Of Course it's about Control

by Paragon SC on Nov 30, 2007 10:16 AM PST in USC Football Comment 7 comments

You knew this was coming.

Some Coliseum Commission members have reportedly received death threats in regards to the handling of this whole mess. Now I'm not naive but with USC going on the offensive it would not surprise that some stories would come out alleging that there have been death threats. The coliseum Commission is in a bad spot here and they know it. Their insistence on retaining control of the Coliseum in the hopes of the NFL bringing a team there shows just how out of touch and behind the times they are.

Like it or not Mike Garrett was right to go on the offensive, he is in a position of strength and he wants to get a deal done. The Commission members are nothing but professional politicians who, regardless of party affiliation, would say or do anything in order to keep control of the Coliseum. You can't prove a negative so you will understand if I am a little bit skeptical of the alleged threats.

A Coliseum Commission executive said his office received scores of "incredibly threatening" phone calls after USC posted a letter on its website urging fans to complain.

Some of the commission's nine members said they had been harassed too, and at least one has canceled plans to attend the regular-season finale against UCLA on Saturday.

"I've gotten many, many calls along the following lines: 'Hey, Mr. Chadwick, hope our paths don't cross. Understand you're married, you've got three little girls,' " Commissioner Bill Chadwick said.

"That's taking it to a low, low level," he said. "When you send something out to your entire alumni, don't expect every response to be rational."

I am sure that there have been some disparaging comments made, I would agree that every fan base has its loon's so it wouldn't surprise me if a few nasty things were said but I doubt it was "scores" of threats made.

This deal needs to get done and the longer it takes the nastier it will get. The mayor understands the urgency, as does the governor. Its money in the kitty, today, so they should get the deal done.

DC Trojan said it best:

USC, after all, is the oldest tenant of the Coliseum; indeed their agreement to play football there was one of the contributing reasons for the construction of the stadium. It is also appropriate that USC - the main tenant and a private entity - pick up the tab for renovations, rather than holding hostage the taxpayers of Los Angeles or indeed the state of California.

The aforementioned article also points out that the Commission has been making promises that it fulfill, essentially Writing check their body can't cash.

Money is a thread that runs through other disagreements between the stadium and the university next-door.

As recently as last fall, USC administrators said they were happy with the stadium. But then they commissioned a private study that determined the Coliseum needed extensive renovations.

Commissioners say they have already done some work and have plans for more upgrades, including an overhaul of the giant video board.

Dickey said: "We've been hearing that for 10 years. 'We're going to build this, we're going to build that.' The problem is, they just don't have the money."

The commission hopes to fund additional improvements by selling naming rights to the stadium, but that has led to yet another dispute.

Not surprising. Again these are professional political operatives and they spend money faster than they can get it. SC is not interested in putting its own money up for nickel and dime upgrades and not have a say in how the place is run.

The other interesting thing here is the naming right's. I am not a big fan of it especially when it comes to removing the names of historic figures or historic places. Being a closet Washington Redskins fan I wan never more disappointed when little Danny Snyder changed the name of Jack Kent Cooke Stadium to Fed Ex Field. Say what you want about The Squire but he did more for DC and the NFL than little Danny ever will.

Last month, the commission and USC met with a sports marketing group that estimated the Coliseum could attract $4 million to $6 million a year from a naming sponsor.

University administrators say that estimate was dependent on allowing the sponsor to use USC's name and mark, which the school does not want. Lynch disagreed with this assessment.

Changing the name of the Coliseum for some two-bit corporate sponsor that will attempt to latch on to USC's name just cheapens the whole process.

These are so out of touch its just ridiculous. I have hard time seeing how the commission comes out on top when they can't even live up to the basic promises that they have made.

And they wonder why the fans go nuts.

0 recs | Comment 7 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

AAARGH.

Why oh why are there always some dumb fucks who can't understand where to draw the line!?!?!

I think Chadwick's an idiot - but no-one, not one person, deserves to receive threats like that. Who the fuck would even make a call like that?

It's too bad that these assholes won't be identified because they should be banned from SC games. You want to support the team? Here's a fucking suggestion: don't threaten children!

by DC Trojan on Nov 30, 2007 11:03 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Pathetic politicians

These are obviously not the first death threats that these people have received (if they actually received any at all). Their names are in the papers everyday, and every single public issue has some small set of nutcases who will make threatening calls. The vast majority are of no actual threat, and I'm sure that City Hall has a standard process that is followed whenever any are received.

Commenting on the few threatening calls they might be getting is a pathetic attempt to demonize Mike Garrett and the USC side of the issue. They are trying to deflect attention from the scores of angry but rational calls that they're getting. If they actually had a reasonable counterargument to Garrett's mail, that's what they would be talking about.

by bwren on Nov 30, 2007 12:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Hmph

I don't cope well with the notion that anyone
might threaten children - could you tell? - but it hadn't crossed my mind that commission members might stoop to lying about it. It's a sad state of affairs that now that you've mentioned it, I wouldn't have a hard time believing it.

by DC Trojan on Nov 30, 2007 12:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Might not technically be lying

Maybe they receive 2 death threats and 200 rational calls. They mentioned the freaks and don't mention the rest. To a politician, that's telling the truth.

by bwren on Nov 30, 2007 12:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd love to see that hate mail that Dorrell gets

There's dumbasses in everyones camp. We have our share. People have strong feelings about the Coliseum, the commission needs to know that there will be a lot of angry alumni and students if the Trojans move, but there's no excuse for crossing the line and making threats to a man and his family over a football stadium.

by frak on Nov 30, 2007 12:24 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

asymptotes

You're right of course, there's always going to be a lunatic fringe. A pox on them, to get old school about it.

by DC Trojan on Nov 30, 2007 1:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I hate politicians

That's probably evident by the fact that I've all of a sudden become a verbose contributer to the blog here, but I do have some more comments....

The insinuation that Mike Garrett should not have gone public with this fight is beyond insulting. The politicians would prefer that everything stay in the back rooms and students and alumni could just be left scratching their heads in wonder as they boarded the bus bound for Pasadena.

The students and alumni should be given the details of the argument because we are the powerless victims in this whole mess. We're the ones that spend money for our season tickets, buy concessions at the Coliseum, spend money around the stadium prior to games, and pay taxes in the city of Los Angeles! We need to be given the information and the opportunity to have our voice heard.

There are comments in that article about concern that USC would give precedence to our own events over events of more "broad community appeal". The university isn't stupid. If there's a chance to hold a soccer game, they're going to take that revenue rather than let the place sit empty for an evening. Without USC football, there are no events anyway. The Coliseum is not financially viable from the few non-USC events that are held there every year. No corporation is going to pay to put their name on the side if USC is playing there. If they can't pay for improvements now, how are they going to pay for them with USC playing at the Rose Bowl. Within two years, it will be condemned - a giant embarrassing eyesore behind a chain link fence.

Whenever one side in a negotiation goes public with full disclosure, they typically have the upper hand and know it. USC's formal proposal is on the internet for anyone to read. This keeps the politicians from lying about it. When the opportunity to lie is taken away from a politician, they lose every time.

by bwren on Nov 30, 2007 2:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs