Report: NFL has discussed moving the Chargers to London

[Mastercheddaar]

Why don't they go back to San Diego? Well first have doofus McGee agree to sell the team then move back?

MC

[daineraider]

On 11/5/2019 at 12:39 PM, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

They should have never left San Diego. I'm still stumped by that decision several years later.

The Rams moved to LA, where fans didn't want a team. 

Then the Chargers, who are already in freaking SD, decide they want to double up?! Now their home games are like 80% away teams fans and they're like "THIS IS OUR HOME!"?!? Yeah, okay, it's not, but sure.

They will have a very hard time building a fanbase in LA.  It’s already a Raiders/Rams city and that isn’t going to change, especially when the Raider fans are only a 3-4 hour drive to Vegas.  The Chargers just needed to work with San Diego longer to get something worked out, it could have worked.  Now they are lost and many of their fans have already switched allegiances.

[Shanedorf]

Just now, daineraider said:

it could have worked.

not with Spanos as the owner. That's the main problem and the hurdle they cannot overcome
I don't think the other owners like him much either, they double crossed him - asking him to support Rams -> to LA vote in exchange for support for his needs.
in the end, the league offered Spanos an extra $100 million to stay in SD.... he chose to spend $650 million to leave

[Xenos]

41 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

not with Spanos as the owner. That's the main problem and the hurdle they cannot overcome
I don't think the other owners like him much either, they double crossed him - asking him to support Rams -> to LA vote in exchange for support for his needs.
in the end, the league offered Spanos an extra $100 million to stay in SD.... he chose to spend $650 million to leave

People keep blaming Spanos, which is the easy thing to do. The reality is that the city shares at least half of the blame as well. It's why no NFL team will ever go to SD. As I already mentioned in another thread, the Chargers leaving (while really sad for the fans) was probably the best thing for both the team and the city. A necessary divorce. NFL teams are just an expensive luxury. 

[Xenos]

56 minutes ago, daineraider said:

They will have a very hard time building a fanbase in LA.  It’s already a Raiders/Rams city and that isn’t going to change, especially when the Raider fans are only a 3-4 hour drive to Vegas.  The Chargers just needed to work with San Diego longer to get something worked out, it could have worked.  Now they are lost and many of their fans have already switched allegiances.

They had what at least 10 years to work it out? It was never going to work out because the city is just as stubborn as the owner.

[Shanedorf]

1 hour ago, Xenos said:

It was never going to work out because the city is just as stubborn as the owner.

I'm not sure that's the case
Spanos always had LA in his back pocket and he negotiated from that POV, despite his protests to the contrary
 Spanos burned through 3 mayors during this saga, the one constant was the Spanos family. Hiring Fabiani was a bad move if you actually wanted to get something done because all Fabiani did was agitate.

Contrast that with the current environment in San Diego:
In a very short period of time, SDSU is gonna build a brand new stadium in Mission Valley. One reason for that success is because Spanos and Fabiani aren't involved.  the City isn't blameless, but I'd put it in the 80/20 category with the bulk of it on The Spanos Family

I believe a better owner would have pulled this off...and I hope one comes along someday and brings the Chargers back to SD

[Xenos]

3 hours ago, Shanedorf said:

I'm not sure that's the case
Spanos always had LA in his back pocket and he negotiated from that POV, despite his protests to the contrary
 Spanos burned through 3 mayors during this saga, the one constant was the Spanos family. Hiring Fabiani was a bad move if you actually wanted to get something done because all Fabiani did was agitate.

Contrast that with the current environment in San Diego:
In a very short period of time, SDSU is gonna build a brand new stadium in Mission Valley. One reason for that success is because Spanos and Fabiani aren't involved.  the City isn't blameless, but I'd put it in the 80/20 category with the bulk of it on The Spanos Family

I believe a better owner would have pulled this off...and I hope one comes along someday and brings the Chargers back to SD

A college stadium that cost significantly less than an NFL stadium built for a Super Bowl.

In terms of back pocket, the hotels certainly had the officials in their back pocket.

[DirtyDez]

Lakers

Dodgers

Clippers (now)

Rams

Kings

Angels

Ducks

Chargers

 

That’s not counting USC/UCLA/MLS so the Chargers are probably the least interested team in Los Angeles.

[Kiltman]

On 11/5/2019 at 7:45 PM, Bolts223 said:

I don't think the NFL likes LA Raiders fans.

