NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[DaytonBlue]

I think everything can be worked through regarding London except for the home playoff game issue (which is a huge one). So probably no London before we have supersonic travel again across the Atlantic in 3 hours.

[2001mark]

The playoff issue could be concerning. Concerning from the NFLPA's standpoint no less.

What if (AFC for argument's sake) London are lined up to play the LA Raiders on the road WC wkend, the Broncos at home the next (worse if the Broncos were a WC team already played previous wk), & potentially the huge implications AFC Championship either on the road or for their opponent having to fly all the way to London.

What if the London team has to fly back & forth throughout the playoffs week after week just to make the SB. How the heck is that parity? lols

*

...the Broncos would have played the previous week if they were the road team in London.

[HedleyLamarr]

The playoff issue could be concerning. Concerning from the NFLPA's standpoint no less.

What if (AFC for argument's sake) London are lined up to play the LA Raiders on the road WC wkend, the Broncos at home the next (worse if the Broncos were a WC team already played previous wk), & potentially the huge implications AFC Championship either on the road or for their opponent having to fly all the way to London.

What if the London team has to fly back & forth throughout the playoffs week after week just to make the SB. How the heck is that parity? lols

If the London team is playing a road playoff game, the easy solution is for the team to arrive at their state-side practice facility Monday, practice during the week, then fly in to their playoff destination Saturday (as teams normally do), and play the game Sunday. If their next round game is also on this side of the pond, they'll just fly back to their practice facility here and repeat the routine.

If the London team is hosting a playoff game, the opponent would probably arrive in London by Wednesday, hold some practices over there, then play Sunday. The process then repeats itself for multiple home games. Practices aren't that intense come playoff time, anyway. They're almost glorified walk-through practices.

Which, now that I think about it, London would need two practice facilities: One for the hosts and one that's for the incoming opponent.

[The_Admiral]

MORE TROUBLE THAN IT'S WORTH

[bosrs1]

So the details of the Oakland stadium plan to "keep" the Raiders leaked.

http://www.insidebayarea.com/breaking-news/ci_28392873/exclusive-oakland-stadium-deal-worst-by-far-raiders?source=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Among other things it calls for the team to sell a 20% stake in itself to the developer and then reinvest 100 million in profits from that sale into the stadium... To call it a non-starter plan is an understatement. And on top of that it leaves the A's homeless and with no funding mechanism for a new ballpark at the Coliseum site. Foregone conclusion at this point that the Raiders are leaving Oakland.

[rams80]

Well, if the London team plays at Tottenham I'm not sure if playoffs will be a concern, what with the lingering curse that affects the Spurs and all...

[STL FANATIC]

So months later, St. Louis is still the only city with a reasonably viable (but still unsettled) stadium plan, but also currently hosts the team most eager to move to LA.

And thus, it is still a ridiculous situation for a league that reasonably stakes claim as the most successful sports league in North America.

Commenting on the London stuff... I too believe it sounds unrealistic. The only way I can see it happening is if Goodell can convince his employers that this is a long-range plan that will eventually see multiple teams in Europe, and thus the absurdity of it all (including a huge league-wide investment) is worth it in the long-run. Seems like a tough sell.

I also wonder if (in a situation that includes plans for London/Europe), you might not see the NFL eventually re-organize (which is a little different than re-alignment, I think) itself with geographic conferences and not just divisions.

Ultimately, I just don't see how London is truly in play. But these billionaires are often (but not always) better at playing the long game than we are, so who knows.

[Gothamite]

So months later, St. Louis is still the only city with a reasonably viable (but still unsettled) stadium plan

Well, except for Inglewood.

[2001mark]

I'll bet money that London gets a Super Bowl before an actual team.

[IceCap]

So months later, St. Louis is still the only city with a reasonably viable (but still unsettled) stadium plan

Well, except for Inglewood.

Don't be silly. Owning the land and getting the green light to build means nothing. NOTHING!

[STL FANATIC]

So months later, St. Louis is still the only city with a reasonably viable (but still unsettled) stadium plan

Well, except for Inglewood.

Ah, good catch. Although if that's the case, throw Carson in there too.

(But of course I meant of the three current host cities. )

[Cosmic]

So months later, St. Louis is still the only city with a reasonably viable (but still unsettled) stadium plan

Well, except for Inglewood.

Don't be silly. Owning the land and getting the green light to build means nothing. NOTHING!

