NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[Still MIGHTY]

Ugh... Please not the Raiders. I don't want anything to do with that.

[STL FANATIC]

The NFL would still prefer the Raiders move to Santa Clara, but that doesn't look like it's in the Raiders cards. Would Industry be a tempting target for the Rams as an additional team?

Still seems unlikely to me that Kroenke would pay a hefty relocation fee to move into a venue that he doesn't own, but if a stadium plan actually makes headway in LA, it'd be impossible to write it off entirely.

[Gothamite]

Given what such a move would do to his income stream (especially the kinds of revenue not subject to sharing), I'd still call it a realistic possibility. Not to mention the overall value of the franchise, although I don't think that's a primary consideration.

The Raiders thing is interesting. I've long said that the Rams are the only team that can be second into LA, but the Raiders could be as well. Don't think the Raiders are the first choice, or even fifth choice, of the league or city government, but maybe at this point they'll take what they can get. Then it's a race to be second.

[STL FANATIC]

No doubt there's extra revenue to be made in LA. I also admit to not knowing all that Roski is offering in the profits that could/would be made off of stadium concessions and parking and such, and what Roski would be charging in rent.

But Kroenke is a developer. It's how he makes his living. So if he has the opportunity to build his own stadium as part of a larger development somewhere in St. Louis (this is still yet to be seen, but it's often mentioned as a possibility in a handful of specific spots), that just seems more in line with his manner of operating.

On the other hand, maybe Roski is will to hand over some land surrounding his stadium to be developed. I really don't know.

Like I said, if the LA plan(s) swing back around to the point where they seem ready to go, I'm not going to write it off as unrealistic.

Not relative to this specific strand of the discussion, but to the topic as a whole, Bryan Burwell of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch had some notes/thoughts on the situation in a video clip posted on STLtoday.com yesterday.

Burwell says he's not remotely surprised that the negotiations have been turned over to the governor and that he in fact wrote last year (I don't recall, but I also don't doubt) that something like this would play out. He says he had a source in/near the government that described the negotiations with the CVC as little more than a preseason game. A bunch of players who would have no real role in the final outcome, but had to play out the process to get to the meaningful part.

Burwell also reports that Governor Jay Nixon has already retained the services of an investment banking firm from New York "that is very familiar with the process of getting stadium financing". Then Burwell states (in an informed speculative manner) that there will be public financing but it won't be to the degree of what was required if the arbitration had been accepted.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bryan-burwell/

(Rams talk starts at 2:07.)

[bosrs1]

Given what such a move would do to his income stream (especially the kinds of revenue not subject to sharing), I'd still call it a realistic possibility. Not to mention the overall value of the franchise, although I don't think that's a primary consideration.

The Raiders thing is interesting. I've long said that the Rams are the only team that can be second into LA, but the Raiders could be as well. Don't think the Raiders are the first choice, or even fifth choice, of the league or city government, but maybe at this point they'll take what they can get. Then it's a race to be second.

Well this is the Raiders we're talking about. Historically they don't give a rats ass what the NFL thinks. And the LA city government has no input on what goes on out at the Industry site. So the Raiders very well could end up as No. 1 out there in what would frankly be a shocking twist given what was going on down in LA two years ago.

[rams80]

Historically Al Davis didn't give a rats ass what the NFL thought. I'm not sure his spawn is cut from the same cloth.

[bosrs1]

Historically Al Davis didn't give a rats ass what the NFL thought. I'm not sure his spawn is cut from the same cloth.

So far he's been running the Raiders just like Al did. With reckless abandon and no regard for what any of his moves do to his team or the fan base. Seems like he's cut from the same cloth other than the pumpkin pie haircut freak thing he's got goin on.

[rams80]

Historically Al Davis didn't give a rats ass what the NFL thought. I'm not sure his spawn is cut from the same cloth.

So far he's been running the Raiders just like Al did. With reckless abandon and no regard for what any of his moves do to his team or the fan base. Seems like he's cut from the same cloth other than the pumpkin pie haircut freak thing he's got goin on.

Never ascribe to malice what could be ascribed to incompetence. IIRC Al never really groomed Mark to actually run the team. And anyway running your team into the ground out of your own stupidity is one thing. Actively antagonizing the Commissioner is another.

[Gothamite]

Agreed. Does Davis fils have his father's contempt for the NFL brass, or just his father's recent inability to manage the club? We may find out.

And I spoke imprecisely - while the Industry site is outside the LA city limits, it is still within Los Angeles County. So local government may still have an opinion on the Raiders.

[Mac the Knife]

I don't go to games anymore because the pacing of games is so bad. The TV Timeouts just kill any sense of momentum from the stands.

The NFL is a victim of its own success; they worked so hard to create a product optimized for television that the product suffers when watched in person.

And the first new group that realizes this well enough to somehow make a deal to have their marquee games broadcast on an HBO or Showtime? They'll expose that glaring weakness in the NFL's overall business model. Imagine an NFL game without television timeouts in the modern era - instead of a 3+ hour broadcast, it'd easily be whittled to under two, giving a league/premium TV outlet the opportunity to take professional football in some directions never even conceived before... just to bring the broadcast length up to 2 or 2 1/2 hours.

