27-11-2003 12:09									#1
	Low blow to SD. The chargers sue to leave. Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Chargers Sue City To Break Stadium Lease
Team Is 2-9

POSTED: 8:55 a.m. PST November 26, 2003
UPDATED: 11:52 a.m. PST November 26, 2003

SAN DIEGO -- The San Diego Chargers want out of their lease with Qualcomm Stadium.

The team filed a lawsuit Tuesday in Los Angeles, asking a judge to determine whether the team has met the criteria to allow them to renegotiate their lease.

The renegotiation trigger can only be activated if the team's salaries and benefits exceed its salary cap -- which the team claims has been surpassed by more than $4 million.

The Chargers signed a lease in 1995 to keep the team in San Diego until 2020, but a provision in the contract allows the team to reopen negotiations with the city if conditions are met.

The Chargers say they need a new stadium to remain economically competitive with other NFL teams.

There has been speculation that the Chargers may move to Los Angeles -- a city without an NFL team. The earliest the team could leave would be after the 2003 season.

San Diego city officials have yet to take a formal stance on whether the Chargers have met renegotiation requirements. They said they were unaware of the lawsuit.

Representatives for the Chargers said the team would drop the lawsuit if the city agrees to binding arbitration and also that the Chargers would refund nearly $4 million in current rent rebates under its controversial unsold-ticket guarantee.

Mayor **** Murphy said the city was blindsided by the suit.

"You know, I've been a judge or an attorney for 30 years," said Murphy. "I don't think I've ever seen a more egregious act of bad faith by a party that is supposedly trying to work with the city. The people of San Diego ought to be completely insulted by this.... It completely poisons the atmosphere."

Murphy and City Attorney Casey Gwinn are preparing a formal response to the suit.

	27-11-2003 12:43									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Let them go. Has there ever been an instance where building a taxpayer-funded NFL stadium has been anything less than a boondoggle costing everyone $100m+?

	27-11-2003 12:55									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

is that football thing still around? jees.

	30-11-2003 01:36									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

The answer is for Congress to remove the NFL's special exemption to the Federal anti-trust laws. That way the bastards would have to give a franchise to every city which wants one and the owners wouldn't have any leverage when they try to black mail cities.

The other option is to let these bastards keep their exemption but to give the citizens of the city partial ownership or veto rights. The team could leave if voters vote to let them leave but I doubt that would ever happen.

	30-11-2003 01:53									#5
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I don't blame the Chargers.
Any jenny should know Chargers is capitalized.

	30-11-2003 01:57									#6
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: The answer is for Congress to remove the NFL's special exemption to the Federal anti-trust laws.

Um... Oerdin? The NFL doesn't HAVE an exemption to anti-trust laws. Only MLB does. That is why no one moves in baseball, but teams move in football all the time.

	30-11-2003 02:22									#7
	Support Apolyton

let them go

and give the clippers back to them

	30-11-2003 02:53									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Have them relegate to the NFL Europe.

	30-11-2003 03:00									#9
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: The answer is for Congress to remove the NFL's special exemption to the Federal anti-trust laws. Um... Oerdin? The NFL doesn't HAVE an exemption to anti-trust laws. Only MLB does. That is why no one moves in baseball, but teams move in football all the time.

No, I think you are wrong. Proffesional sports teams cannot be sued for anticompetetive practices under the anti-trust laws. Congress gave them a get out of jail free card. BTW the exemption means they can let in as few or as many new teams as they want and no one can sue them to force them to let more in.

Naturally the owners try to prevent most expansions because they know the value of their francise is directly connected to the supply of availible teams.

Another good way to solve this problem would to have multiple leagues like the European football teams have and then let the teams go up or down leagues depending upon how well they do during the season. I.E. If you are in the major leagues but you finish in last place you get kicked down to the minors and if you finish in 1st place in the minors you get to go up to the Majors. This would solve the problem of crap owners sitting on teams and never investing any money into them. If they don't get the team to perform then the value of the team crashes as it sinks into the minor leagues.

	30-11-2003 03:02									#10
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ted Striker let them go and give the clippers back to them

I actually have a vintager San Diego Clippers jersey. Still, I agree. No sports team is worth $100million when the schools are underfunded and a million other things need to be done.

	30-11-2003 05:32									#11
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin No sports team is worth $100million when the schools are underfunded and a million other things need to be done.

That's the reason I hate the Redskins.

	30-11-2003 05:35									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: The renegotiation trigger can only be activated if the team's salaries and benefits exceed its salary cap -- which the team claims has been surpassed by more than $4 million.

Whoever on the SD side who signed onto that clause oughtta be fired.

	30-11-2003 14:42									#13
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Send 'em to Canada. We'll take 'em.

