Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
"If the Padres were setting attendance records, Petco would still be a waste, because it would still be true that people (you, for example) would make their decision to see the Padres for reasons other than their stadium." I'm sorry, but that has to absolutely be one of the silliest things I've ever read. My first pro football games was a Rams game in 1956 and my first pro baseball game was a Dodgers game in 1959, both in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. In my entire life, I've nevergone to see a game because of the stadium, or arena or what ever name you care to use for the venue. It has ALWAYS been because of one team or the other, if not both. And I don't know any else who has chosen to attend a sporting event based on the venue rather than the team. As for those pesky old NFL team ownership and revenue sharing rules, what you are talking about is what YOU would have them as or what YOU think they should be(fantasy), and I'm saying what they actually ARE and will in all likelihood remain(reality).— May 6, 2012 3:24 p.m.
Marco Li Mandri wants to get around Prop 13
In San Francisco, the anti litter laws require you to remove all of the litter and other urban detritus that ends up on your sidewalk. It doesn't matter if it's yours or not. Pick it up or faces possible fines ranging from less than $100 up to $1000. In 2009, the SF BoS approved a $.20 surcharge on a pack of cigarettes to help fund the cost of cleaning up tobacco litter. The also passed an ordinance ordinance requiring businesses and residents to separate recyclable and compostable materials from their garbage. Any one who doesn't can be fines up to $100. The city provides city to have three separate color-coded bins for waste and has a stated goal of having nothing sent to landfills or incinerators by 2020. Does San Diego have anything like that?— May 5, 2012 8:46 p.m.
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
I don't take anything anyone says here personally whether they are agreeing or disagreeing with my comments. It's just the internet I'm simply confused as to how you equate people not coming to Petco this season because the team sucks with your opinion that building Petco was a waste of money. Does that mean you feel if the Padres were setting MLB attendance records, then it wouldn't be a waste? From my point of view either building Petco was a waste or it wasn't and how many people show up, on how many not so much, in this case, has no bearing. BTW, It's the NFL, the requirement is that the principal owner must hold a 30% interest, there is a limit of 30 total partners and there must be an agreement in place giving the principal owner total voting control. And despite how you think revenues SHOULD be shared, they are what they are and the only way they can be changed is if the people who voted on them in the first place voted to change them. Don't see that happening. The NFL is what it is and it ain't changing anytime soon.— May 5, 2012 5:47 p.m.
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
I'm not quite sure what any of that has to do with why people aren't coming to Petco this season.— May 5, 2012 5:11 p.m.
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
the 2011 cba that I referred to was for MLB. forgot to type that in.— May 4, 2012 7:58 p.m.
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
refriedgringo, If I recall correctly you grew up in L.A. or at least lived here for a long time. I think you will understand and agree with this scenario. Most Dodger game begin at 7:10. When we go we like to get there in time to get parked, get inside, get our first round of whatever refreshments we want and get to our seats 20-30 minutes before the game starts. Acoording to our GPS, we live just under 13 miles nw of Dodger stadium. On most weekdays, it takes a minimum 45 minutes to get there and into the parking lot. That means to get seated by 6:45ish, we need to leave no later than 5:45, usually closer to 5:30. And on a Friday game day, well, I'm sure you remember what the Hollywood Freeway is like on a Friday, any time, any direction. I'm curious as to on average how long it takes you to come up from your house in Mexico for a weeknight game. I sent a group email to all of my relatives a short while ago asking them if they have attended less games so far and if so was it due to the prices, the hassle of getting into Petco or because of how poorly the Padres are playing thus far. I can pretty much guarantee I will here back from everyone by tomorrow, so I'll see how my data correlate with yours.— May 4, 2012 6:49 p.m.
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
The methods the 2 leagues use are different, so it's hard to compare. I don't know what the current CBA calls for, but the one that ended after the 2011 season called for all 30 teams pay 31 percent of their local revenues into the fund. That fund was then evenly distributed among the 30 teams. Under the old CBA, the NFL split the gate 60-40. In terms of league generated revenue, I believe both leagues use the same method. The monies are disproportionately split among the teams based on their relative revenues, so lower-revenue teams get a bigger share, but I have no idea what formulas or methods either league uses Another reason that small market teams can get to the Superbowl is that the NFL has a hard cap on salaries. The teams MUST be under the cap at all times. There is also a hard salary floor. I think this year's cap is $120 million. Another reason some teams seem to dominate MLB is that there is no cap. They have the the "luxury tax" and some owners just don't care how much they spend because the are willing to pay the penalty in an attempt to win, unlike some owners who apparently don't care about winning at all.— May 4, 2012 6:23 p.m.
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
Your statement was that my comment was supporting the larger argument that Petco was a waste of money. I don't see how not wanting to go see a team that sucks, regardless of where they play, has any bearing on whether or not building Petco was a waste of money. Now, if what you're saying is that if everyone knew the Padres were gonna suck so bad, that it would have been cheaper just to tell them to stay at the Murph and if they didn't like that, they could go play someplace else, then I agree. But again, my comments were strictly to the point that I disagree with Don Bauder's assertion that poor attendance is tied to the inconvenience of getting to Petco and the expense of attending a game. If you want to interpret that as support for what ever point(s) you are trying to make, have at it.— May 4, 2012 5:59 p.m.
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
It's nice that you I have multiple sources and know where bodies are buried. I say bloody good for you!!! Apart from speaking from my own personal experiences, I too have my sources that I am in constant contact with. And they all say that if the Padres were putting a team on the field that at least had a chance to win, they would attend more. My wife's sister and her husband had season tickets for a long time, probably more than 25 yrs. They didn't renew them last year because of how bad the team was and how little ownership seems to care about putting a good product out on the field. That's pretty much the consensus of everyone I know who has stopped going.— May 4, 2012 5:35 p.m.
Build a stadium and Chargers will stay? Nope.
I understand that you were theorizing. You presented 2 different theories of how the NFL could or should be run. But the fact is the the NFL fits neither model. The fact is 32 separate franchise are not the same as 32 different businesses. If you want to start a business, if you, as you said can foot the bill, then you can start it. assuming that you follow the applicable building codes, laws, etc. If so, then off you go. It is not the same when trying to buy a franchise. Still have to go thru all of the same legal, municipal etc that you do when starting your own business, but on top of that you still have to meet all of the additional requirements that the people selling the franchise, in this case the NFL. NOT the same thing. I never characterized McDonald's franchise requirements as onerous. The point is, as i said that there are requirements above those of just simply opening your own business because you can foot the bill. Have you read the NFL constitution and by-laws regarding ownership. I've never claimed that the NFL's prohibition against public ownership as protecting the brand was justified. One final thought. While buildings or other properties in San Diego, or L.A. for that matter, may be deemed "public" property, the public has very little, if any, say so in the use or disposition. The Green Bay Packers are not owned by the city of Green Bay. They are owned by about 350K individual shareholders, of which I happen to be one. That is what I would call "public" ownership. I don't consider a municipality owning a sports team to be a "public" ownership when the public has no say in the matter.— May 4, 2012 5:27 p.m.