at Cleveland Browns stadium once, and although it's now around 10 years old (chime in with corrections), it was awesome except for almost no nearby parking, and I read somewhere it cost 300 million. Did the cost of building a new stadium triple in ten years? I think Atlanta is looking to replace the Georgia Dome for 800 million with another domed stadium, which has to cost more than an open stadium that would be called for in the San Diego climate. NFL owners: Don't keep up with the Joneses, it's foolish and their team (It is NOT America's team, typical Texas arrogance) ain't doin so well as of late.

Rickapolis
Rickapolis

What I found interesting was  the statement, "It’s still the greatest place to live. This is where I’m from. This is where I want to be—and that means a lot". I guess home is home, no matter the problems. 

chris92021
chris92021

I know it's an NFL column but the Aztecs have to play in that stadium too. 

David46
David46

Can you imagine the head of surgery at a hospital going to all of the minimum wage orderlies and complaining to them about how the hospital won't build a house for them so they don't have to spend any of their own money? That's what this is like. 

David46
David46

Hey, i've got an idea. Quit complaining about taxes not being taken from individuals at the poverty level and given to NFL/MLB/NHL/NBA teams and start paying for your own. It is BEYOND me how we hear all of this CRAP on TV about money being taken from the poor and given to the rich, but it is somehow a good idea to spend half a billion dollars to put a stadium in for a football team filled with folks making a thousand times as much money as the individuals from which the stadium money was mooched. 

chris92021
chris92021

I love how billionaires always asks us working stiffs and taxpayers who are indifferent to football for money for a new stadium. 

shadows
shadows

The place is old and it would be comparable to the Lakers playing at the Forum. I'm still blown away as San Diego claims to be America's Finest City as has yet to do anything about a new stadium for a decade? Go ask Seattle if they miss having an NBA team? Time to update and get current!

jj55
jj55

Jim, I'm calling BS. I am a Charger season ticket holder and was at the stadium the day it opened in 1967. The Chargers have purposefully not spent an extra nickel to improve the fan experience at the Q. Case in point: TV monitors in the Club Section bars, where "elite" season ticket holders get to pay 11 bucks for a beer but until 2012 had to watch games on tiny, prehistoric box TV sets. When the club finally installed flat screens, they couldn't spend the few extra bucks to size them up to proper size, even though the total expenditure was laughably minimal for a team valued at $950 million.  I've been to games at Lambeau, and it's fabulous. Especially the $6.50 beer, which has exactly nothing to do with a new, old, or fantasy stadium.

Chris10
Chris10

Quit screwing the working man and you damn billionaires build your own stadiums

Tony38
Tony38

Hard to believe that billionaires and millionaires are still trying to put one over on the middle-class taxpayers. Study after study has shown that professional team stadiums do nothing to boost the economy, and in some cases, damage it even more. Taxpayers will be stuck paying a tax bill that will still be around after the new stadium is dust. All so rich people can continue making money. The only way this deal makes sense is if the city of San Diego gets an ownership share of the team equal to the taxpayer's contribution to the stadium. And if the owner tries to sell the team/stadium before the bond is paid off, he pays off the note with his share of the proceeds.

conor42
conor42

NFL teams are grossly profitable... that's no secret.  Why can't the Chargers simply go 100% private with perhaps some tax and zoning assistance and finance their own stadium?  They'll -still- make tons of money, especially if all these modern stadium profits actually exist.  An annual income greater than their mortgage on a privately-financed stadium shouldn't be too difficult.  The NFL's salary cap is humorously low as well, so there's nothing but fat profit margins to be had.

horsley1953
horsley1953

There aren't any deals that are fair to "both sides". There are no "both sides". If the owner wants a new stadium, then he can build it himself. Perhaps he can even talk sense to the NFL which apparently has public extortion as the only way they'll allow new stadiums written into their charter.

MarkHoaglin
MarkHoaglin

This is a dead horse and you keep beating it. Spend what little money the city has to fix the stadium. San Diego will never be a big media town no matter how you dress up a stadium. If the Spanos' want to make big league money they have to move the team to LA. That's just a smart business decision. San Diego can't build a stadium for decades. Just drive around the city and look at the infrastructure that needs fixing. This is a pipe dream. Just fix The Murph and move on.

darkgoody
darkgoody

Just want to say the level of vitriol here is pretty intense. I live in Oakland and I'm pretty concerned about what will happen to the area around the Coliseum if we lose the Raiders, A's, and Warriors. I also used to live in Denver and I continue to visit regularly. It's pretty clear that Coors Field and Invesco Field have provided a huge public benefit to the surrounding areas, which had previously been a dump. Same thing happened with AT&T park in what was a bad part of SF, and is now one of the nicest. Certainly there are good and bad stadium deals, but arguing that they're all bad and that stadiums don't provide any public benefit is just ignorant. A lot of money flows through other public agencies trying to further development that are much less effective.