Also not using public money, thereby reducing lawsuit and/or political trouble potential. Just a small thing.

[Gothamite]

I knew what you meant, hence my . Of all the potential projects, Inglewood is the one farthest along by far. Of the three cities scrambling to keep their teams, St. Louis is by far in the lead, though until they have the money they can't be considered that far along.

I'll bet money that London gets a Super Bowl before an actual team.

I don't even think they're get an actual team, but hosting a Super Bowl is even less likely. The Super Bowl starts at 6:30 Eastern; how full is Wembley or New White Hart Lane going to be for a major sporting event that starts near midnight and goes on for four hours? In order to have anyone in the stands, it would have to be televised before brunch in California. I love London, but it's more like LA than New York in its circadian rhythms; the tube shuts down after midnight and bus service goes minimal.

[CubsFanBudMan]

The Super Bowl has started earlier in the past, and isn't the complaint about these big events that they are filled with corporate sponsors, not fans? I have no doubt a Super Bowl in London would sell out, even if I don't want to see it happen.

Meanwhile, column from St. Louis:

http://m.stltoday.com/sports/columns/joe-strauss/strauss-stadium-aside-rams-must-prove-their-worth/article_cdf76577-85c4-5fd0-929f-2e88a392bef5.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed&mobile_touch=true

Headline is "Stadium aside, Rams must prove their worth," but it's really just a rambling, unfocused recap of the situation.

[Gothamite]

I really hope he's wrong about one point: if St. Louis can't manage to draw 40,000 to the season opener, then the market has truly failed.

This is the time to step up. Make a statement. Show the league and the world that you deserve better.

[STL FANATIC]

I still get a kick out of being asked to spend $75 to watch a bad football organization that is fighting tooth and nail to abandon you in order show that the league and the owners shouldn't treat you like dirt. But to each their own.

I don't see 40k being an issue for the opener anyways, though.

But I also don't care to read anything written by Joe Strauss anyways. He's awful.

On another note, the San Diego Union Tribune suggests a move to LA could be delayed by a year at the owners meetings this August. I'm not sure how likely that is, but I'd say it would not be a particularly positive development for St. Louis.

It may in fact make it more likely that St. Louis gets their stadium plan lined up, but it also makes it more likely that San Diego gets one lined up. And I'm certain that the NFL will choose their longer-standing market in that case.

But we'll see. This almost feels more like informed speculation than an actual report. So I'm not sure such a delay would really happen.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/jun/27/san-diego-stadium-hope-wait-till-next-year/

[rams80]

The Rams open with Seattle. They're going to sell out. The stadium probably will be cheering for Seattle (as has been typical for Rams sellouts since the mid-2000s), but they're going to sell out.

[2001mark]

The Rams open with Seattle. They're going to sell out. The stadium probably will be cheering for Seattle (as has been typical for Rams sellouts since the mid-2000s), but they're going to sell out.

That shouldn't be a thing. NFL home dates are supposed to sell out. All 8 of them.

[bosrs1]

So months later, St. Louis is still the only city with a reasonably viable (but still unsettled) stadium plan, but also currently hosts the team most eager to move to LA.

Don't know about that. San Diego has presented a very viable plan that can be accomplished on the league's timetable. The issue in SD is that it's not at the location the Chargers want, but at the same time, the Chargers won't come out and say that's not where they want it. Until they do the city has to proceed with the plan that is best for them in Mission Valley that can be completed the cheapest and quickest. If the Chargers want the much more expensive and much harder to accomplish downtown plan, they need to say so.

[STL FANATIC]

So months later, St. Louis is still the only city with a reasonably viable (but still unsettled) stadium plan, but also currently hosts the team most eager to move to LA.

Don't know about that. San Diego has presented a very viable plan that can be accomplished on the league's timetable. The issue in SD is that it's not at the location the Chargers want, but at the same time, the Chargers won't come out and say that's not where they want it. Until they do the city has to proceed with the plan that is best for them in Mission Valley that can be completed the cheapest and quickest. If the Chargers want the much more expensive and much harder to accomplish downtown plan, they need to say so.

You're right to some degree, and probably more up on the plans than I am. But a public vote has to happen to use public money, right? And the Chargers have said they do not support the plans that aim to hold public votes in 2015 because they don't believe they're legally viable.

That's why I'm not sure their plan currently can be considered viable on the NFL's current time table.