Skip to content

browns chargers game 2017

The Browns Board
72 18 1.6k
  • @unsympathetic said:

    Boo fucking hoo. And of course corporatist ESPN is going to run a puff piece on how sad this move is.

    Reality? Spanos is a greedy bastard who doesn't care about anything especially the viability/perception of the NFL. As George Carlin famously said, it's a club and you ain't in it.. and they don't care about you.

    Are the Chargers correct? FUCK NO. The entire notion of a team is its city - without that, the team is literally nothing. Thought experiment: What, exactly, is the current Browns organization without Cleveland? Because Haslam doesn't get to take it with him.. that's Cleveland's.

    I say let Spanos and his rent-a-team fail for however long it takes. He'll come crawling back and be told to sit down, shut up, and pay for a stadium renovation out of his own revenue sharing deal.

    And if he doesn't, GOOD FOR SAN DIEGO. I live in a town (suburb of Boston) that happily and correctly told the Olympics to go pound sand because the economics weren't a good deal for the taxpayers.

    Ultimately this is not really a commentary on the NFL as an institution --- it's a commentary on the laughable absurdity of public cost / private profit enterprises, and the continuing revolt against the economic policies of the 1% who own each individual business.

    A liberal talking economics making very little sense. Shocked.

    @wargograw said:

    A liberal talking economics making very little sense. Shocked.

    Of course, they are the only ones that have ever made sense out of the economy. Ready for another round of trickle down Voodoo?

  • @stinkhole said:

    Heard some sports talk show discuss the move and the situation so mimics the browns.

    Chargers in Sand Diego for 56 yrs.

    Spanos asking for a new stadium as far back as 1995 when the Chargers were in the Super Bowl vs San Fran.

    Padres after 1 winning season get a new baseball stadium, but the chargers continue to be ignored.

    Spanos...he had no choice.

    Spanos had no choice if he wanted to keep up with the (Jerry) Jonses. 🙂

    We wouldn't expect a Steelers fan to know the details of 1995, but regarding Artie- not exactly. He had the original sweetheart deal from the City of Cleveland- essentially free stadium, all the concessions, and the rather primitive luxury box revenue. And he had the Indians as a captive tenant. Hit Model right in the pocket when the Tribe moved to Jacobs Field. But though he had to be jealous, Artie never asked for a NEW Stadium, The plans for a remodeled one were on the books, and there was a vote on the November ballot. That's where Spanos and Modell diverge. Spanos has been bellyaching for a new stadium for decades, Voters rejected funding a couple months ago. Modell never asked for one- and if he had- it would have been a done deal. There's a difference in wealth too. Alex is worth over a billion- Modell had no choice BECAUSE it came to light after the fact- he was essentially broke. Even with the $42 million bribe from Baltimore, the state of Maryland- and a sweetheart deal that made anything he had in Cleveland look like chump change, he was forced to sell out to Biscotti- because Fleet Bank was threatening foreclosure on him. Plus, Modell could have sold out to Al Lerner, but nope, he wanted to pass the team down to his cigar chompin' kid. As Mr. DeFord famously said- "Sorry Art, you're just not RICH enough to own a football team anymore."

    @hoorta said:

    Spanos had no choice if he wanted to keep up with the (Jerry) Jonses. 🙂

    We wouldn't expect a Steelers fan to know the details of 1995, but regarding Artie- not exactly. He had the original sweetheart deal from the City of Cleveland- essentially free stadium, all the concessions, and the rather primitive luxury box revenue. And he had the Indians as a captive tenant. Hit Model right in the pocket when the Tribe moved to Jacobs Field. But though he had to be jealous, Artie never asked for a NEW Stadium, The plans for a remodeled one were on the books, and there was a vote on the November ballot. That's where Spanos and Modell diverge. Spanos has been bellyaching for a new stadium for decades, Voters rejected funding a couple months ago. Modell never asked for one- and if he had- it would have been a done deal. There's a difference in wealth too. Alex is worth over a billion- Modell had no choice BECAUSE it came to light after the fact- he was essentially broke. Even with the $42 million bribe from Baltimore, the state of Maryland- and a sweetheart deal that made anything he had in Cleveland look like chump change, he was forced to sell out to Biscotti- because Fleet Bank was threatening foreclosure on him. Plus, Modell could have sold out to Al Lerner, but nope, he wanted to pass the team down to his cigar chompin' kid. As Mr. DeFord famously said- "Sorry Art, you're just not RICH enough to own a football team anymore."

