• Scam Diego alerts

Los Angeles billionaire Ed Roski Jr., who says he will build a 75,000 seat, $800 million stadium in City of Industry, wants to buy the Buffalo Bills or Jacksonville Jaguars, one of his executives said yesterday (Jan. 5). Both of those small-market teams have had trouble attracting fans. However, their owners have said they didn't want to sell or relocate, but these pronouncements may just be negotiating ploys. If he can't buy those teams, Roski says he would like part of the equity of the San Diego Chargers, Minnesota Vikings, Oakland Raiders, San Francisco 49ers and St. Louis Rams, who would relocate to his planned L.A. area stadium. Roski hopes to make an announcement before the Feb. 7 Super Bowl. Roski says he hasn't contacted any teams or made any formal offers.

  • Scam Diego alerts

Comments

David Dodd Jan. 6, 2010 @ 1:15 p.m.

Roski is playing games. He knows that the Bills are going nowhere and that Jacksonville likely won't either.

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 6, 2010 @ 2:46 p.m.

Roski is playing games. He knows that the Bills are going nowhere and that Jacksonville likely won't either.

Of course he is playing games, they play one city off against another. Don't be surprised to see the bankrupt city of Buffallo squander more of their general revenue funds on a stadium/improvmenets-along with tax hikes on the poor, like Cabelas (big box retailer) did with Syracuse. Same for Jacksonville.

BUT, if one of those teams did sign on-that would put the Chargers in a whole lotta hurt.

I think the Chargers are the team to beat for winning the Superbowl. I thought New Orleans was the team, until their final 4 games.......

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 6, 2010 @ 4:53 p.m.

Good call MiM on the SuperBowl match up with the Chargers and CowGirls.

0

Don Bauder Jan. 6, 2010 @ 5:10 p.m.

Response to post #1: The Bills' owner, although he has claimed he will not sell the team, is elderly. Buffalo is not attracting fans. It will be playing part of its games in Toronto. Jacksonville also cant fill up its stadium. I would not be surprised if either sold out and moved, perhaps to L.A. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 6, 2010 @ 5:14 p.m.

Response to post #2: Once again, I will say it: the Chargers would prefer L.A., even if it had to sell part of the equity to Roski. However, other NFL owners might not let it happen. That is why the Chargers are going down several roads. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 6, 2010 @ 5:16 p.m.

Response to post #3: Even if the Bills play some pre-season and regular season games in Toronto, they will demand subsidization of a makeover of the stadium in Buffalo. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 6, 2010 @ 5:18 p.m.

Response to post #4: Possible. And following the game, the citizenry will be so giddy that it will vote the city into bankruptcy court to subsidize the Chargers. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 6, 2010 @ 5:20 p.m.

Response to post #5: If you're so sure, why don't you put $100,000 on that spread? Best, Don Bauder

0

PistolPete Jan. 6, 2010 @ 8:57 p.m.

<p>NFL.com had an article yesterday stating that Buffalo and then Jacksonville were the first teams in line for the L.A. stadium.

I also LOVE how people are saying the Chargeless are on fire. Didn't those people say that last year and the year before and the year before and the year before and the year before and the year before and...

0

Don Bauder Jan. 6, 2010 @ 11:28 p.m.

Response to post #11: The Chargers have won 11 in a row and looked good doing it. I think they have to be considered as strong candidates for the Super Bowl. Best, Don Bauder

0

paul Jan. 7, 2010 @ 12:49 a.m.

By themaninthemirror

Chargers 31 Cowboys 24 ========================== How do you already have a copy of next years schedule? What week is the game, and is it going to be in Arlington or LA?

I know you aren't talking about the Super Bowl this year, because the Cowboys ain't gonna be there.

0

paul Jan. 7, 2010 @ 1 a.m.

SP said: Good call MiM on the SuperBowl match up with the Chargers and CowGirls.

