Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dimitri Dorlis's avatar

On the record, I said UCLA was going to move no matter what the contract said (because contracts are just words on paper and can be broken for the right price) so it was good to see I was right I guess.

Expand full comment
Tamara's avatar
1hEdited

Reposting my comment from the other post, with a few edits...

It seems to be 💯 BS (I know that's not becoming 🤣) but 💯 BS it is, that UCLA cannot afford to buyout the slimiest Donut Head in the Universe, Jelly 2.0.

I know I am reiterating but the billion dollar question needs emphasis:

How in the hell will UCLA buyout the Rose Bowl lease at $60-$80 million... yes, $60-$80 million, and this deal is close to being done? What a cluster!

Add to that cool $60-$80 million, the financial damages that UCLA will likely be required to pay the Rose Bowl from the law suit, and of course this deal makes perfect sense.

And Inglewood is so much nicer than Pasadena 😠

Exactly what Joe said.. save a few miles, but not any time with traffic snarls, picnic on pavement on ONE parking lot - that will be fun in the heat, and then sit in a sterile corporatized stadium that has NO history, NO legacy, NOTHING connected to UCLA.

And Blockhead 2.0 is backing this??? Is this his idea of making Football profitable? If so, we are doomed.

If true, UCLA, it's Donut Head, Donut Holes, Blockhead and Block Holes will have officially burned our greatness to the ground.

What's next, Basketball moving to Intuit?

And yes again, this deal will not resolve attendence problems, it will make them worse! The problem is not the Rose Bowl, it's whose running Morgan and Murphy!!!

I am beyond SMDH 😡

Expand full comment
11 more comments...

No posts