    It was $75 mill. Larry, not 42. And that still didn't help.

  • @diehardbrownsfan said:

    I was stationed at Coronado when Fouts and Winslow played for the Chargers. Went to many a game with my unit and had some outstanding tail gates there. Damn shame I think.

    Always wanted to go to San Diego. Guess I will settle for Vegas to see the Raiders play the Broncos and bet on the Browns. 😆

    In fact I will email my Broncos season multi-ticket holding nephew and see if he wants to get us tickets and meet me there.

    @texasag1969 said:

    Always wanted to go to San Diego. Guess I will settle for Vegas to see the Raiders play the Broncos and bet on the Browns. 😆

    In fact I will email my Broncos season multi-ticket holding nephew and see if he wants to get us tickets and meet me there.

    When is that move supposed to happen? Rams/Chargers get to LA before Raiders get to Vegas.

  • @mark-o said:

    From my understanding, Stan Kronke (or however you spell it) paid for the new stadium in LA himself. The league might have chipped in some money in exchange for having the NFL combine and all league offices be a part of this new giant palace in Inglewood.

    The Raiders will do fine in Vegas....big following, cheap flights from LA, OC or Bay area and it seems clear that Raiders fans don't care where the team plays and they'll still follow them. SD Chargers fans are not going to follow this team to LA even though its' only about 90 miles away. People in SD hate everything about LA and there's no chance they're going to support the team up there.

    I know you've been following this Mark. The SD folks had to know by now how the new stadium or I'll move extortion game is played. They had their chance- and vote, adios.

    @hoorta said:

    I know you've been following this Mark. The SD folks had to know by now how the new stadium or I'll move extortion game is played. They had their chance- and vote, adios.

    I think they knew. There's too many issues with why the vote failed to type here. Essentially though, they had one vote in 15 years and it was a half assed effort at best for a new stadium that was thrown together a couple of months after the team tried to move to LA after last season. The vote had zero chance of passing this past november and the team knew that and talked about the fact that it was a "starting point" to see what they could get accomplished. The fact that the team has been talking about needing a new stadium (and rightfully so, Qualcomm is a dump and has been for years) for 15 years and between the team and the city they've only managed to get one half assed plan on a ballot is a pretty poor effort. From my outside looking in perspective, the city officials don't really care if the team is there or not and the team ownership doesn't have the leader or the front man to get something done because I believe the team owner always wanted to move the team to LA.

    I feel bad for the fans of the Chargers, they deserve better than this and much like what all of us went through 22 years ago, they didn't have much of a chance to stop it from happening.

  • I feel bad for the fans of the Chargers, they deserve better than this and much like what all of us went through 22 years ago, they didn't have much of a chance to stop it from happening.

    Except, of course the difference was that "we"....the City of Cleveland at least, had a 100% chance of stopping it from happening. Cleveland had the ironclad lease.

    The only way that our situation would have been parallel would have been if Modell had stayed here until the lease ran out (which he didn't but I believe the Chargers did) and if Cuyahoga County had rejected the ballot measure, (which they didn't).

    So, no, the parallel is not there.

  • @tour2ma said:

    SD isn''t that far from LA... so the die hard's still have a team.

    As for me attending our trip to LA... not in the cards for 2017.

    The diehards are telling the team to go fuck themselves and dumping boxes full of Chargers gear in front of the team offices.

    The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team".

    @mark-o said:

    The diehards are telling the team to go fuck themselves and dumping boxes full of Chargers gear in front of the team offices.


    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    @mjp28 said:

    This might be a BIG financial mistake with the NFL showing cracks in the shield, viewership is actually dropping particularly on the Thursday and even less interest in Sunday Night and Monday Night games.


    A good chunk of the ratings decline has been explained by a rise in mobile viewing on line.

  • War, did you read anything regarding the actual plan proposed by the Chargers? Why, exactly, do you support raising the taxes of SD?

    If 85% of economists -- even Greg Mankiw -- agree on something... they're probably right. Public subsidies for stadiums are generally a BAD idea for the taxpayer.