Don said: Response to post #5: If you're so sure, why don't you put $100,000 on that spread?

Cowboys are +$1,200 to win. Pretty nice odds if you believe in them, although not many do. Saints are +$400 and Vikings are +$600. Dallas would have to beat Philly first, then beat both the Saints and the Vikings on the road just to get there. That is just not going to happen.

The Chargers scenario is much more plausible, which is why they are only paying +$350

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 7:14 a.m.

Response to post #13: I infer that you believe the Chargers will be in the Super Bowl, but not the Cowboys. Whom will the Chargers play? And will the Chargers win? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 7:18 a.m.

Response to post #14: Suppose the Jets win? They only got in because two teams rolled over and played dead in their last two games. Best, Don Bauder

0

paul Jan. 7, 2010 @ 8:31 a.m.

By no means do I think San Diego is a lock. With the way they are playing, the fact they are reasonably healthy and the fact they get a bye and then a home game, they have just about as good a shot as anybody. I give them roughly a 40% chance of making it to the Super Bowl. I give the Colts a 45% chance, since they are also well rested and will play the Chargers at home. It might be closer to 45% and 50%, since the rest of the field in the AFC doesn't scare anybody. The Patriots are +550 based mostly on sentiment, not what they have done this year. Nobody else has any shot in the AFC.

The NFC is different, because neither the Vikings nor the Saints is a proven winner in big games, and every other team is capable of an effort that could beat anybody. Even the Cardinals (with the worst record) scare teams, because when they are on they can't be stopped.

If the Chargers make it to the Super Bowl against the Vikings, I think that they are in trouble. Against anybody else, I like their chances.

0

paul Jan. 7, 2010 @ 8:52 a.m.

BTW, Brady getting the comeback player of the year was a joke.

Ricky Williams had one of the most impressive and newsworthy comebacks in recent memory, and he did not get a single vote. To be out of football for years, to be considered finished, and then to come back at his age at the level he did was just astounding. What he did was on par with what Kurt Warner did last year.

Apparently neither Warner nor Williams received any consideration because they had each done a little too well the year before. They each completed astounding two year comebacks, but that doesn't count.

After Williams, Vince Young deserved it well before Brady.

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 7, 2010 @ 8:54 a.m.

Once again, I will say it: the Chargers would prefer L.A., even if it had to sell part of the equity to Roski. However, other NFL owners might not let it happen.

Don, Spanos does not need any OK or approval fromm the other owners to move, anywhere.

Al Davis proved that in 1981 with the Raider move to LA.

If Spanos wants to move to LA he just needs his own OK.

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 7, 2010 @ 8:58 a.m.

If you're so sure, why don't you put $100,000 on that spread?

Although I joke on here at times about putting money where mouth is (in the form of $100 bets)-I am very much against gambling. It is a terrible, and dangerous, vice.

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 7, 2010 @ 9:02 a.m.

By no means do I think San Diego is a lock. With the way they are playing, the fact they are reasonably healthy and the fact they get a bye and then a home game, they have just about as good a shot as anybody.

No team is a lock, but there is no question the Charger offense is the most potenet in the NFL right now-at this point in time.

Chargers have an excellent defense, and with an 11 game win streak, NO have a 2 or 3 game losing streak, Colts have a 2 game losing streak-the odds for winning it all are most tilted in favor of the Chargers.

I am pretty shocked how the season turned out-but there is no denying the fact that the Chargers have the goods to win it all this year.

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 7, 2010 @ 9:04 a.m.

I also LOVE how people are saying the Chargeless are on fire. Didn't those people say that last year

The Chargers were just 1 or 2 touchdowns away from the SB last year. I think that is about as close as you can get and not make it in.

Plus the fact they have made the playoffs for what, the last 4 straight years???

0

PistolPete Jan. 7, 2010 @ 10:30 a.m.

