Skip to content

Chargers make smart move to stay put

Zz00OGZmOTY3ZGIwMWQxZWE1ZGJkN2UyOTVlMTdhMTU3OA== AP

The Chargers lost in L.A. Relocluster Relay, with the team’s preferred project in Carson finishing second in a two-venue rendezvous with Inglewood. But the Chargers have emerged with a win-win.

By working out terms of a shared stadium with the Rams in L.A. with a commitment to stay in San Diego for at least a year, the Chargers can eventually move with little or no blame or guilt. The cup has now passed to San Diego; if the people of San Diego want to find a way to keep the Chargers, the people of San Diego have one last chance to do it.

Don’t want to subsidize a billionaire? That’s fine, but the billionaire will be leaving, and the people in San Diego will have only themselves to blame.

And even if there’s no way to work out a new deal in San Diego, it makes sense for the Chargers to stick around for another season. Why not stay put when the alternative is to share space with the Chargers, Rams, and USC in the L.A. Coliseum? It will give the Chargers more time to plan the move, and to avoids the possibility of a sudden uprooting of the organization.

So now they get what could be a farewell season or the first of many more to come. Whether they stay, the Chargers have done their part. It’s now up to San Diego.

Permalink 49 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Los Angeles Rams, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers
49 Responses to “Chargers make smart move to stay put”
  1. rodd1 says: Jan 29, 2016 7:45 PM

    Charger fans take Aaron Rogers advice and R-E-L-A-X … Spanos’ wealth is basically the $1B or so that the Chargers are worth … unlike Kroenke he is not seriously wealthy beyond that … Spanos would have to finance the $550M relocation fee … plus another $1B for his 50% share of the Inglewood Stadium, unless he simply wants to pay Stan rent which would be on Stan’s terms ie exorbitant

    Bottom line is Spanos can’t afford to go to LA unless it’s strictly on a 2nd class tenant basis … his best option is a new stadium in DT San Diego where some public contribution would be justified as part of a redeveloped SD convention center … Spanos and the NFL will put enough (60-70%) into the project to get it done as the Chargers to LA option is in reality not financially attractive to Spanos or the NFL

  2. pantherfan1973299 says: Jan 29, 2016 7:46 PM

    The idea of sharing a stadium with another team just makes me shudder. Those awesome panther statues we have around the

  3. 3menandablog says: Jan 29, 2016 7:47 PM

    Chargers belong in SD. The politicians and voters now need to get it right.

    Spanos took an interesting, and not a very great PR route to get here. But I’m happy we get another chance.

    Let’s make it happen!

  4. pantherfan1973299 says: Jan 29, 2016 7:48 PM

    The idea of sharing a stadium with another team just makes me shudder. Those awesome panther statues we have around ours would have to be inflatable…hope you guys work it out and stay home!

  5. vbe2 says: Jan 29, 2016 7:48 PM

    The smart move for the Raiders would be to go and make a deal with the Rams that is contingent upon the Chargers not going to L.A.

    If the Chargers stay in San Diego, the Raiders then have a deal in place with the Rams. That would put Oakland’s fee to the fire right now. If they don’t have a deal done by next January and if the Chargers stay in San Diego, we get the return of the Los Angeles Raiders.

  6. teamgale88 says: Jan 29, 2016 7:55 PM

    Hoping along with literally every nfl fan I bet that they stay. Even if they don’t get a stadium and decide to move, I hope they go somewhere that’s not LA (or especially london) like Portland San Antonio or Vegas.

  7. evilglazers666 says: Jan 29, 2016 7:58 PM

    Leave you greedy bastard.

  8. joenash72 says: Jan 29, 2016 8:04 PM

    Raiders should keep using Las Vegas as their leverage.

    Either get a new Oakland stadium or move into the one already being built in Sin City.

    NFL HUSTLE😉

  9. mackcarrington says: Jan 29, 2016 8:05 PM

    People are giving Spanos way too much credit by labeling him a “billionaire”. He’s only worth a billion on paper by the value of his team. He’s actually a pauper by NFL standards. That’s why he should be cut some slack and given a chance to work with the city on some public funding. I don’t know the details, but from what I’ve read, they aren’t really that far apart. I hope they can stay in San Diego.

  10. Wisconsin's Favorite Son Jeffrey Be Dahmed says: Jan 29, 2016 8:10 PM

    Why can’t my Packers make a smart move?

    Oh yeah, they’re trapped, or they would have, a long time ago.

