Yep, SF Investors have the exclusive rights to MLS in SD. That's what keeps getting glossed over by other groups claiming they'll bring MLS too if their group is chosen instead. Plus it ignores the reality that MLS bids were already submitted, and theirs weren't among them.
Well FS has got more than the minimum number of signatures and then some so far from what I was told at the USMNT viewing party downtown. They were at approximately 100,000 already and still gathering. So looks like it will be going before the council as expected with no issue there.
GoalSD got 108'000 signatures within 12 days! This should be more than enough votes with plenty of time to spare, which is a good sign and shows broader public support.
I think they'll get the required signatures but I hate when I read things like this: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/chargers/sd-me-soccercity-20170327-story.html
You know, I don't see what the objections are. The plan is for a half SDSU/half soccer stadium. If SDSU doesn't want it, that's not FS's problem. But their plan does legitimately call for a soccer stadium and it is a stadium for SDSU, nothing disingenuous about saying that. Also nothing wrong with signature gatherers highlighting the stadium over the rest of the development. I mean I agree I don't like it when signature drives are disingenuous like when the Measure C guys were saying Comic-Con supported them last year on the "Convadium". But I don't see this as that.
My bad..I also forgot to link a tweet Zeigler posted. Said a signature gatherer said that SDSU endorsed the plan AND that it would reduce MV traffic.
You shouldn't hate it. This means that SDSU is so desperate that they will send their basketball and football writer out to create a piece of garbage like this. It's so transparent.
Yeah I think there is a bit of desperation on their part. I mean Stone was on 1090 this morning and highlighted a good point about SDSU's ill advised going it alone idea... they'd not only be on the hook for the stadium (approx $150 by SDSUs estimate) but demo, site prep (which will be tens of millions on its own since the site is partially in the flood plain right now), and 100% of the stadium maintenance down the road. FS in their plan is taking care of demo of the Q, site prep, would take $50 mil of SDSU's cost on the stadium off their plate and would take care of 50% of the stadium maintenance for at least 30 years.
My point was about the signature gatherers being untruthful. The plan has merit on its own that they don't need to lie.
Well the vast majority aren't. The media is just looking for the few bad eggs to stir the pot. Besides, proportionally they've already got approx 110,000 signatures. Even if a sizable percentage of them are wrongly collected, the majority will still be good.
Yeah about half the "falsehoods" mentioned put it in a worse light than the truth would have. If all the unattributed quotes were really made, it just points more to their lack of understanding of the project. I wouldn't assume a marginally employed signature gatherer to be well-informed or even well-educated, especially on such a complex financial and political issue. Citizens are responsible for informing themselves about what they sign.
All and all probably not a bad move. It takes away the attack that this whole thing is a "backroom deal" being rushed through the council. Still going to be tricky this is San Diego, but FS has been doing a great job so far so I think they have a better than 50/50 of getting it passed. And obviously the MLS statement is comforting. Guessing there were assurances made around the Franchise fee.
Yeah with them being able to get over 120,000 signatures in a little over two weeks does bode well for the vote. Remember special elections usually only get out those motivated to vote. So the odds are always up for those putting forth the item for vote anyway. And with the level of support Soccer City is getting I like their chances. And it effectively neuters most of those that were countering them whose main objection was that it wasn't being put to a vote. The only other real opposition is SDSU. And if Soccer City can keep up the pressure on them, they'll have to see which way the wind is blowing and cut a deal with FS.
Here's a sampling of what people on the ground are saying about MLSinSD https://www.soccernation.com/mls-to...local-members-of-the-soccer-scene-had-to-say/
Yep, this is why I'm still bullish on SD even with it going to a vote. The only real opposition left is the Aztecs. And their opposition is predicated on them believing the city would just gift the Qualcomm site to them. Which was never going to happen. They were going to have to pay market value for it and then fund their own stadium (neither of which they're financially able to do). I think ultimately they'll have to negotiate with FS and take what they can get. Beggars can't be choosers. And if this level of support keeps up for the Soccer City plan it'll either be work with them now, or get whatever FS decides to give you later.
Yea I think both sides are playing chicken so to speak and seeing who blinks first..unfortunately SDSU doesn't hold as many cards as they think.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...an-carlos-rodrguez-soccercity-0425-story.html “It’s not only an MLS team,” Juan Carlos Rodriguez said in a recent interview. “This is way bigger than MLS. … We really want to make the biggest thing that has ever happened to (San Diego).” Rodriguez is president of Univision Deportes, which holds the rights to Spanish-language MLS telecasts in the U.S. It also has those rights for Liga MX, the national teams of the United States and Mexico, Copa America and the Gold Cup. He joined the FS Investors group pushing SoccerCity after being convinced not only of the viability of MLS in the market but the capacity for San Diego to become an epicenter for international soccer – with national teams and clubs from around the world spending extended time training in San Diego each year, bringing media and fans with them.
Look for more of this in the coming months. They're going to be pushing the value of the project beyond just MLS hard. And with good reason, MLS is only a small part of the project.
So, if MLS has a choice between a handful of candidates with proper SSS plans and San Diego with a Whitecaps part deux set up, does San Diego get in? I'm sure the Soccer City people won't care either way as long as they get the entitlement. I would love a SD team. But if I were an MLS strategist, Id be weary of this group with a 35K+ venue being awarded a franchise. The league doesn't need SD for footprint, this stadium will be bad for the league's presentation and I have a hunch this group looks like they'd be crappy MLS owners
Rowdies and Republic have stadium plans, anyone else? And Atlanta's huge dome didn't hinder their cause, although I agree with you that these FS investors might not make the best MLS owners. Period of silence to me means that there is negotiating going on behind the scenes. If SDSU is on board this thing gets a lot stronger. Juan Carlos Rodriguez, on the other hand, is someone Don Garber wants to continue to invest with.
Plus Phoenix Detroit San Antonio Carolina, Indianapolis and St Louis (not sure if they're trying to regroup after their vote loss) also have bids with proposed stadiums.