[FiddySicks]

Of every team that has potential to move, IMO the Raiders make the MOST sense. They already have a well established fan base there that's one of the biggest in the NFL, and of all teams with stadium issues, the Raiders are probably in the worst situation (and I think they'd be the easiest to move as well). Despite all of the Al Davis shenanigans in the past, getting the Raiders out of Oakland and the potential for profit that the Raiders have in the area makes too much sense for the NFL to just ignore.

[Gothamite]

I don't go to games anymore because the pacing of games is so bad. The TV Timeouts just kill any sense of momentum from the stands.

The NFL is a victim of its own success; they worked so hard to create a product optimized for television that the product suffers when watched in person.

And the first new group that realizes this well enough to somehow make a deal to have their marquee games broadcast on an HBO or Showtime? They'll expose that glaring weakness in the NFL's overall business model. Imagine an NFL game without television timeouts in the modern era - instead of a 3+ hour broadcast, it'd easily be whittled to under two, giving a league/premium TV outlet the opportunity to take professional football in some directions never even conceived before... just to bring the broadcast length up to 2 or 2 1/2 hours.

Never going to happen. The strength in the NFL's business model is in the portability of its games. They can trade them, swap them out, flex the schedule and substitute local games for national ones. The games all have to be of approximate length for that to work.

Maybe the NFL as a whole could sell a Tuesday Night Football to HBO (although I'd settle for AppleTV) and we could have an isolated game played at the proper speed. But no one group could do that, new or otherwise.

[bosrs1]

Of every team that has potential to move, IMO the Raiders make the MOST sense. They already have a well established fan base there that's one of the biggest in the NFL, and of all teams with stadium issues, the Raiders are probably in the worst situation (and I think they'd be the easiest to move as well). Despite all of the Al Davis shenanigans in the past, getting the Raiders out of Oakland and the potential for profit that the Raiders have in the area makes too much sense for the NFL to just ignore.

Agreed. And of all the owners, the Raiders are the most desperate. Kroenke could make a go of it in Saint Louis, he's not poor by any stretch and just wants public money to pump up his bottom line and offset some of his costs. And he's still not sure Saint Louis won't do that for him. The Chargers, while desireing a new stadium still don't sound like they've given up on San Diego, and the leadership in SD similarly doesn't sound like they've given up on the Chargers either. And other than the scoreboards, Qualcomm Stadium may be old but replacement of it isn't urgent unlike say the leaking Oakland Coliseum.

But with the Raiders, Oakland is broke and had to cancel putting new scoreboards into the existing Coliseum just to fund an EIR at the Coliseum site for a future stadium. And their EIR conclusion appears to be at minumum almost a billion dollars for JUST the NFL stadium (to say nothing of costs for their efforts to try and save their other two teams from moving away). And unlike Kroenke, Mark Davis isn't independently wealthy and needs someone like Roski to buy into the Raiders to offset the approaching inheritance tax payments he'll owe when his mother kicks the bucket in the next few years in addition to building him a new stadium. It goes without saying he doesn't have any significant assets to bring to bear himself to privately build a 1 billion dollar stadium. Additionally Oakland doesn't have a PSL, corporate or season ticket base to speak of which means that traditional funding avenue is out. Cut away G4 which appears to have run dry after Atlanta and there's just no way to fund a new stadium in Oakland despite how much the city may crow about such a notion. Which leaves only being team one with Roski in LA or paying rent indefinitely to the Niners in Santa Clara and cementing themselves as the "other" team in the south bay (not unlike the Jets long tenure as second fiddle in Giants Stadium). And Santa Clara still doesn't solve his inheritance issue or the long term home problem for the Raiders.

[DustDevil61]

Of every team that has potential to move, IMO the Raiders make the MOST sense. They already have a well established fan base there that's one of the biggest in the NFL, and of all teams with stadium issues, the Raiders are probably in the worst situation (and I think they'd be the easiest to move as well). Despite all of the Al Davis shenanigans in the past, getting the Raiders out of Oakland and the potential for profit that the Raiders have in the area makes too much sense for the NFL to just ignore.

Agreed. And of all the owners, the Raiders are the most desperate. Kroenke could make a go of it in Saint Louis, he's not poor by any stretch and just wants public money to pump up his bottom line and offset some of his costs. And he's still not sure Saint Louis won't do that for him. The Chargers, while desireing a new stadium still don't sound like they've given up on San Diego, and the leadership in SD similarly doesn't sound like they've given up on the Chargers either. And other than the scoreboards, Qualcomm Stadium may be old but replacement of it isn't urgent unlike say the leaking Oakland Coliseum.

