duma

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

Recommended Posts

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24779844

Raiders seem to be making a push to start the discussion as soon as this month on making a move to LA.

Did the story change? I don't see the Raiders named as the one making the push here. This has the Rams on equal footing again.

That link led me to this one:

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24769105/nfl-in-los-angeles-owners-league-officials-talking-about-relocation

... with this thrown at the end:

Many team and league officials say that if not by 2015, then by 2016 there will be a team or teams playing in the Rose Bowl on an interim basis while a new stadium is under construction.

So it's the Rose Bowl now? And letting 2016 get out there won't help keep the pressure on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's been the Rose Bowl for a while now due to USC's control of the L.A. Coliseum.

Did the story change? I don't see the Raiders named as the one making the push here. This has the Rams on equal footing again.

You have to adjust for bosrs1 wanting the glorious Oakland Raiders to move away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the Rose Bowl is almost certainly going to be the temporary venue; they want it, enough to re-negotiate with the city to be allowed to host extra events every year.

And as for that article; nothing new there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also has some bad news for the Chargers:

by definition, that no club has rights to more than a single home territory.

Spanos is going to have to learn to make it on San Diego alone.

Wait... I thought Milwaukee is officially considered Packers territory. We're definitely subjected to the same blackout rules even though Lambeau is more than 75 miles away.

Granted, the Packers have an infinitely stronger claim to Milwaukee than the Chargers do to LA, but still....

I could be completely wrong, but I think it has to do with broadcast area. If the Milwaukee stations' reach makes it into the Lambeau blackout zone, then those stations would have to be blacked out, even if the stations themselves are outside the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24779844

Raiders seem to be making a push to start the discussion as soon as this month on making a move to LA.

Did the story change? I don't see the Raiders named as the one making the push here. This has the Rams on equal footing again.

That link led me to this one:

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24769105/nfl-in-los-angeles-owners-league-officials-talking-about-relocation

... with this thrown at the end:

Many team and league officials say that if not by 2015, then by 2016 there will be a team or teams playing in the Rose Bowl on an interim basis while a new stadium is under construction.

So it's the Rose Bowl now? And letting 2016 get out there won't help keep the pressure on.

It was always the Rose Bowl. What stadium did you think they were going to be using as a temp venue?

Also apologies for the article not stating the Raiders part. That link was tweeted out by a Raiders beat writer who confirmed they're the team pushing for the league to discuss the relocation this month before the December owners meetings in the accompanying tweet. I'll see if I can dig the tweet up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's okay... that gives me the context. Thanks.

Yes, the Rose Bowl is the obvious temp choice, but I thought the buzz a couple weeks ago was Dodger Stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's okay... that gives me the context. Thanks.

Yes, the Rose Bowl is the obvious temp choice, but I thought the buzz a couple weeks ago was Dodger Stadium.

Dodger Stadium was mentioned but I don't think anyone is taking it as a serious consideration. It's not laid out properly for football and would be a terrible venue even on a short term basis. Rose Bowl has always been the frontrunner as a temp venue given Dodger's structural limitations and the Coliseum's ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also has some bad news for the Chargers:

by definition, that no club has rights to more than a single home territory.

Spanos is going to have to learn to make it on San Diego alone.

Wait... I thought Milwaukee is officially considered Packers territory. We're definitely subjected to the same blackout rules even though Lambeau is more than 75 miles away.

Granted, the Packers have an infinitely stronger claim to Milwaukee than the Chargers do to LA, but still....

NFL Constitution and Bylaws, Article IV, Section 1:

"Home Territory" with respect to any club means the city in which such club is located and for which it holds a franchise and plays its home games and includes the surrounding territory to the extent of 75 miles in every direction from the exterior corporate limits of such city, except as follows:

( a ) Whenever any two member clubs, other than the San Francisco 49ers and the Oakland raiders, are located and hold franchises for different cities within 100 miles of each other measured from the exterior corporate limits of such city, then the territorial rights of each of such clubs shall only extend to and include an area of one-half the distance between such cities.

( b ) The "Home Territory" of the Green Bay Packers shall extend to and include all of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, despite the fact that portions of such County are outside the 75 mile limits from the exterior corporate limits of the City of Green Bay.

The provision, obviously, is intended to keep a team out of Milwaukee so as to avoid undue competition with the Packers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. The Packers are grandfathered in all sorts of ways. No new team could get those waivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missouri Governor Jay Nixon will have a conference call tomorrow with reporters discussing the Rams stadium situation in St. Louis.

https://twitter.com/nwagoner/status/529771309291429888

The suggestions that we'd begin to hear more after the elections may have been spot on.

I'll remind myself to keep an eye on this tomorrow. I wonder if the urgency builds or Nixon stands back.

Edited by DustDevil61

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect him to say that they're "working on something" and that they hope things work out. No hard talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For more updates on the Missouri Governor's conference call tomorrow, check the twitter feed of Jim Thomas, the Rams beat writer for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

https://twitter.com/jthom1

Basically, no specifics are expected tomorrow, but he's expected to announce a commitment to keeping St. Louis an NFL city and potentially a formation of a committee or some kind. A specific proposal should come around the end of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think, at the very least, this locks the Rams into St. Louis in 2015, not that I was particularly worried about that in the first place. The NFL would have to totally change course to allow the Rams to move while STL/MO is showing a concerted effort to work towards a resolution.

I wouldn't rule anything out for sure, though, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't "concerted effort" get scare quotes? I'm going to assume Missouri's political apparatus only lurched further to the right tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That certainly wouldn't help. Sinking their economy won't make paying for a stadium any easier.

I would think, at the very least, this locks the Rams into St. Louis in 2015, not that I was particularly worried about that in the first place. The NFL would have to totally change course to allow the Rams to move while STL/MO is showing a concerted effort to work towards a resolution.

Not necessarily. Unless Missouri can show a willingness to pony up the dough, they won't actually have done anything. Committees are cheap.

And the fans will also have to show that they would actually mind the team leaving. That would perhaps be more impactful in the NFL's eyes, to read their regulations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Governor announces that former Anheuser-Busch president Dave Peacock and prominent St. Louis area attorney Bob Bliss will lead the effort to keep St. Louis an NFL city. They'll work over the next 60 days to analyze the situation and determine more concrete possibilities.

The 60 day time frame was chosen because the Rams have set forth a January 28, 2015 date to give notice to the Dome authority whether they will convert their lease year-to-year. (I would assume this would happen no matter what, but I suppose when they do so you don't want them feeling like there are no possibilities in St. Louis.)

Nixon sounded pretty committed keeping the Rams and the NFL in St. Louis. And putting Dave Peacock in charge is fantastic news for that possibility. He gets things done.

I'm not back to being extremely confident the Rams remain in St. Louis. I don't see any chance a Dave Peacock effort comes up short unless the Rams truly have already made their decision and the NFL is okay with letting them leave without truly exhausting the options.

Definitely good news for St. Louis Rams fans today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole thing about the NFL requiring teams to "exhaust their options" reminds me of this piece a Thrashers fan (from St. Louis, coincidentally) wrote where she went "doot doot doo I've done the research and technically it's against the rules for the team to move!" There are no rules. Billionaires gonna do what billionaires wanna do. God Bless America.

Share this post


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.