  11. mccontrary says: Jan 29, 2016 8:11 PM

    People can stand on principle and say that taxpayers shouldn’t pay for a stadium, but that will mean no NFL team in San Diego. It will also mark the end of San Diego as a host for major league sports other than MLB, as San Diego will announce to the world that is a minor-league city with minor-league aspirations, and a home for mediocrity.

  12. Mr. Wright 212 says: Jan 29, 2016 8:25 PM

    pantherfan1973299 says:
    Jan 29, 2016 7:48 PM
    The idea of sharing a stadium with another team just makes me shudder. Those awesome panther statues we have around ours would have to be inflatable…hope you guys work it out and stay home!
    ———-

    Nice of you to point out those statues, as you just came along this year.

  13. joenash72 says: Jan 29, 2016 8:31 PM

    “People can stand on principle and say that taxpayers shouldn’t pay for a stadium, but that will mean no NFL team in San Diego. It will also mark the end of San Diego as a host for major league sports other than MLB, as San Diego will announce to the world that is a minor-league city with minor-league aspirations, and a home for mediocrity.”

    Exactly.

    I remember watching Ken Behring pack up the Seahawks and try to move to LA.

    Fortunately for us, he wasn’t allowed to. Paul Allen saved the day for us — but even with his billions, we still had an election (that Paul Allen funded/paid for) where we voted to contribute public dollars to build the Clink.

    Subsidizing Billionares sucks, but it’s the price of being a Major vs. Minor League city.

    Someone said in a comment that a new or upgraded stadium could also involve a new convention center in SD? Hopefully that’s the case, and is a benefit for SD out of this whole deal. Part of knocking down the Kingdome and building Centurylink included an adjoining Exhibition Hall, which has a lot of concerts, home, boat, outdoor shows, etc.

    Keep the Chargers in SD😉

  14. dagrouch says: Jan 29, 2016 8:40 PM

    “Don’t want to subsidize a billionaire? That’s fine, but the billionaire will be leaving, and the people in San Diego will have only themselves to blame.”

    ONLY THEMSELVES???? How about blaming the guy who has all the money, but would rather spend our money (which, by the way, we do not actually have . . . ) ? Just where do you assign HIS share of the blame? Do you not appreciate the conundrum that we are being asked to pay for a stadium which will host events which most normal people cannot even afford to attend? Themselves to blame, indeed.

  15. abninf says: Jan 29, 2016 9:01 PM

    dagrouch says:

    ONLY THEMSELVES???? How about blaming the guy who has all the money, but would rather spend our money (which, by the way, we do not actually have . . . ) ? Just where do you assign HIS share of the blame? Do you not appreciate the conundrum that we are being asked to pay for a stadium which will host events which most normal people cannot even afford to attend? Themselves to blame, indeed.
    ====================================

    So since Spanos’s wealth is the value of the team, do you want him to sell his team, and then with that money build a new stadium for the new owner?

  16. wheels579 says: Jan 29, 2016 9:11 PM

    It’s interesting how there’s no mention in this post of the disaster that was the Browns’ last year in Cleveland. I was at one of those games and the atmosphere was awful. The home fans that showed up were sad and angry. If you think another year in SD is nothing but a good thing, think again.

  17. immafubared says: Jan 29, 2016 9:47 PM

    I don’t see this scenario at all. This is spanos saying hey I really really really want to stay in san diego, how about a little more money and were good to go.

  18. huck222 says: Jan 29, 2016 9:49 PM

    Spano’s knows he is in a tricky situation, because the Raiders can move to north San Diego county and keep all their LA fans and gain new Charger fans… I just hope they call themselves the “California Raiders”!

  19. immafubared says: Jan 29, 2016 9:51 PM

    The raiders will get 500 mil towards a new stadium and are staying put.

  20. thegeneral7694 says: Jan 29, 2016 9:54 PM

    Blame Spanos for what, exactly? Not wanting to continue to play in the second worst stadium in the NFL? Jack Murphy (which is what I will always call it) is ancient and by NFL standards, dilapidated. I don’t blame Spanos one bit for wanting out of that rat trap, just like I don’t blame Mark Davis for wanting out of OAC….they were awesome in 1976, but that was 40 years ago. And he would rather spend taxpayer money because it’s his only option….he isn’t that wealthy (again, by NFL standards)….

  21. packertruth says: Jan 29, 2016 10:20 PM

    Wisconsin’s Favorite Son Jeffrey Be Dahmed says:
    Jan 29, 2016 8:10 PM

    Why can’t my Packers make a smart move?