First off SP, the Chargeless have made the playoffs 4 straight years because the division sucks. As much as I respect the Raiders and Chiefs a hell of a lot more than the Hillcrest Chargeless, they are pathetic. Let's not forget about the Donkeys self-destructing two years in a row. Speaking of self-destructing...the Chargeless have been handed the Lombardi on a silver platter year after year and yet they somehow manage to pull out that .357 and blow their foot off...

Second, you're correct. The Chargeless were in fact 1-2 TDs away from the Super Bowl. Too bad woulda, shoulda, couldas don't get you far in life. ;-D

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 7, 2010 @ 11:53 a.m.

First off SP, the Chargeless have made the playoffs 4 straight years because the division sucks.

Beating the Indy Colts TWICE in the playoffs has nothign to do with the AFC West division.

0

paul Jan. 7, 2010 @ 3:20 p.m.

SurfPup said: "Although I joke on here at times about putting money where mouth is (in the form of $100 bets)-I am very much against gambling. It is a terrible, and dangerous, vice."

Apparently you missed the memo:

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=34592

0

paul Jan. 7, 2010 @ 4:20 p.m.

SurfPup said: "Chargers have an excellent defense, and with an 11 game win streak, NO have a 2 or 3 game losing streak, Colts have a 2 game losing streak-the odds for winning it all are most tilted in favor of the Chargers."

In the 36 seasons since Miami went undefeated, only ONE team won their last 11 regular season games (New England won their last 12 in 2003).

A full 19 Super Bowl champions during that span, however, lost one of their last three games.

As for the Chargers "excellent defense", SD is 11th in pts allowed, behind Jets, Cowboys, Ravens, Patriots, Bengals, Packers, Indy and Minnesota.

SD 16th in yards allowed, behind Jets, Packers, Ravens, Bengals, Vikings, Cowboys, Patriots, Eagles.

SD is 20th against the rush, which is why I don't think they can beat the Vikings if they have to stop Adrian Peterson AND Percy Harvin.

The SD defense is probably 9th or 10th out of the 12 playoff teams.

As for their offense, yes they are playing pretty well, but that doesn't change the fact that they were 10th in total offense, behind the Saints, Cowboys, Patriots, Vikings, Packers and Colts.

The Chargers also played in a horrible division, which helped their stats. The Chargers are good, and deservedly one of the favorites, but they are no juggernaut.

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 7:34 p.m.

Response to post #21: But Indianapolis rested its starters in its last two games. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 7:36 p.m.

Response to post #22: Yeah, but the Steelers pretty much manhandled the Chargers in that playoff game last year. The score was closer than the game. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 7:38 p.m.

Response to post #23: A weak division does help. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 7:40 p.m.

Response to post #24: Yes, those victories over the Colts were impressive. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 7:42 p.m.

Response to post #25: Tell Wall Street that gambling is a vice. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 7:45 p.m.

Response to post #26: Didn't New England go undefeated in both the regular season and the playoffs until it got knocked off in the Super Bowl a couple of years ago? Best, Don Bauder

0

paul Jan. 7, 2010 @ 9:04 p.m.

Response to #32,

Yes, New England won 18 straight and then lost in the Super Bowl. That was the point I was driving at. Having a long winning streak can actually be somewhat draining on a team. New England was thought to be the vastly superior team, yet lost the Super Bowl that year.

Losing a few meaningless games at the end of the season is often due to a team playing "vanilla" once they have secured their playoff spot (i.e. nothing but basic formations on both offense and defense so you don't show on film what you really plan on doing when it matters), as well as resting key players.

0

Don Bauder Jan. 7, 2010 @ 9:37 p.m.

Response to post #33: I think you have to confess that you were wrong in your second paragraph (post #26). But no problem. You added some interesting information in both posts. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 7, 2010 @ 10:23 p.m.

But Indianapolis rested its starters in its last two games.

Yep, and that was a mistake-they lost momentum going into the playoffs.

