Jump to content
Willie Cee

Shovels In The Dirt - New Aztec Stadium

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Aztec Since 88 said:

No the the Q is still upright  but barely.  We need to play there until the new stadium is ready.

 

 

Covid is a blessing.

Six fewer games in that dump 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2020 at 7:08 AM, SDSU-Alum2003 said:

35K but can flex to 40K. Can be expanded to 55K if needed in the future. 

Perfect size!  This is going to be a very nice stadium for local fans and the full stadium will be quite the experience for fans, television, and players.  Looking forward to the first roadie to San Diego post Covid!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Koji Vu said:

They read this forum! Haters gonna hate.

Probably the twitter folks like Brandon, Greg Parks, Zee, WomanTalkingSoccer and the other SuckerCity-paid folks, as well as some Charger fans, and of course, RetiredAztec and SDSUFan.  Most have magically stopped talking after this past week.  :banana:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Probably the twitter folks like Brandon, Greg Parks, Zee, WomanTalkingSoccer and the other SuckerCity-paid folks, as well as some Charger fans, and of course, RetiredAztec and SDSUFan.  Most have magically stopped talking after this past week.  :banana:

I see we've ran into the same knuckleheads.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Probably the twitter folks like Brandon, Greg Parks, Zee, WomanTalkingSoccer and the other SuckerCity-paid folks, as well as some Charger fans, and of course, RetiredAztec and SDSUFan.  Most have magically stopped talking after this past week.  :banana:

 

The decision was a no-brainer.  The University itself or some greedy private investors.  I voted for SDSU west.

  • Cheers 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jdgaucho said:

 

The decision was a no-brainer.  The University itself or some greedy private investors.  I voted for SDSU west.

How do you feel about the Sports Arena plans out now? SDLoyal trying to get a stop gap stadium seems like a waste. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AztecSU said:

How do you feel about the Sports Arena plans out now? SDLoyal trying to get a stop gap stadium seems like a waste. 

 

I've only heard about it, the most basic goal - to draw an NHL or NBA franchise.  

Not a fan.  Pacific Beach and Mission Beach are crowded enough as is.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2020 at 9:58 AM, East Coast Aztec said:

Probably the twitter folks like Brandon, Greg Parks, Zee, WomanTalkingSoccer and the other SuckerCity-paid folks, as well as some Charger fans, and of course, RetiredAztec and SDSUFan.  Most have magically stopped talking after this past week.  :banana:

Yup. Feels so good to tell those losers to suck it! Can’t wait for 2022! Go Aztecs!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2020 at 12:37 PM, AztecSU said:

How do you feel about the Sports Arena plans out now? SDLoyal trying to get a stop gap stadium seems like a waste. 

Soccer City couldn’t have had worse timing. Not to mention they were arrogant enough to think they could win without the significant political power SDSU has in San Diego. Would have liked to see MLS at that site & a new arena for NHL/NBA & extra convention center space downtown. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SDSU-Alum2003 said:

Soccer City couldn’t have had worse timing. Not to mention they were arrogant enough to think they could win without the significant political power SDSU has in San Diego. Would have liked to see MLS at that site & a new arena for NHL/NBA & extra convention center space downtown. 

 

MLS is still a possibility, IF the Don and the other owners are okay with the new stadium's expanded capacity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2020 at 12:43 PM, jdgaucho said:

 

I've only heard about it, the most basic goal - to draw an NHL or NBA franchise.  

Not a fan.  Pacific Beach and Mission Beach are crowded enough as is.  

San Diego has had two NBA franchises (Rockets & Clippers) and one ABA franchise (Conquistadors). It's my hometown and I love it, but pro hoops hasn't drawn well here. I remember getting free Clippers tickets at McDonald's. The crowd was sparse and security didn't care when we moved down from the free seats on top to the lower section. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2020 at 12:33 PM, jdgaucho said:

 

The decision was a no-brainer.  The University itself or some greedy private investors.  I voted for SDSU west.

Nonsense.  The choice was between "greedy"private investors AND SDSU or "greedy" private investors AND an MLS ownership group which, until the 11th hour was working with SDSU to build a shared stadium which would have had SDSU playing in it for roughly a $10 million dollar up front investment.

SDSU West is a chimera.  It doesn't exist except in the minds of those who support a public university going in debt for $500,000,000 dollars for a football stadium. The rest is hotels,retail, office space, and apartments.

There will NEVER be an additional 15,000 students and actual classrooms were never part of even the blatantly dishonest pitch the school used to get their way.  That number is the expected expansion of CSU system over the next twenty years.

 

  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, SDSUfan said:

Nonsense.  The choice was between "greedy"private investors AND SDSU or "greedy" private investors AND an MLS ownership group which, until the 11th hour was working with SDSU to build a shared stadium which would have SDSU playing in it for roughly a $10 million dollar up front investment.

SDSU West is a chimera.  It doesn't exist except in the minds of those who support a public university going in debt for $500,000,000 dollars for a football stadium. The rest is hotels,retail, office space, and apartments.

There will NEVER be an additional 15,000 students.  That number in the expected expansion of CSU system expansion of the next twenty years.

 

LOL. SDSU is NOT on the level of the MLS team. 

The difference between Soccer City and SDSU West was (besides the fact that SDSU is building a better, larger, and more expensive stadium than Soccer City proposed), were:
1) SDSU, not a private equity firm (and not "private investors"), will control what happens on the site, and
2) The overall revenues from this development will flow to SDSU and NOT a members of a private equity firm and their heirs. 