    Oh yeah, they’re trapped, or they would have, a long time ago.
    ————————————
    If you have nothing to say, just say nothing.
    Hope the Chargers stay in San Diego

    12

  22. hbvandamme says: Jan 29, 2016 10:27 PM

    I dont see the Raiders moving anywhere but Vegas. The NFL does what the richest owner says. That much is clear. (Jones, Kroenke). With the Vegas money, the Raiders come back to the big table. It just amazes me that the teams worth is so low when the product is the most iconic of all NFL teams…..

  23. Deelron says: Jan 29, 2016 10:30 PM

    “People are giving Spanos way too much credit by labeling him a “billionaire”. He’s only worth a billion on paper by the value of his team. He’s actually a pauper by NFL standards.”

    Gee he’s so unfortunate. If only he had to participate in an actual free economy and do what other business owners would have to do if they couldn’t keep up financially with their competitors (sell or go out of business). Good thing he has guaranteed profit within the NFL cartel then I guess.

  24. raiderrob21 says: Jan 29, 2016 10:46 PM

    Its only a smart move if they end up staying in SD. They have lost valuable time in marketing, sales etc. The report is that the Rams have already sold 48,000 season tickets. If the chargers do end up moving to LA next year they will have squandered over a years time of making money and building their brand in LA.

  25. slick50ks says: Jan 29, 2016 11:04 PM

    You gotta pay to play.

    You’re either a major league city, or you’re not. And that costs a franchise fee of new stadiums, in most cases. Not all owners can, or would build a billion dollar stadium themselves.

    Yeah, reality still sucks.

  26. deathspiralx says: Jan 29, 2016 11:25 PM

    The LA coliseum was a terrible place to play when I saw the Raiders play there in the 90s. Ancient and the seats are off the track and waaayyy back from the field of play. So, no one is in a rush to play there.

    $7B in shared revenue last year by the NFL teams… to speak of the love of its fans and pick their pockets clean without remorse. Distasteful.

    I don’t mind that the NFL plays hardball and puts dollars first. Many large companies do that and municipalities engage them.

    However, this profession to love the game and the fans is disingenuous.

  27. chawk12thman says: Jan 30, 2016 12:28 AM

    It’s true that the SD population/politicians now control whether or not they keep the team, just as it’s true that all of us can buy an expensive meal at a high class restaurant, if we decide it is worth it. Now it is up to the public to decide if they want the team at an exorbitant cost………The NFL/Spanos just imitated Clint Eastwood and said, “Well do ya, punk?”

  28. genericcommenter says: Jan 30, 2016 12:38 AM

    “Don’t want to subsidize a billionaire? That’s fine, but the billionaire will be leaving, and the people in San Diego will have only themselves to blame.”

    Frankly, this sounds like blaming an abused spouse or something. Yeah, put up with the tyrant bully and do everything you can to appease them. What are they going to to.. leave? Maybe that’s for the best.

  29. coltzfan166 says: Jan 30, 2016 12:38 AM

    Why not just take the Carson stadium plan and build it in San Diego?

  30. natedoggpd says: Jan 30, 2016 1:02 AM

    All your blame game does, with worrying who to tag it on, is end up with your city losing its team.

  31. captainwhodat says: Jan 30, 2016 1:23 AM

    fools rush in spouting major leage vs minor league…Goodell has you thinking just the way he wants you to think, ignoring the infrastructure of your cities to support billionaires making money hands over fists while making a one hour game a three and a-half game…its the same thinking that got our country into trillions of dollar in debt…oh, by the way, explain to me in simple terms what a trillion is, my brain can’t seem to wrap around it…

  32. gbartell22 says: Jan 30, 2016 3:27 AM

    “Major vs minor league city” what?! as if a sports franchise single handedly defines an entire city. Those tax dollars that would be allocated to funding a billionaires toy could be used to actually do some good in the city. Improve infrastructure, fund some parks, go to the local school systems or fire departments or police departments etc. you know things that actually help a city and its residents. I could see the argument of the value of having a sports franchise in the city however trouble is after those tax dollars are used on that private entity the city itself reaps no financial benefits from that stadium yet usually has to pay for maintenance and upgrades. The tax payer loses overwhelmingly but the nfl knows they can pull on people’s heart strings to get them to open up their wallets and write silly articles like this and push their local politicians into funding these monstrosities and financial burdens. The nfl makes 30 billion a year in profit they don’t need public funding.