	30-11-2003 21:08									#14
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: That's the reason I hate the Redskins.

The Redskins? Their stadium is privately funded. And their franchise is the most lucrative in the league. But the Redskins model isn't being used in most situations, because everybody wants a free lunch.

	30-11-2003 21:54									#15
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by JohnT quote: The renegotiation trigger can only be activated if the team's salaries and benefits exceed its salary cap -- which the team claims has been surpassed by more than $4 million. Whoever on the SD side who signed onto that clause oughtta be fired.

Tell me about it. They can trigger renegotiation just by going on a spending spree.

What's even worse is the "ticket guarentee" in which the city agrees to buy every ticket to every home game which isn't sold. This means the Chargers make the same amount of money whither they win or lose so the bastards immediately went out and gutted the team in order to minimize expenses. The owners actually make more money if they have a losing team which costs next to nothing.

	30-11-2003 21:58									#16
	Get a bigger avatar today!

What's really pissing me off is four years ago the Chargers demanded Qualcomm Stadium to be remodled to the tune of $30 million claiming that it would make the stadium a "football stadium" instead of a "baseball stadium" (I doubt they could even define the difference between the two). The city paid because the Chargers said they'd stay for 20 years yet here we are just under four years latter and the bastards are again saying pay me or I leave.

	30-11-2003 22:59									#17
	Inflate your Upload Space

Well, it San Diego's own damn fault for signing such a deal.

But as the saying goes... "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."

	30-11-2003 23:12									#18
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Yes, but the problem is the owners pay big campaign contributions to the city council members so the council members are nothing more then the hired puppets of the owners. The council also has never seen a developer's penis which they did not want to suck. These whores have given away half of the open space in the city just so some out of town developer can turn a quick buck and then leave.

	01-12-2003 02:50									#19
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

that won't change the fact that the Chargers suck, and will always suck

	01-12-2003 03:16									#20
	Tired of ads?

They went to the Super Bowl four years ago; that was the last year before the new contract came into effect.

	01-12-2003 03:24									#21
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

it was more than 4 years ago. And they got lucky

	01-12-2003 05:28									#22
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by DanS The Redskins? Their stadium is privately funded. And their franchise is the most lucrative in the league. But the Redskins model isn't being used in most situations, because everybody wants a free lunch.

Are you sure about that? Didn't Maryland pay to have it built? I think I remember there being state funding for the Redskins' stadium when it was first built. Or maybe it's the Ravens I'm thinking of.

	01-12-2003 05:38									#23
	Tired of ads?

The State of Maryland paid for the funding of the Ravens stadium, but not the Redskins. However, that doesn't mean that there weren't government funds used for non-stadium improvements, including roads, sewers, and other stuff.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sr...ne98/mdpoll.htm

	01-12-2003 06:10									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

This is a great chance for Los Angeles to gain a football team.

	01-12-2003 06:17									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

yes but they had a contract with San Diego. What good are contracts if teams can just break them anytime they want to?

	01-12-2003 23:53									#26
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by JohnT The State of Maryland paid for the funding of the Ravens stadium, but not the Redskins. However, that doesn't mean that there weren't government funds used for non-stadium improvements, including roads, sewers, and other stuff. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sr...ne98/mdpoll.htm

Must have been the Ravens I was thinking of then. I hate both teams, anyway. And I hate the Steelers, just because they're the home team here.

	01-12-2003 23:59									#27
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by monkspider This is a great chance for Los Angeles to gain a football team.

How many times have they had that chance already?

	02-12-2003 02:12									#28
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Proffesional sports teams cannot be sued for anticompetetive practices under the anti-trust laws. Congress gave them a get out of jail free card.

Wrong, Oerdin. Remember, the USFL WON its anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL in the mid 80s. Of course, since there were hardly any damages, they only got $1.

quote: BTW the exemption means they can let in as few or as many new teams as they want and no one can sue them to force them to let more in.

Which is no different from any other franchise relationship, or do you think you can sue McDonalds to force them to open a franchise on your street? Companies cannot be forced to open more franchises if they don't want to.

However, they can't block their franchises from moving (taking advantage of better buisness oppertunities). This is the reason Al Davis can move all along California with the Raiders, but an MLB team hasn't moved since 1961 (Washington Senators to Minnesota to become the Twins) - cause the MLB has an anti-trust exemption.

	02-12-2003 02:20									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Wrong, Oerdin. Remember, the USFL WON its anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL in the mid 80s. Of course, since there were hardly any damages, they only got $1.

Shows what you know. Those damages were punitive, therefore tripling the financial hit on the NFL.

Iirc, the joke at the time had Pete Rozelle go to the commissioner of the USFL after the trial asking "Can you break a $5?"