    The Chargers put out a horrible, obviously flawed "plan" with assumptions that never had a chance of being true - and just expected everyone to dumbly buy it.

  • The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team".

    @mark-o said:

    The diehards are telling the team to go fuck themselves and dumping boxes full of Chargers gear in front of the team offices.


    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    @mjp28 said:

    This might be a BIG financial mistake with the NFL showing cracks in the shield, viewership is actually dropping particularly on the Thursday and even less interest in Sunday Night and Monday Night games.


    A good chunk of the ratings decline has been explained by a rise in mobile viewing on line.

    @tour2ma said:

    The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team".

    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    First Tour we'll see how playing in a 20k stadium works out.

    Regarding a possible Browns move, can't happen anytime soon. Part of the deal to let Modell out of town, the best lawyers in Cleveland drew up an ironclad 30 year lease that's essentially impossible to break.

    As to the Columbus Browns, no thanks, though it would knock 4 hours off the round trip.

  • @tour2ma said:

    The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team".

    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    First Tour we'll see how playing in a 20k stadium works out.

    Regarding a possible Browns move, can't happen anytime soon. Part of the deal to let Modell out of town, the best lawyers in Cleveland drew up an ironclad 30 year lease that's essentially impossible to break.

    As to the Columbus Browns, no thanks, though it would knock 4 hours off the round trip.

    @hoorta said:

    First Tour we'll see how playing in a 20k stadium works out.

    Regarding a possible Browns move, can't happen anytime soon. Part of the deal to let Modell out of town, the best lawyers in Cleveland drew up an ironclad 30 year lease that's essentially impossible to break.

    As to the Columbus Browns, no thanks, though it would knock 4 hours off the round trip.

    They apparently will be moving there training camp down there soon, so you will have a short trip for that.

  • And check this out: while this coming year the Browns will be playing in MarkO land (LA...SoCal), the year after they play in Zomboland:

    2018 Browns schedule

  • The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team".

    @mark-o said:

    The diehards are telling the team to go fuck themselves and dumping boxes full of Chargers gear in front of the team offices.


    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    @mjp28 said:

    This might be a BIG financial mistake with the NFL showing cracks in the shield, viewership is actually dropping particularly on the Thursday and even less interest in Sunday Night and Monday Night games.


    A good chunk of the ratings decline has been explained by a rise in mobile viewing on line.

    @tour2ma said:

    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    People in San Diego won't support the LA Chargers, SD hates LA and everything about LA so there's no chance of any support going up the freeway. The fact that it looks like the Chargers are going to switch to the classic powder blue color scheme now as well is just one more slap in the face to SD and their fans who have been begging for that for years.

    As for the hypothetical Columbus move.....if it don't say Cleveland in front of the Browns, I'm out and I'd be donating every piece of Cleveland Browns clothing to the local homeless shelter. Just like I wouldn't have supported the Baltimore Browns if that is how things had turned out 22 years ago.

  • War, did you read anything regarding the actual plan proposed by the Chargers? Why, exactly, do you support raising the taxes of SD?

    If 85% of economists -- even Greg Mankiw -- agree on something... they're probably right. Public subsidies for stadiums are generally a BAD idea for the taxpayer.

    The Chargers put out a horrible, obviously flawed "plan" with assumptions that never had a chance of being true - and just expected everyone to dumbly buy it.

    @unsympathetic said:

    War, did you read anything regarding the actual plan proposed by the Chargers? Why, exactly, do you support raising the taxes of SD?

    If 85% of economists -- even Greg Mankiw -- agree on something... they're probably right. Public subsidies for stadiums are generally a BAD idea for the taxpayer.

    The Chargers put out a horrible, obviously flawed "plan" with assumptions that never had a chance of being true - and just expected everyone to dumbly buy it.

    That article is 18 months old and the proposal that was put out was for a "tourism tax". Essentially an extra tax on all hotel rooms in the city of San Diego that would've paid a large portion of the stadium.

  • @hoorta said:

    First Tour we'll see how playing in a 20k stadium works out.

    Regarding a possible Browns move, can't happen anytime soon. Part of the deal to let Modell out of town, the best lawyers in Cleveland drew up an ironclad 30 year lease that's essentially impossible to break.

    As to the Columbus Browns, no thanks, though it would knock 4 hours off the round trip.