But with the Raiders, Oakland is broke and had to cancel putting new scoreboards into the existing Coliseum just to fund an EIR at the Coliseum site for a future stadium. And their EIR conclusion appears to be at minumum almost a billion dollars for JUST the NFL stadium (to say nothing of costs for their efforts to try and save their other two teams from moving away). And unlike Kroenke, Mark Davis isn't independently wealthy and needs someone like Roski to buy into the Raiders to offset the approaching inheritance tax payments he'll owe when his mother kicks the bucket in the next few years in addition to building him a new stadium. It goes without saying he doesn't have any significant assets to bring to bear himself to privately build a 1 billion dollar stadium. Additionally Oakland doesn't have a PSL, corporate or season ticket base to speak of which means that traditional funding avenue is out. Cut away G4 which appears to have run dry after Atlanta and there's just no way to fund a new stadium in Oakland despite how much the city may crow about such a notion. Which leaves only being team one with Roski in LA or paying rent indefinitely to the Niners in Santa Clara and cementing themselves as the "other" team in the south bay (not unlike the Jets long tenure as second fiddle in Giants Stadium). And Santa Clara still doesn't solve his inheritance issue or the long term home problem for the Raiders.

I can't say that I disagree here. The only real viable options for the Raiders right now are moving in with the 49ers in Santa Clara or moving south (again). As has been stated, neither the Davises or G4 have the funds for the Raiders to even renovate the Oakland Coliseum, let alone build an entirely new stadium. If they move into Levi's Stadium, they will have pay rent to be the 49ers' second banana. If Roski buys into the team and they move (back) to L.A., then they have the #2 market all to themselves for at least a year* or so and the Davises get an infusion of cash.

Now, it's a matter of seeing how serious talks get between Ed Roski and Mark Davis, and how serious the NFL actually wants to get back to Los Angeles as opposed to using it as leverage from cities in which its teams currently reside.

*Assuming that the chips fall just right for both the Raiders to move as soon as next offseason and that Team #2 arrives around 2015, 2016-ish.

[STL FANATIC]

Governor Nixon was asked in public about the Rams situation for the first time since it was reported he was leading the negotiations. He admittedly evaded the question for the most part, but here's the little bit of take away that there is from it.

• Kroenke and Nixon both know each other as far back as their days at Mizzou. (Not sure they were "friends" but they certainly seemed to be familiar with each other.)

• Nixon apparently hasn't had dialogue with Kroenke since last year, but he does feel like he has open communication with him and is certainly open to talking whenever Kroenke is.

• Kroenke has yet to express in any formal manner what he wants to do, so Nixon has essentially put the ball in his court to do so.

• Nixon appreciates the Rams and what they mean to the public and the state. He is open about the sort of state funds available and at least publicly is making it known he intends to be responsible with them.

Really not much of anything there, but as always I'll keep everyone posted when there is any sort of development on the matter.

[Gothamite]

I have no doubt that the governor would love to keep the Rams (or at the very least not be the Gov who lets them get away). I also have no doubt that he'd be willing to open the state coffers.

I do doubt whether there's enough in those coffers to pay for his aspirations. We'll see. I also doubt whether the taxpayers will let him, especially after their "Screw St. Louis!" tax fit a couple years back.

[theSLVRBCK]

And the Jaguars/London nonsense thickens ... sigh. LINK

I still don't think this is any kind of indication that there is a NFL forthcoming full time in London as I just can not see ti working on a full time basis, wheter it be the Jaguars, the Bills, or even an expansion franchise.

My interest int his comes on the homefront, where Khan has purchased a large chunk of real estate on the riverbank that he wants to develop in an unknown capacity. There are heavy rumors circulating of interest in Jacksonville bringing a pro level soccer club to the city. With Khan having a heavy hand in the premier league, I think this further expands on that idea that Khan may play a part in eventually securing a MLS team for Jacksonville.

[Gothamite]

MLS? Won't happen. They're set right now with the new NYC club.

The NASL, on the other hand, is very possible.

[bosrs1]

And the Jaguars/London nonsense thickens ... sigh. LINK

I still don't think this is any kind of indication that there is a NFL forthcoming full time in London as I just can not see ti working on a full time basis, wheter it be the Jaguars, the Bills, or even an expansion franchise.

My interest int his comes on the homefront, where Khan has purchased a large chunk of real estate on the riverbank that he wants to develop in an unknown capacity. There are heavy rumors circulating of interest in Jacksonville bringing a pro level soccer club to the city. With Khan having a heavy hand in the premier league, I think this further expands on that idea that Khan may play a part in eventually securing a MLS team for Jacksonville.

Bleacher Report could tell me the sky is blue and I wouldn't believe them. That site is less credible than my dead grandfather is when it comes to up to sporting information.

[rams80]

And the Jaguars/London nonsense thickens ... sigh. LINK

I still don't think this is any kind of indication that there is a NFL forthcoming full time in London as I just can not see ti working on a full time basis, wheter it be the Jaguars, the Bills, or even an expansion franchise.

My interest int his comes on the homefront, where Khan has purchased a large chunk of real estate on the riverbank that he wants to develop in an unknown capacity. There are heavy rumors circulating of interest in Jacksonville bringing a pro level soccer club to the city. With Khan having a heavy hand in the premier league, I think this further expands on that idea that Khan may play a part in eventually securing a MLS team for Jacksonville.

Bleacher Report could tell me the sky is blue and I wouldn't believe them. That site is less credible than my dead grandfather is when it comes to up to sporting information.

Is the Daily Mail a credible enough source for you?