If you recall about 20 years ago Denver won 12 (??) straight games, clinched homefield thru the playoffs with first round bye, and pulled Elway out of the last 4 games.

Lost the opening playoff game. End of season.

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 7, 2010 @ 10:28 p.m.

Yes, New England won 18 straight and then lost in the Super Bowl. That was the point I was driving at. Having a long winning streak can actually be somewhat draining on a team. New England was thought to be the vastly superior team, yet lost the Super Bowl that year.

NE lost by a hair.

I think that Patriots/Giants game was the best SB ever played.

Eli Manning was in the grasps of a NE defender and tossed the pass of his life in the 4th Quarter to go ahead and win. I do not think the NE win streak did anything to diminish their playing ability in that SB.

If you look at ALL the teams you listed, like NO, Indy, MN.....they ALL played awful the last month of the season. Not the Chargers, they are peaking perfectly.

0

paul Jan. 8, 2010 @ 1:56 a.m.

Don Said: "Response to post #33: I think you have to confess that you were wrong in your second paragraph (post #26)."

==================================================== What I meant to say is actually correct, but I definitely could have said it much more clearly.

I was talking about super bowl champions, so when I said only 1 team had one their last 11 regular season games, I meant only 1 super bowl championship team had won their last 11 games.

I was specifically thinking of New England, because it is widely thought that the stress of trying to maintain their winning streak wore them down. That is why teams like the Colts and the Saints aren't discounted, even though the lost late. For many reasons, they actually preferred a loss or two at the end.

Sorry for causing the confusion.

0

paul Jan. 8, 2010 @ 2:08 a.m.

SurfPup said: "If you look at ALL the teams you listed, like NO, Indy, MN.....they ALL played awful the last month of the season. Not the Chargers, they are peaking perfectly."

=======================================================================

My point was that 19 of the last 35 Super Bowl champions can be said to have stumbled going into the playoffs since they lost at least one of their last three regular season games. Historically, riding a large winning streak and "peaking" going into the postseason has not been a strong indicator of Super Bowl success.

In fact, the few teams which did enter with long winning streaks were some of the most dominant teams ever. If my memory serves me, they included a couple of the Steelers teams, a couple of the 49ers teams, a New England team and a Dallas team for the longest streaks (still 9 games or less, with the lone exception of New England wining 12).

I don't think anybody is mentioning these Chargers as being in that category. That is not to say they won't win, because I don't think anybody is near that level this year.

0

paul Jan. 8, 2010 @ 2:35 a.m.

SurfPup said: "NE lost by a hair.

I think that Patriots/Giants game was the best SB ever played. "

===============================================================

Yes, it was a close game, but New England was a huge favorite (+12) and didn't perform.

That raises another interesting tidbit: The betting line has historically been very good at picking super bowl winners. 32 favorites have won out of 44 games. The interesting thing is that 5 of the 12 underdog victors were underdogs by 11 points or more. That means the odds makers are generally right, but when they are wrong they are often badly wrong. In fact, in games where the line is 11 points or greater, the favorites only hold a 6-5 edge.

Do you remember when the Chargers made the Super Bowl? They were 18.5 point underdogs to the 49ers, and they couldn't even cover. Now THAT team (the 49ers) was one of the great ones.

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 8:18 a.m.

Response to post #35: There is controversy about holding out players in late games. The team may lose momentum. But this year, New England lost its key receiver to injury by leaving him in. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 8:21 a.m.

Response to post 36: I just wish we could generate as many heated opinions about the Chargers's attempt to filch $700 million to $800 million from a bankrupt city as we do about the possible Super Bowl winner.

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 8:23 a.m.

Response to post #37: Maybe you just confused me -- not the others on this blog. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 8:25 a.m.

Response to post #38: You people really follow the statistics closely. My guess is you play fantasy football. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 8:30 a.m.

Response to post #39: Who would give a damn about football if there weren't point spreads to gamble on? Incidentally, it looks like a big betting scandal is brewing in the NBA. Best, Don Bauder

0

paul Jan. 8, 2010 @ 8:52 a.m.