BillAbendroth
BillAbendroth

First, Maureen O'Connor was mayor from 1986 to 1992.  To say her current problems with gambling addiction has any impact on the current city government is really a stretch.  

Second, a call for public funding to have better luxury boxes at a stadium--that's going to be a tough sell in any municipality, especially San Diego.  The Chargers are paying for the sins of the last few ownership groups of the Padres.  The Padres would spend big, build a team, then trade off all their good players.  The last time that happened was when the Padres were trying to get PetCo built: the team had a great year, PetCo was approved.  Then all the good players were traded or left in free agency...and the Padres returned to being the Expos of the west: pretty much a farm team for the dozen or so teams who pay the going market rate for talent.  Because San Diego's been burned by the Padres, they're going to be reluctant to go down that road with the Chargers.

Finally, if the Chargers become the LA SU-PA Chargers (cue the song), Dean Spanos will not be Art Modell.  Pretty much everyone in Cleveland was born & raised there, and is a Browns fan.  Because so many folks have moved to San Diego from the midwest, if you go to a Charger game, roughly a third of the fans are rooting for the visiting team: The Chiefs, the Broncos, or whatever rustbelt team comes through.  If you listen to the old LA Rams players, they're bitter and furious about playing in the Coliseum.  Because so comparatively few people have lived in LA for any length of time, it's difficult to build up any team loyalty.  The Rams players all insisted, at best, the Coliseum was a neutral venue...and when a popular team like the 49s came to town, there would be more people rooting for SF than for the Rams....The fact LA has failed to sustain three NFL teams (Chargers, Rams, Raiders), that's no accident.

YES, municipal government in San Diego, as of late,  has hardly lived up to the Platonic ideal of civic virtue--and the fact a self proclaimed progressive Democrat (who back in the day was even a Freedom Rider) is proving to be such a nightmare is a terrific embarrassment, and another chapter in "You're Not Helping"--but to claim that all that's needed to untie the Gordian knot of stadium funding/relocation/restoration is just electing the one right guy (sic) mayor is, frankly, disingenuous.  The solution is far from that simple--Mr. Trotter neglects to even mention that the San Diego State Aztecs also play their games at San Diego Jack Murphy (Qualcomm) Stadium.  Any plans for relocation would have to take the Aztecs into account as well........... 

Trevor619
Trevor619

They've been talking about building a new stadium in San Diego since I was a kid. I'm 23 now. It's not gonna happen. The city won't budge and Spanos is only willing to put up $100 million in addition to the $200 he thinks he'll get from the league. The city and the team are $700 million apart. And they have no location. The Downtown plan is all but dead because the Convention Center wants nothing to do with the Chargers and their stadium. The only way a new stadium is built in San Diego is if Qualcomm literally collapse (which it may) or they start racking up Super Bowl rings (the 1998 World Series appearance was enough to for Petco to get built). They're gonna have no choice but to move to LA because if the Raiders or Rams beat them there they'll be stuck in San Diego in an aging cement bowl with no way out. That's the reality out here. Us fans are just hoping they'll get us one super bowl before they eventually leave town.

JeffDowdy
JeffDowdy

SD fans I would not jump up and down too much after a TD....be very still.


charles130
charles130

Look at the SW corner of the Quallcom parking lot on Google Maps...pretty sure its a murder scene with the forensics lab.

T.J.1
T.J.1

I had the pleasure of visiting Ford Field this past March and it is gorgeous. If bankrupt Detroit can get a modern stadium built, why can't we?

Cory3
Cory3

*Not entitled to watch

BTW, you are never done paying for it either because before it's paid off they come to you and tell you then needs 100's of millions more to upgrade it because it's getting too old.


johnogre68
johnogre68

@JimmyAlbin The NFL isn't offering to pay for anything.  The NFL G-4 program provides up to $200 million in loans to NFL owners to build new stadiums.  The Chargers want the city to spend over a $billion of taxpayers' funds on the stadium.


It's be proven over and over that NFL stadiums and Super Bowls do not bring in the revenue to make these projects anything but a drain on the taxpayers.

mystafugee
mystafugee

@ianlinross agreed, how about NFL teams if they take public funds agree to share stadium profits along the same lines of investment or give an ownership stake to the city/county/etc.  