The naysayers have been wrong throughout the entire process. I'm pretty certain you'll be wrong with your current prognostications here, too. 

In fact, I'm reading an article right now that says overall CSU enrollment is expected to increase by 43,000 over the next 15 years.
https://edsource.org/2020/cost-of-a-new-csu-campus-doesnt-justify-enrollment-growth/636900




 

  • Like 2
  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Koji Vu said:

LOL. SDSU is NOT on the level of the MLS team. 

The difference between Soccer City and SDSU West was (besides the fact that SDSU is building a better, larger, and more expensive stadium than Soccer City proposed), were:
1) SDSU, not a private equity firm (and not "private investors"), will control what happens on the site, and
2) The overall revenues from this development will flow to SDSU and NOT a members of a private equity firm and their heirs. 


The naysayers have been wrong throughout the entire process. I'm pretty certain you'll be wrong with your current prognostications here, too. 

In fact, I'm reading an article right now that says overall CSU enrollment is expected to increase by 43,000 over the next 15 years.
https://edsource.org/2020/cost-of-a-new-csu-campus-doesnt-justify-enrollment-growth/636900




 

Glad to hear that SDSU has managed to find a developer that will build out the site for free.

The reason there will never be a campus is that the revenues generated will be required to service the debt and pay their public partners.

SDSU is now not only a university ,it is also in the land speculation business which if fine, I guess, if you think the government should be competing with private industry, siphoning off profits from the local economy.

In the mean time, SDSU Incorporated (LLC?. ...How does a state institution incorporate? In Nevada?) will be in competition with this:

https://riverwalksd.com/

which contains 4000 housing units, retail and over 1 million sq feet of office space, known in SDSU West speak as "lab" space for the "tech hub" and is 2 miles west from SDSU West and within walking distance of Mission Bay

And there's also this, lest anyone should thing that SDSU will ever be anything close to an actual research university from which a thousand startups shall spring, each vying for precious "lab" space close to the center of innovation that is SDSU.

https://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/uc-san-diego-breaks-record-with-1.35b-in-research-funding

As to my assessment of growth, twenty years was not accurate.  Here's what the actual report says:

Assessment

Report Assumes 11 Regions for CSU Analysis. As the state has no formal set of regions that it consistently uses for CSU purposes, we explored various options, ultimately selecting a set of 11 regions already used by the state for various education programs. In our view, these regions provide one reasonable approach, though other regional breakdowns also could be reasonable.

Modest Enrollment Growth Projected Over Period. High school graduates are expected to increase modestly between 2016–17 and 2024–25. Based on this forecast, we project UC would enroll 11,000 more resident students (5 percent) in 2024–25 compared to 2016–17. For CSU, we project enrollment growth for eight of the eleven regions, with total growth of 15,000 resident students (4 percent) over the 2016–17 level.

Significant Capacity Available at UC and CSU. Whereas UC is projected to grow by 11,000 students between now and 2024–25, we estimate that it has capacity through existing and planned facilities to accommodate at least triple this number of students. Whereas CSU is projected to grow a total of 15,000 students, we estimate it could accommodate 92,000 in its existing facilities and another 139,000 students were the campuses to construct new facilities according to their long–range plans. We find that every CSU region could accommodate projected enrollment growth.

New Campus Not Warranted at this Time. Given UC and every CSU region could accommodate projected enrollment within existing campuses, we conclude that new campuses are not warranted at this time. Because both UC and CSU have capacity significantly beyond projected enrollment growth, new campuses likely would not be warranted even if the Legislature were to change its underlying assumptions. For example, even were the Legislature to expand freshman eligibility, new campuses likely would not be warranted in the near future.

Note that SDSU West was NOT part of the "long range plan" at the time of this study.  It is excess and those that chose to LIE to the public about this simpe, salient fact knew damn good and well they were lying.

https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3532

 

All of this aside.  I'm simply trying to set the record straight.  SDSU Inc and its partner developers won so it is incumbent upon the university to realize their plan, in a manner sufficiently timely such that we are not stuck with a moribund site containing demolished stadium, a river park and a stadium separated by by weed strewn, vacant construction pads for a decade while SDSU Inc and its partners wait for market conditions to turn in their favor.

So in that sense: GO SDSU West!

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Idiot 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Koji Vu said:

LOL. SDSU is NOT on the level of the MLS team. 

The difference between Soccer City and SDSU West was (besides the fact that SDSU is building a better, larger, and more expensive stadium than Soccer City proposed), were:
1) SDSU, not a private equity firm (and not "private investors"), will control what happens on the site, and
2) The overall revenues from this development will flow to SDSU and NOT a members of a private equity firm and their heirs. 


The naysayers have been wrong throughout the entire process. I'm pretty certain you'll be wrong with your current prognostications here, too. 

In fact, I'm reading an article right now that says overall CSU enrollment is expected to increase by 43,000 over the next 15 years.
https://edsource.org/2020/cost-of-a-new-csu-campus-doesnt-justify-enrollment-growth/636900




 

You would think they'd learn

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SDSUfan said:

All of this aside.  I'm simply trying to set the record straight.  SDSU Inc and its partner developers won so it is incumbent upon the university to realize their plan, in a manner sufficiently timely such that we are not stuck with a moribund site containing demolished stadium, a river park and a stadium separated by by weed strewn, vacant construction pads for a decade while SDSU Inc and its partners wait for market conditions to turn in their favor.

So in that sense: GO SDSU West!

Good news for SDSU is that housing is definitely in short supply. The portion of the land you're concerned about is the gray-colored buildings. image.png.df47090f741842d927a200c1e065e6d4.png

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...