Report: Chargers, Rams reach agreement on sharing Inglewood stadium

Getty Images

When NFL owners voted to approve the Rams’ move from St. Louis to Los Angeles, the Chargers were given until January 15, 2017 to strike an agreement with the Rams to share their proposed stadium in Inglewood if they chose to make the move.

The two teams began talks shortly after that vote and Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune reports that the two teams have reached such an agreement in principle. There are no details about what’s involved in the agreement.

Reaching the agreement is a big step toward the Chargers making a move, but it’s not a final one. Chargers owner Dean Spanos still has to make the call to head up the coast and Acee reports that “some near the process say” he hasn’t “entirely made up his mind” about departing. Reaching the agreement could lead to action from San Diego that makes staying a more favorable deal for Spanos and the team, although there’s been no public comments from the team or city at this point.

The Chargers have already gotten the ball rolling on a team headquarters and practice facility in Orange County and the Los Angeles Coliseum is considering a change to their lease with USC to allow two NFL teams to use it as a temporary home.

50 responses to “Report: Chargers, Rams reach agreement on sharing Inglewood stadium

  1. The Chargers would make more money being the B team in Los Angeles than being THE team in San Diego. It’s nothing personal, just business San Diego. And yes this is a business, don’t ever forget that.

  2. I’m trying to figure out why the Chargers want to be in that market. They do not have a solid following there at all. I’m interested to see how they fill that stadium up every other Sunday with a casual fan. You know if there are San Diego transplants there half of them turned off with that team.

  3. I’m still having a hard time figuring out how anybody thinks LA can support two NFL franchises when history has shown it has difficulty keeping one. I just don’t get it.

  4. As a resident of San Diego, here’s my thoughts on the matter.

    1: Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, Spanos!

    2: I’m going to wallow in the Schadenfreude of the half empty stadium in Inglewood during Chargers home games.

    3: I’ll root for any NFL team that moves to San Diego, regardless of their past affiliation. If no other team moves to San Diego, then the Los Angeles Rams will become my west coast team of choice.

    4: I know a lot of people in Los Angeles. Not one of them has expressed an interest in rooting for the Chargers.

    5: I know even more people in San Diego, many of them Chargers fans. Not one of them intends to root for the Chargers when they leave town.

  5. niners816 says:
    Jan 29, 2016 4:53 PM
    I feel for St. Louis and San Diego. NFL owners only care about money and more money. Bunch of useless tools

    and that makes them any different than other for profit business owners? st louis had the lowest home attendance in the league. they may have some passionate fans but not enough to justify keeping a team there. san diego has similar issues and there is more money to be made heading north. don’t want a team to leave? have enough support to make it profitable to stay.

  6. Maybe they should have seen how the Rams would do first (PSL sales, etc.) before piling on a second team. Why not throw in the Raiders & LA’s almost got it’s own division…

  7. The boss may not always be right, but he’s always the boss. These teams do not belong to the cities in which they play (with the partial exception of the Packers), but to the very rich people who own them. You may be a fan of a team that’s moving (as I was of a team that moved), but life goes on and the owner has the right to move his team.

    Resentment and envy of people who are wealthier than you is a waste of time.

  8. Well done, NFL! Two cities losing their NFL teams, and counting, for a redundant benefit in one place.

    Somehow this will result in expanding the impact of the product, just not sure how yet.

  9. 2liveted says:
    Jan 29, 2016 5:05 PM
    niners816 says:
    Jan 29, 2016 4:53 PM
    NFL owners only care about money and more money.
    ——————————————————————————————————————-

    Well what do you think Business is? You sound silly

  10. California Chargers, Los Angeles Chargers, Los Angeles Chargers of Inglewood…none of them sound right.

  11. finatic1 says:
    Jan 29, 2016 5:02 PM
    LA support 2 of every sport why not NFL.
    ——
    Support 2 of every sport-when the teams are winning.

    Prior to 5 years ago, the Clippers were pariahs. The Angels had some very lean years in the 80’s and 90’s.

    Even the Lakers are starting to feel the pinch of fielding a crappy team for a few years.

    Neither Kroenke nor Spanos has been known to field a consistent winner.

  12. Rams and Chargers fans get the shaft after supporting them. I still feel any team that in their original franchise city must keep the uniform and LOGO! It belongs to the fans….
    GREED, GREED, GREED!

  13. Agree with daytontriangles above. Chargers have absolutely no following in LA now, in the past, or the future. They go, good riddance, hope it costs Deano and his boys $1 Billion or so for the costs incurred with the move and lease agreement so hopefully we’ll see them all panhandling. So much for leaving a legacy behind, ask Modell how that turned out.

  14. “I still feel any team that in their original franchise city must keep the uniform and LOGO! It belongs to the fans….”

    So the Rams would be Cleveland’s team and the Chargers…Los Angeles.

  15. LA resident here. I really hope the Chargers fail here. They should never have moved from San Diego where they belong. Spanos may get some short term gains from the move, but ultimately, we don’t want/need the Chargers. San Diegoans deserve better.

    Moving teams in ANY sport is just awful PR.

  16. I think Mark Davis will be in discussions with Mayor Kevin Faulconer in the very near future. He said that he doesn’t need much – just a lease and a city that wants them.

    World-recognized architect Dan Meis said that he could “absolutely, without a doubt” have the stadium in San Diego renovated and Super Bowl-ready for $500M.

    Who is calling whose bluff next?

