The Chargers current won-loss record is 1-3. If the Chargers were 3-1, the new stadium might have more voter support. Everyone loves a winner, I don't know if too many people love a loser.
To: jeannineinsd
San Antonio Chargers sounds pretty good.
2 posted on
10/07/2016 3:40:57 PM PDT by
rod1
(CTLY)
To: jeannineinsd
Yep, the team has not had a good year recently, and that’s a problem.
3 posted on
10/07/2016 3:41:52 PM PDT by
SaxxonWoods
(Ride To The Sound Of The Guns)
To: jeannineinsd
Awkward title, or I just have a knack for getting things wrong: I thought they were trying to measure the stadium, like it needed new drapes or something.
4 posted on
10/07/2016 3:44:34 PM PDT by
married21
( As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.)
To: jeannineinsd
Sucks to be an NFL team owner when the taxpayers finally stop being billion dollar suckers every time the owners say jump. Now that LA has a team the biggest market without a nearby team is Portland ... and the Portland Chargers doesn't have the threat that the LA Chargers does. Maybe LA could grab another couple teams before saturation.
It couldn't happen to a nicer league.
5 posted on
10/07/2016 3:46:42 PM PDT by
KarlInOhio
(If Muammar Gaddafi had donated to the Clinton Foundation he would still be alive and in power today.)
To: jeannineinsd
No taxpayer money should ever be spent building stadiums for billionaire owners so there millionaire players have a place to play.
If they want a new stadium, let them build it with their own money.
6 posted on
10/07/2016 3:47:28 PM PDT by
Lurkinanloomin
(Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam , Know Peace)
To: jeannineinsd
Everyone loves a winner, I don't know if too many people love a loser.
Notwithstanding the team's current success, the Cubs have been perpetually loved losers.
10 posted on
10/07/2016 3:48:57 PM PDT by
Dr. Sivana
(There is no salvation in politics.)
To: jeannineinsd
It’s really irritating that public funds pay for stadiums, vote or not. What a perfect opportunity to have fan support by selling shares of stock.
15 posted on
10/07/2016 4:11:32 PM PDT by
grania
(I'm Deplorable)
To: jeannineinsd
Sounds like the same issue we had in Pittsburgh when they built two shiny new stadiums with tax payer money. Two stadiums were proposed for Philadelphia as well to get support from the Eastern part of Pennsylvania.
They had a state wide referendum on the issue which was called “Plan A”. It was defeated 80% to 20% at the polls.
The legislature then went to “Plan B”.
Plan B was Plan A the only difference being that the voters had no choice in the matter because there was no referendum with Plan B.
The promised revenues were never seen and we are now paying for two shiny new stadiums in Pittsburgh, two in Philadelphia, and we’re STILL paying for Three Rivers Stadium in Pittsburgh, even though it doesn’t exist any more.
i was really hoping that everybody learned the lesson that Pennsylvania had to learn. Apparently not.
17 posted on
10/07/2016 4:22:04 PM PDT by
Calvinist_Dark_Lord
((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
To: jeannineinsd
Stadium deal is getting Kaepernicked.
18 posted on
10/07/2016 4:32:21 PM PDT by
Cen-Tejas
(it's the debt bomb stupid)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson