[Gareth]

If the Chargers were to build a new Stadium where Qualcomm is, where could they play in the interim?

I believe the new stadium will go in the parking lot and the old stadium will become the new parking so the Chargers will play in the old stadium while the new stadium is being built and there will be no onsite parking for a couple years...

That sounds like a mess. But I hope it happens.

[Elvis]

BTW: All posters without avatars, consider having one...

[Hacksaw]

Is Jeric Griffen aware that there is an August 11 meeting to likely decide the outcome and that is likely why Sponos is making SD's proposal look bad to better his chances to LA?
The comment he made about the team with the most need is perplexing as it would back up this theory.
I've never put the NFL's criteria being put quite that way. Still seems odd though because you are enriching the weak and under qualified and turning back the best proposal of all of them. IMO

[Gareth]

BTW: All posters without avatars, consider having one...

Done

[Elvis]

BTW: All posters without avatars, consider having one...

Done

Literally LOL...

[BuiltRamTough]

BTW: All posters without avatars, consider having one...

Done

Literally LOL...

Me 2 : D

[SoCalRam78]

BTW: All posters without avatars, consider having one...

Elvis has spoken

[kayfabe]

I'm still with Elvis here, Kroenke's actually got the cards. Spanos is just
acting as if he does. But why? Ego? Spanos is likely to be paid by Kroenke
either way: if Kroenke wants LA exclusivity then ESK will mostly likely
have to help fund a significant portion of the SD stadium via an assymetric
(much larger) relo fee...and I bet he'd be more than glad to do that to keep
Spanos out of LA. But If they share the Inglewood site then Spanos knows he'll
definitely have to play second fiddle to the returning Rams (and he'll have an
entirely new fan base to boot: a recent poll last week on boltsfromtheblue.com
had only a third of Chargers fans living in San Diego willing to support
the LA Chargers). So why diss the ballot initiative now? How does that
exactly help him to extract more money out of Kroenke and keep on good terms
with the city San Diego? He can still hide behind the August 11th owners
decision and pull the initiative after that meeting. But how exactly does
that influence anything that Kroenke decides to do (I believe it doesn't).

Agree then with Elvis and the analysis done yesterday at the bottom of this --

http://www.boltsfromtheblue.com/2015/6/ ... t-downtown

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is, supposedly, a document between Stan Kroenke and Dean Spanos
that was a Letter of Intent for the two of them to partner in Inglewood...
The relationship soured between the two... and that Kroenke is sort of
holding (the Letter of Intent) as an ace-in-the-hole."

- Scott Kaplan on the Scott and BR Commercial Free Uncensored
Podcast #4, June 10, 2015.

If this report is accurate, it means one very important thing.

Dean Spanos doesn't want the deal on that Letter of Intent, at least not as
it is now. We know this because he elected to walk away from the Inglewood
project and pursue Carson on his own.

Therefore, when Kroenke and Spanos sit down to discuss this, I can see
Kroenke making Spanos an offer like this:

"If you want to come to Los Angeles with me in 2016, we're sticking with
this Letter of Intent. Or... go back to San Diego and try to get a deal
there in 2016. You'll still have Inglewood as leverage. If the deal passes,
I'll give you money (possibly part of the relocation fee) to help cover the
stadium costs. If it doesn't work, come back in 2017, and you, me, and the
NFL will come up with a better deal for you to play in Inglewood."

Kroenke gets what he wants: Los Angeles to himself for 2016.

Spanos gets a shot at the deal he wants in San Diego, and as a backup,
he gets a better deal in Inglewood.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

So yeah, Kroenke's got the cards, I want to play his hand. And Spanos is
doing...what exactly? Maybe trying to get extra money out of San Diego by
dissing them yesterday? But combined with the above analysis...I don't
understand how undermining your fallback position actually helps you with
your leverage. And if there's an extra year built in any ESK/Spanos agreement,
doesn't that cover the 12-18 months needed for CEQA?

I don't even know which town is Spanos' fallback position again, is it Carson,
is it Inglewood or is it San Diego? The Carson stuff all feels like a total
bluff to me.

[den-the-coach]

I believe the new stadium will go in the parking lot and the old stadium will become the new parking so the Chargers will play in the old stadium while the new stadium is being built and there will be no onsite parking for a couple years...

Hope you're right King!

[Elvis]

http://www.boltsfromtheblue.com/2015/6/16/8779761/why-cant-the-chargers-and-san-diego-look-at-downtown

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is, supposedly, a document between Stan Kroenke and Dean Spanos
that was a Letter of Intent for the two of them to partner in Inglewood...
The relationship soured between the two... and that Kroenke is sort of
holding (the Letter of Intent) as an ace-in-the-hole."

- Scott Kaplan on the Scott and BR Commercial Free Uncensored
Podcast #4, June 10, 2015.

If this report is accurate, it means one very important thing.

Dean Spanos doesn't want the deal on that Letter of Intent, at least not as
it is now. We know this because he elected to walk away from the Inglewood
project and pursue Carson on his own.

Therefore, when Kroenke and Spanos sit down to discuss this, I can see
Kroenke making Spanos an offer like this:

"If you want to come to Los Angeles with me in 2016, we're sticking with
this Letter of Intent. Or... go back to San Diego and try to get a deal
there in 2016. You'll still have Inglewood as leverage. If the deal passes,
I'll give you money (possibly part of the relocation fee) to help cover the
stadium costs. If it doesn't work, come back in 2017, and you, me, and the
NFL will come up with a better deal for you to play in Inglewood."

Kroenke gets what he wants: Los Angeles to himself for 2016.

Spanos gets a shot at the deal he wants in San Diego, and as a backup,
he gets a better deal in Inglewood.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

So yeah, Kroenke's got the cards, I want to play his hand. And Spanos is
doing...what exactly? Maybe trying to get extra money out of San Diego by
dissing them yesterday? But combined with the above analysis...I don't
understand how undermining your fallback position actually helps you with
your leverage. And if there's an extra year built in any ESK/Spanos agreement,
doesn't that cover the 12-18 months needed for CEQA?

I don't even know which town is Spanos' fallback position again, is it Carson,
is it Inglewood or is it San Diego? The Carson stuff all feels like a total
bluff to me.

Good stuff, good find.

The thing i wonder is, if Spanos' actions don't make sense, maybe our theory is wrong?

Listened a little to The Mighty 1090 this evening and one of them thinks this is Spanos' way of trying to force downtown SD into play. That makes sense, and is consistent with his actions. It's also pretty much what Acee has been saying...