Response to #44: Another one?

I always thought basketball lent itself much too conveniently to point shaving. One or two people can have such a large impact on the final score. It's so easy to miss a free throw, throw away a pass, or just the choice between taking a last shot or letting the clock run out in a game that is already decided, to swing the final score by 4 or 5 points.

And of course when I was 5 or 6 my older brothers were sure to repeatedly tell me that all the Dodgers games were fixed, and major league baseball was a show just like professional wrestling!

0

paul Jan. 8, 2010 @ 8:54 a.m.

Add'l response to #44: I forgot to add that basketball refs have an ability to massage a game that is probably only matched in major sports by a baseball umpire calling balls and strikes.

0

PistolPete Jan. 8, 2010 @ 10:12 a.m.

Response to post 36:"I just wish we could generate as many heated opinions about the Chargers's attempt to filch $700 million to $800 million from a bankrupt city as we do about the possible Super Bowl winner."

Bingo Don!!!!! To all the bandwagon riding FF geeks who are so sure that THIS IS THE YEAR, I beg of you, put up or shut up!

Like the saying goes, the sun shines on a dog's ass every now and then...

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 11:39 a.m.

Response to post #45: Definitely, basketball is an easier game to fix. The referees can aid in the process, too. Boxing, of course, has been notorious. Throughout history, boxing matches have been thrown. I would think golf would be easy to fix, and there is a lot of gambling on professional golf. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 11:41 a.m.

Response to post #46: Of course, a baseball umpire can't do a damned thing if the batter swings and hits a pitch. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 11:43 a.m.

Response to post #48: But a Super Bowl appearance or win would certainly boost the Chargers's chances to fleece the city for money it doesn't have. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 8, 2010 @ 11:44 a.m.

Do you remember when the Chargers made the Super Bowl? They were 18.5 point underdogs to the 49ers, and they couldn't even cover. Now THAT team (the 49ers) was one of the great ones.

Yes, one of the highest scoring teams ever. So were the 83 redskins. Steve Young was amazing, and Junior Seau didn't have a very good game. As good as Young was, I will always say Joe Montana was the best QB I have ever seen.

I remember when the 1983 Raiders won the SB, they were bigtime underdogs against Washington, and one SMALL casino owner in Vegas (forgot who it was-could have been Stratosphere developer Stupak) walked across the street to one of the BIG casinos-with $1 million in cash-and took the Raiders and the points-and the Raiders won.

Crazy stuff......

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 11:47 a.m.

Response to post #49: There has been much written about pro sports team owners's ties -- often direct -- to organized crime. This is most evident in the NFL, with the NHL and NBA close behind. Baseball owners have fewer ties to organized crime and gambling, although some Vegas swingers have owned baseball teams. As to baseball umps: I don't remember seeing any evidence of umps' ties to mob game fixers, but that doesn't mean there haven't been any. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 8, 2010 @ 11:48 a.m.

But a Super Bowl appearance or win would certainly boost the Chargers's chances to fleece the city for money it doesn't have.

If the Chargers win the SB, it will not boost the chances-it is a 100% guaranteed certainty.

Then we WILL file BK within 6 months of the Spanos corporate welfare.

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 11:50 a.m.

Response to post #55: Your predictions are both bold and precise, although all your forecast happenings don't eventuate. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 Jan. 8, 2010 @ 5:15 p.m.

.......although all your forecast happenings don't eventuate.

LOL...you aint kidding. I thought we would be in BK for sure by now!

BK is a certainty though-maybe not today, this week, or this year, but sometime in the near future.

Look at CA, we are worse of as a city than CA is as a state-

0

Don Bauder Jan. 8, 2010 @ 9:52 p.m.

Response to post #57: San Diego is in the dumps, but it's difficult to say that it is worse off than the state. Best, Don Bauder

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close