BillAbendroth
BillAbendroth

@pamperofirpo 

I share Commentator Pamperofirpo's point of view.  I write separately, though, to describe the last time I attended a Charger game in person.  This was the last game of the season in 2009.  The Chargers had already cliched a playoff berth, and were playing Jim Zorn's Washington Redskins, for which (I'm sure) was the last head coaching position of Mr. Zorn's career.

The tickets were roughly $65. USD a piece (if I remember), and we sat about twenty rows from the top of the lip of the bowl that is Qualcomm.  Now, my eyes aren't what they used to be, but still--I could hardly make out the action on the field, and (with everyone else) largely depended on the replays on the large screen.  So, I'm paying to sit in an uncomfortable seat, to watch crappy television.  Why NOT stay home, and watch good television from a comfortable chair?  (not to mention, the refreshments are much better and more affordable).

But because the game was meaningless (in every sense of the word), the Chargers' first string played (maybe) two series.  From then on, the game was a preseason exhibition.....

What is lost, though, by not seeing a game live is the instant camaraderie with people in your section.  I loved heckling players on the field (even though my voice wouldn't carry more than five feet away) and listening to the catcalls from folks around me (again, all less than five feet away).  Nevertheless, as clever as some of the wits were (and they were funny), they weren't a hundred and thirty bucks clever......

Public funding to subsidize more luxury boxes is just a poor use of money...................  

OK
OK

@CommentsRarely 

"Why do these owners think they have to keep up with the Joneses in Dallas and spend a billion dollars on a stadium?"

Slightly incorrect, your statement. It should read:

"Why do these owners think they have to USE TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND NOT ALL OF THEIR OWN MONEY to keep up with the Joneses in Dallas and spend a billion dollars on a stadium?"

chris92021
chris92021

@David46 Not only that, but charge a fee for a chance to visit when it's all built. Having an NFL team is a like having a license to print money and the Chargers are no different. 

DAS
DAS

@shadows More like the Lakers playing in the LA Sports Arena

BillAbendroth
BillAbendroth

@darkgoody 

No one is arguing that there is "no public benefit" to anyone, with publicly financed stadiums.  I mean, even if you dump bales of cash out the back of dump trucks in random neighborhoods, of course people in those areas will benefit.  But that's not the measure of "success."  Instead, you look at what public works projects a community (as a whole: not just the immediate neighborhoods around the project) needs, and the projected long and short term benefits of each project.

If you look at deMause and Cagan's Field of Schemes: How the Great Stadium Swindle Turns Public Money into Private Profit, and Delaney and Eckstein's Public Dollars, Private Stadiums: The Battle Over Building Sports Stadiums, you will see that contrary to Mr. Trotter's assertions, big budget sports facilities (for viewing, as opposed to participating) are poor public investments.

johnogre68
johnogre68

San Diego has a lot more to offer than other cities, we don't need the NFL.

johnogre68
johnogre68

@Trevor619  The only way a stadium gets built in LA is with 2 teams, 1 AFC & 1 NFC, sharing one stadium just like the Jets and Giants.

JoeCabot
JoeCabot

@T.J.1 Uh, maybe Detroit is bankrupt because the grifters in charge kept spending money they did not have on stuff like new stadiums.

CommentsRarely
CommentsRarely

I know that's a standard argument against using taxpayer dollars, and I agree to a point, but considering the amount of sales tax revenue, parking revenue, and probably quite a few other chunks of change that end up in government coffers from every game that would not come in if the stadium were not there, that's where/why I don't have a problem with SOME of the capital outlay coming from local or state sources. Many of these facilities host other events besides two preseason and 8 regular season and hopefully playoff games, thereby adding to tax revenue that doesn't go to the NFL or the owners - although it wouldn't surprise me if in their contracts they don't demand some kickback from non-NFL events at "their" stadiums. Would be nice for them to reveal such info, in fact it might sway some to ease up on their opposition.

OK
OK

@chris92021 @David46  

And then these owners pay schmucks like Jimmy Trotter and Peter King to spin their BS and try to fleece taxpayers.

mystafugee
mystafugee

@JoeCabot @T.J.1 agreed, it should also be pointed out Ford Field has been a BIG money loser and basically is the prime example as to why the public should not fund these stadiums.  

mystafugee
mystafugee

@CommentsRarely That argument doesn't pass because firstly you have to take into account the money spent.  Secondly, the jobs that are created are minimal and are low-paying service jobs.  As for hosting events other than the 10 San Diego home dates, with smaller venues such as casinos so plentiful, concert acts are more likely go to there.  Other than an ego standpoint, there's no financial argument to using public funds.  

Newsletter