Comments by Visduh

Rams most likely to go to L.A.

Twenty years ago, if you had told me that LA would go without any NFL team for two decades, I'd have laughed in your face. It is a natural spot for one or even two teams, yet no governmental agency would just build a stadium there and rent it to an NFL franchise for a song. I've heard over and over that the city wanted the Coliseum to host whatever NFL team called LA home, and that the requirement was the sticking point. But that seems very strange to me. That stadium goes back a century, with expansions and rebuilds along the way, notably in the early 30's to host the Olympics of 1932. There were plenty of other places that could have held a stadium, and razing a square mile of LA's notorious slums to accommodate one would have made some sense. That is if the city or county or . . . were willing to pick up the tab. But even sports-besotted LA couldn't marshal the political pressure to pull that off. But somehow, San Diego, which doesn't have a single tax dollar to waste, was being called upon to cough up the bigger part of $1 billion to build a new stadium for the local NFL team, lest it leave. And yet it has a stadium now, and one that's not all that old. If that one needs some renovation, the cost would be a small fraction of the cost of a new facility. Furthermore, it has the best central location for a sports venue of any spot being proposed. LA was smart for a change; it seldom is smart about anything. In the 1940's one prominent columnist referred to it as "a great, slobbering civic idiot." San Diego is perilously close to doing a most foolish thing, acting more foolishly than LA. Hard to stomach, isn't it?
— October 22, 2014 10:48 a.m.

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!