  17. Fairly similar to the sharing relationship the Giants and Jets have where the Giants get a stadium and the Jets get to pretend they are an NFL team.

  18. I think there are plenty of football fans in LA that they can support one NFC team and one AFC team. And of course it makes good business sense for the NFL to at least try. And if I’m wrong so what? I’m just a commenter on a football blog.

  19. Rams and Chargers fans get the shaft after supporting them. I still feel any team that in their original franchise city must keep the uniform and LOGO! It belongs to the fans….
    GREED, GREED, GREED!

    Well then St. Louis should have never had the Rams so they didn’t get The shaft. The original Rams fans got shafted. Them going back was correcting a wrong.

    Although the Chargers were in L.A. for only one year before San Diego, they are getting shafted, sort of. They will still be in SoCal.

  20. As a lot of comments focus on LA’s historical inability to “support” NFL teams, it might be useful to interject some facts:

    The LA Coliseum seating capacity is almost 94,000. That is almost 14,000 more seats than the next largest stadium (Cowboys – which wasn’t even built yet), and almost 24,000 more seats than the NFL average. When the Raiders and Rams played there, the NFL was still subject to the FCC blackout rules. The massive attendance demand meant many games were blacked out in the prized media market. As a vicious cycle, this also meant locals weren’t exposed to their own teams, causing attendance to further flag. Efforts to renovate the stadium to limit seating were effectively killed by the 1994 Northridge earthquake.

    Prior moving to St. Louis, the Rams did not depart an LA stadium, they departed what is now known as Angels Stadium in Anaheim. If you’ve ever lived in Los Angels, you know that driving to Orange County is like traveling to another state. In Anaheim, they played with a baseball diamond on the field, and never committed to long-term.

    Circumstances are different now. It’s no coincidence that the return of the Rams only came after the FCC lifted the blackout rule. Teams can now take full advantage of the media market.

  21. lambeaudungbarn says:
    Jan 29, 2016 5:22 PM
    Rams and Chargers fans get the shaft after supporting them. I still feel any team that in their original franchise city must keep the uniform and LOGO! It belongs to the fans….
    =================================
    I agree with that; like the Browns’ name logo had to stay when Model ran away. No city/team fans got screwed over more than Baltimore when Irsay literally snuck his team out of the city under the cover of early morning darkness. The Colts will always carry that stink.

  22. I for the life of me cannot understand the people who say that the Chargers have no following in LA. Until the details of Ralph Wilson will became the NFL was all for moving Buffalo there. How many Bills fans are in LA? Once there is NFL back in LA people will come out in droves. The team does not matter.

  23. The San Diego Chargers are my fav team. I love them, regardless of where they play! LIVE & DIE A BOLT FAN!

    (I’d rather not watch football than change my favorite team. I’m a fan of ONE team). In fact, I’m not even a football fan, not a super bowl fan or an NFL fan. I’m a CHARGERS FAN !(The End!)

  24. Best comments I’ve seen on this site in some time. Too many folks give an opinion on how LA can’t support teams w/out ever having lived in S. Cal. and understanding what the situation was. Well done and well put clickablecontent.
    ——————————————-
    As a lot of comments focus on LA’s historical inability to “support” NFL teams, it might be useful to interject some facts:

    The LA Coliseum seating capacity is almost 94,000. That is almost 14,000 more seats than the next largest stadium (Cowboys – which wasn’t even built yet), and almost 24,000 more seats than the NFL average. When the Raiders and Rams played there, the NFL was still subject to the FCC blackout rules. The massive attendance demand meant many games were blacked out in the prized media market. As a vicious cycle, this also meant locals weren’t exposed to their own teams, causing attendance to further flag. Efforts to renovate the stadium to limit seating were effectively killed by the 1994 Northridge earthquake.

    Prior moving to St. Louis, the Rams did not depart an LA stadium, they departed what is now known as Angels Stadium in Anaheim. If you’ve ever lived in Los Angels, you know that driving to Orange County is like traveling to another state. In Anaheim, they played with a baseball diamond on the field, and never committed to long-term.

    Circumstances are different now. It’s no coincidence that the return of the Rams only came after the FCC lifted the blackout rule. Teams can now take full advantage of the media market.

  25. My two cents says spanos has no intention f moving, never did it was just make and mirrors to get the city to pony up to the bar. I mean nhe has e ery op to bolt now it’s wide open and he just announced he is staying another year.
    Ya I’m are he told me know thanks fr yourmhel, I’m staying in SD but petsmmaker t look like immay move and you get the whole LA market to yourself.

  26. Davis and Raiders already own land in San Antonio
    that could be used to build a stadium.
    McCoombs, former Vikings owner/billionaire
    and 12 other very rich guys are trying to lure the Raiders to San Antonio.

    Raiders could play in the Alamodome while building their new stadium

  27. Why does it always have to be about money? Spanos is a billionaire, why does he need more? Why not be loyal to your fan base and make a little less than you would in LA. As a St Louisan I watched Kroenke who has like 7 billion to go along with his wife’s multiple billions crap all over his home city so he could move to LA to merely make more money. I’m all for capitalism, but why not be loyal to the fan bases that support your teams. It’s not like the Rams and Chargers are the best run teams in the league either.

  28. I am the only one who thinks this is stupid. Two teams moving to the same stadium. Two teams that already have loyal fans. Crazy crazy. Really the the NFL is whoring them selves. The game of football is brilliant but the people that run it really are just a bunch of greasy greedy morons.

Leave a Reply