(January 13, 2017 at 7:41 am)SteelCurtain Wrote:(January 13, 2017 at 5:48 am)Brian37 Wrote: I have a problem with it. This isn't the first time. Cities get played off of each other like a kid plays two parents against each other, blackmail both until one or the other builds them a news stadium.
This one, at least, was done right. The city of San Diego had a referendum asking if they wanted to subsidize a new stadium, and the taxpayers said no. The Chargers have been playing in Qualcomm since the 60's. The team is essentially a small market team in a military town. Lots of transient residents. I think it's shitty that the owners don't pay for stadiums outright, but the market wins. If there are cities that are willing to shell out hundreds of millions for a stadium complex, then teams will go to those cities. It sucks, but it's the way it is. Thing is, if the Chargers hadn't sucked for 20 years straight, if they had a 5 year window where they were good, then the fans would have hit the voting booth. It happened with the 49ers. They made the NFC Championship and had a couple of good years, and they got a stadium deal--no one was upset about it. Now they returned to sucking, and people have turned.
In twenty years when the Patriots need a new stadium, they will get a deal. Same with the Steelers in 2031. There will be all of 4 people in Allegheny County that would be against giving their team a new facility.
Yes it is shitty that 32 billionaires cant see fit to pool their own money to pay for their own stadiums, but lets stop using that bullshit "market wins", no still a huge difference between market demand and what we have now, which is 36 years of deregulation which allows for corporations to lead people on and manipulate them into allowing it.
Look at whom we just elected, a fucking snake oil salesman.