See's them as gangsters and bad for the image of the league. 

That's why (IMO) they didn't want them there.

I think they would have been just fine with it the stadium and ownership situations aside.

Rams and Kroenke had the cash and situation to snake out of their place first with the first real plan to move to LA, not just lord it over their current city for a better deal. (Chargers, Raiders)
That domino set it all in motion. Because the Rams weren't going to let the Raiders play there. They have more fans, and are a way stronger brand..that has deeper roots already in place.
Rams brand would have been dead on arrival.

I suppose the middle country fans that would follow the Rams was a blank slate. But don't think that was any driving force. 
NFL likes money. Raiders in LA would be way bigger. Just didnt work out that way.

[Bolts223]

5 hours ago, DirtyDez said:

Lakers

Dodgers

Clippers (now)

Rams

Kings

Angels

Ducks

Chargers

 

That’s not counting USC/UCLA/MLS so the Chargers are probably the least interested team in Los Angeles.

You're kidding yourself if you think the Rams are ahead of the Kings. And the Angels/Ducks are really in a separate market altogether. (Orange county)

[Bolts223]

12 hours ago, Shanedorf said:

I'm not sure that's the case
Spanos always had LA in his back pocket and he negotiated from that POV, despite his protests to the contrary
 Spanos burned through 3 mayors during this saga, the one constant was the Spanos family. Hiring Fabiani was a bad move if you actually wanted to get something done because all Fabiani did was agitate.

Contrast that with the current environment in San Diego:
In a very short period of time, SDSU is gonna build a brand new stadium in Mission Valley. One reason for that success is because Spanos and Fabiani aren't involved.  the City isn't blameless, but I'd put it in the 80/20 category with the bulk of it on The Spanos Family

I believe a better owner would have pulled this off...and I hope one comes along someday and brings the Chargers back to SD

I really hate when people bring this up.

That stadium costed a fraction of what building a modern NFL stadium would cost. It's not even comparable.

IF (And this is a very big if) Spanos were to sell the team, whoever buys it will not be doing so with the intention to move them back to SD, but to try to make them big in LA. There is far more money to be made by doing that. The entire Lakers/Clippers analogy with the Rams/Chargers doesn't really work, because the Rams are nothing remotely close to what the Lakers are. The Rams have their own problems with fan support and opposing fans taking over their stadium as well. Moving back to SD when there is really no viable stadium solution there is a pipe dream as much as I would like it to happen.

 

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Bolts223

[SWATcha]

They did a quick breakdown of how the international laws (London) would affect a players salary on the radio. They use Phillip Rivers salary in the example.

They explained how it all works, but in a nutshell;

Base salary 27m.

Minus US taxes 12m.

Minus London taxes 10m.

Phillip takes home 5m lol. 

 

I just can't see a team moving to London permanently. There are SO many visible hurdles in the way and probably just as many unforeseen hurdles.   

 

[Roninho]

19 hours ago, SWATcha said:

They did a quick breakdown of how the international laws (London) would affect a players salary on the radio. They use Phillip Rivers salary in the example.

They explained how it all works, but in a nutshell;

Base salary 27m.

Minus US taxes 12m.

Minus London taxes 10m.

Phillip takes home 5m lol. 

 

I just can't see a team moving to London permanently. There are SO many visible hurdles in the way and probably just as many unforeseen hurdles.   

 

Yeah right you don't believe that i hope? Massive amounts of US expats living in the UK who for sure are not being taxed at 80%. There are a lot of international tax rulings in place so that expats don't get taxed twice.

And i would not be surprised to see the NFL make a deal where they get 0% tax (bunch of us companies for example go to the netherlands and ireland and get a minimum tax rate in return).

[Hunter2_1]

20 hours ago, SWATcha said:

They did a quick breakdown of how the international laws (London) would affect a players salary on the radio. They use Phillip Rivers salary in the example.

They explained how it all works, but in a nutshell;

Base salary 27m.

Minus US taxes 12m.

Minus London taxes 10m.

Phillip takes home 5m lol. 

 

I just can't see a team moving to London permanently. There are SO many visible hurdles in the way and probably just as many unforeseen hurdles.   

 

That would absolutely not happen, but still, there's a plethora of other reasons not to do this

[brushmyhair]

The owners won't allow it. They don't want to have to deal with traveling there every year.