  33. markpugner says: Jan 30, 2016 7:20 AM

    51% of us think that the other 49% should help pay for a stadium in our city that none of us really want to go to because it’s better to watch it on tv so that the wealthy owner and NFL tax exempt non profit organization can make a little more money while we get to be so proud we have a team called the chargers that play here for 8 sundays a year. Because we can’t like a team from some other city that would be crazy. We better pay up and make everyone else in SD do the same.

  34. tonebones says: Jan 30, 2016 7:43 AM

    The people of San Diego will have a team, whether the Chargers stay put or leave for Los Angeles. There just aren’t 32 better cities to have a franchise than San Diego.

  35. beanzze says: Jan 30, 2016 8:03 AM

    Only problem with staying another year in SD is that the chargers lose another year of trying to gain LA fans. Rams already had a leg up. Another year will only make that gap widen.

  36. madmaxx87 says: Jan 30, 2016 8:53 AM

    ONLY THEMSELVES???? How about blaming the guy who has all the money, but would rather spend our money (which, by the way, we do not actually have . . . ) ? Just where do you assign HIS share of the blame? Do you not appreciate the conundrum that we are being asked to pay for a stadium which will host events which most normal people cannot even afford to attend? Themselves to blame, indeed.
    ===========================
    Yes, themselves to blame. Like it or not, Dean Spanos owns a business. He has a right to move that business at his discretion. If you owned the business and you could move to a place where either a) someone would build a stadium for you for free, or b) you could move to a place where you could share a stadium and triple the value of that investment, then you’d do it, too.

    The Chargers have been trying to get a stadium in San Diego for at least 15 years, with little to no progress. If you want to stand on principal and say that public money should not be spent on a new stadium, that is certainly your right. The flip side of that is you risk losing your team.

    I live in a community which has both lost a team and gotten another one to take its place. If having the Chargers in San Diego is important to the people of San Diego, then this will get done. If not, they will move. It really is as simple as that.

  37. mysterytonite says: Jan 30, 2016 9:06 AM

    Sounds like he doesn’t have the juice to condlfideny move. I do t get it, with all the money the league makes now, why do taxpayers have to foot the majority of the bill? The nfl with endless ads for beer, merchandise and tv contracts, make big bucks. The price of doing business as far as I’m co concerned. Oh and the stadium experience sucks balls anyway. I’d rather stay home and watch my team get beat in the first round of the playoffs every year.

  38. lukedunphysscienceproject says: Jan 30, 2016 9:56 AM

    Gee he’s so unfortunate. If only he had to participate in an actual free economy and do what other business owners would have to do if they couldn’t keep up financially with their competitors (sell or go out of business). Good thing he has guaranteed profit within the NFL cartel then I guess.
    =====

    That’s a little naive. Corporations in this country threaten to move their operations all of the time unless they are given tax breaks worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

    In real dollar value, it’s no different than a team demanding that a city or state provide money for stadium construction.

  39. rutherforddabrave says: Jan 30, 2016 10:12 AM

    Wait, so their stadium is actually good enough? I though it was completely inadequate?

  40. donshaw2000 says: Jan 30, 2016 10:51 AM

    Mr. Spanos didn’t stay in San Diego for 2016 out of the goodness of his heart or because he really, really wants more time to make a deal with the City of San Diego. The Chargers are staying this year because it just wasn’t feasible or practical to move them so quickly. Spanos bought some land in Orange County as a precaution. He can easily sell that land if the Chargers don’t move. Maybe a deal will be made for a new stadium in San Diego or maybe it won’t. Not sure if we should be subsidizing billionaires. If the new stadium is going to also benefit San Diego and not just mainly the Chargers, maybe it will happen. San Diego Jack Murphy Qualcomm Stadium will not be a pleasant place to watch the San Diego Chargers this year.

  41. R.J. says: Jan 30, 2016 12:16 PM

    The only reason the Chargers are staying is to try and get a better deal out the city before leaving for good. Spanos knows next year, unless he moves out of state, that the Chargers will become the third-most popular NFL team in Southern California. Either the Raiders move to LA, or Southwest Airlines and casinos will be very happy to fly and host Raider fans to Vegas at least eight times a year.

    Why should I feel an ounce of sympathy for Spanos when his family and Fabiani have been dumping on us for the past fourteen years? We have an infrastructure that badly needs improvement, and cops that are underpaid compared to their counterparts in neighboring cities.