    They apparently will be moving there training camp down there soon, so you will have a short trip for that.

    @the-gipper said:

    They apparently will be moving there training camp down there soon, so you will have a short trip for that.

    Oh, I've been following it Gip. Yeah it's happening, no it's not, yes it is. Here's the latest as of the end of December- NO IT'S NOT.

    http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2016/12/28/Browns-staying-home.html#

    They'll still in all likelihood have the full scrimmage at Ohio State though.

  • The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team".

    @mark-o said:

    The diehards are telling the team to go fuck themselves and dumping boxes full of Chargers gear in front of the team offices.


    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    @mjp28 said:

    This might be a BIG financial mistake with the NFL showing cracks in the shield, viewership is actually dropping particularly on the Thursday and even less interest in Sunday Night and Monday Night games.


    A good chunk of the ratings decline has been explained by a rise in mobile viewing on line.

    @tour2ma said:

    The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team".

    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    A good chunk of the ratings decline has been explained by a rise in mobile viewing on line.

    Spoken like a true fan (not). I suppose if they had stayed the 'Baltimore Browns' you would have followed them also?

  • @tour2ma said:

    The Cleveland parallel is an interesting take. Not hard to see a possible return to SD three years down the road following a stadium deal. Especially if the Chargers draw less than expected as LA's "other team".

    Understandable, short-term reaction... let's see what July brings.

    As for a Browns hypothetical move to Columbus? As long as they are still the Browns, then I'd follow them. After all from Texas, what difference would it make other than "The Columbus Browns" sounding weird as hell for a couple years.

    For every truly disenfranchised, invested fan in the greater Cleveland area, there'd probably be at least one in mid-Ohio to take their place. Hell... IIRC... it'd make hoota's travel much shorter.

    A good chunk of the ratings decline has been explained by a rise in mobile viewing on line.

    Spoken like a true fan (not). I suppose if they had stayed the 'Baltimore Browns' you would have followed them also?

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    Spoken like a true fan (not). I suppose if they had stayed the 'Baltimore Browns' you would have followed them also?

    It strikes me as odd when your definition of "true fan" is to turn away from the game. I take it that you are first and foremost a fan of the City of Cleveland. Cavs must have suffered the loss of your support when they moved to Richfield.

    Columbus would phase me less than an out of state move and the last I checked Baltimore is not in Ohio... so there's that, but addressing your "Baltimore Browns" question... while my initial reaction was to flatly say, "No," honestly... I'm not sure.

    I certainly could not see myself either road-tripping to attend games in Baltimore or spend hours each week on the "BaltimoreBrownsBoard". Most likely I'd have followed the Oilers, who I'd also lose, then the Texans. I am sure I'd have looked in on "the BLT Browns" out of curiosity... especially in their first SB year. Their 2000 win was already bitter enough as "the Ravens", but had they been the Browns???

    Ever heard of the five stages of grief? All I am saying is once the initial hurt of an intrastate move is over, and it will/would hurt, there will be some fans who attend games and wish they had their burned memorabilia back.

  • If the Browns had remained the Baltimore Browns, like originally intended. I would have quit watching the game period.

  • I wouldn't want to follow the Columbus Browns, it would just suck to not have a team, and/or have to find a new team. It just doesn't "feel" right.

  • If the Browns had remained the Baltimore Browns, like originally intended. I would have quit watching the game period.

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    If the Browns had remained the Baltimore Browns, like originally intended. I would have quit watching the game period.

    If the Browns had in fact moved to Baltimore (They never moved people), A. they would have changed there name likely/appropriately and B. they could have all died in a plane crash as far as I am concerned.

    C. We would have had the Cleveland Bulldogs expansion team here. Probably not doing any better than the Browns have since.

  • I wouldn't want to follow the Columbus Browns, it would just suck to not have a team, and/or have to find a new team. It just doesn't "feel" right.

    @wargograw said:

    I wouldn't want to follow the Columbus Browns, it would just suck to not have a team, and/or have to find a new team. It just doesn't "feel" right.

    Plus the "new BROWNS" here kind of like "new Coke" never really made it...but our Brownies are still on life support if only in name only.

    Why?

    1. The NFL slightly changed the new franchise draft rules after the super immediate success of CAR and JAX.

    2. The BROWNS never had a real good FO, ever since returning from the dead.