    The city also makes more money off Comic-Con than they do the con called NFL football.

  42. kylexitron says: Jan 30, 2016 12:49 PM

    Id have to assume that LA fans are predominantly Rams or Raiders fans since both teams played there.

    The Rams are back and they should have some fans.

    I can’t see the remaining raiders fans becoming chargers fans, that’s not happening.

    What in getting at is that the Chargers would be a unmitigated disaster in LA. If they think their fan base is apathetic now just wait.

  43. metspeed21 says: Jan 30, 2016 1:55 PM

    I don’t understand why there can’t be one LA team since they’ve proven they’re disinterested fans. I’ve watched the NFL my whole life and I want San Diego to stay and have a chance to win a Super Bowl. My dad still talks about the great Chargers/Raiders game he saw at Jack Murphy stadium in the 80s.

  44. j0esixpack says: Jan 30, 2016 2:42 PM

    Other owners must hate Kraft for setting the bar of an owner not taking tax dollars to build a stadium to pad his pockets

    That must have all other taxpayers wondering why they have to commit $300 million towards Aid to Families with Dependent NFL Owners

    Don’t worry San Diego. You can trust Roger Goodell. He never lies. 11 of 12 fans know that!

  45. ashhole420 says: Jan 30, 2016 8:08 PM

    The Raiders should really move to Portland, Oregon!!!!
    That is by far the best place for the Raiders to move to and make a huge impact both in profits and in the amount of hardcore fans that would be created!!!

    Plus Portland makes the most sense for the Raiders to play there with the city’s history of shanghai kidnappings turning men into pirates and such.

    BE SMART MARK DAVIS AND FIND A PARTNER IN OREGON TO HELP BRING THE RAIDERS TO PORTLAND !!
    The Oregon Raiders has a great ring to it.

    i bet if the Raiders would move to Portland, Oregon the rivalry game against seattle would be very very heated.

    PORTLAND AND OREGON DESERVES A PRO TEAM WAY MORE THAN VEGAS, THAN LA NEEDS 2 TEAMS, THEN COWBOYS AND TEXAN FANS NEED A SAN ANTONIO TEAM.

    MEXICO CITY AND MEXICO, Toronto and Canada DESERVES A TEAM ALMOST AS MUCH AS THE FOOTBALL JUNKIES IN OREGON DOES

    RESEARCH IT AND OREGON BY FAR IS CURRENTLY THE BEST AND MOST PROFITABLE PLACE FOR BOTH THE RAIDERS AND THE NFL IN THE USA.

  46. richdogg231 says: Jan 30, 2016 8:33 PM

    It comes down to what the general public wants. If the not one penny for a new stadium crowd wins out then the Chargers are gone. If San Diego fans see some value in keeping the team here in new digs they will support a modest public contribution. A give the farm away to Spanos approach will also not work. Compromise needs to be had to keep the team here. We’ll see how much San Diego fans want the Chargers to stay here.

  47. hooterdawg says: Jan 31, 2016 3:13 AM

    The Chargers’ smart move will be to avoid listening to the media.

  48. sd2016ca says: Jan 31, 2016 1:33 PM

    Now let’s just think about this for a minute. Do the fine citizens of San Diego really think the owner of the Chargers wants to relocate our football team to Los Angeles? No he does not. If he did he would not be going back and forth. He would be like the owner of the Rams and just move the team. What we need to do is go ahead and pass a bond issue to build the Chargers a new stadium. Stop complaining and just do it. We will eventually have Super Bowl games here again and many other stadium events. The potential is great. Lets be forward thinkers and not continue to gripe, complain, and point fingers. We are very fortunate to have both an NFL team here and a MLB team here. Let’s climb aboard the support bandwagon and show the country what kind of city we really are: The finest city in America!

  49. mdintino1420 says: Feb 3, 2016 11:20 PM

    I don’t like the idea of a referendum, and having to wait until November for it to happen. But it is time for for the city to band together and save the Chargers. What harm would it do use 200-300 million in public funds for a billion dollar stadium? To me, the answer is absolutely none. The Chargers are a San Diego institution. The team has played here for 55 years. It is time for them to get an updated stadium so they can be here for many more years.

    Los Angeles and San Diego are not next door neighbors. The two cities are 120 miles apart. Something would be seriously lost if the team moved. A huge void would would be here in San Diego, and I don’t think we want to go through that.

    The Vikings are moving into a billion dollar stadium this fall. It is now San Diego’s turn to take care of its team.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!