Jump to content

NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay


duma
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Task Force sucks up to the NFL too much and is WAY too proud of the fact that they're open to being swindled at historic levels again.

With that said, they came out swinging again Kroenke in a letter to the NFL today.

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/c/70/c709b569-c854-540f-9b1e-d78925e97799/568feb8c3725e.pdf.pdf#zoom=100&view=FitBH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Task Force sucks up to the NFL too much and is WAY too proud of the fact that they're open to being swindled at historic levels again.

With that said, they came out swinging again Kroenke in a letter to the NFL today.

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/c/70/c709b569-c854-540f-9b1e-d78925e97799/568feb8c3725e.pdf.pdf#zoom=100&view=FitBH

What did you do with all that time during your hiatus?

J/K

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, which cities were chosen and announced before they found an ownership group?

The three that were not directly related to "steals" of founding AFL franchises: New Orleans (1966), Tampa Bay and Seattle (1974).

My back-up in that regard comes from two main sources: the excellent book "The League: The Rise and Decline of the NFL" by David Harris (which is highly referenced) and "The Saga of the Saints", a great history of the franchise put out during the Saints 25th season.

I tried to scan and OCR some text from The League, but for some reason it is not working, so I'll have to quote and summarize.

The 1960 Minnesota and Dallas expansion were special situations, as they were tied into the formation of the AFL. Essentially, the NFL's plan was to steal two of the founding franchises of the AFL, which as initial franchises of a start-up league already had franchise ownership in place. They were successful in that regard with the Vikings and their owner Max Winter. Similarly, the NFL Dallas franchise was offered to Lamar Hunt who was founding the whole AFL as well as owning the Dallas franchise but Hunt didn't want to turn his back on the other AFL owners once he put the league together. (see The League, p. 104). Clint Murchison was selected as a back-up when Hunt said no; Oakland was picked to replace Minnesota in the AFL, and the rest is history.

The 1965 expansion to Atlanta is similar. The AFL had awarded an expansion franchise to Atlanta with Rankin Smith as owner on June 7, 1965, contingent upon a deal being worked out for the use of Atlanta-Fulton County stadium. Within the month, Peter Rozelle came in and told Smith and city officials that they could have an NFL franchise instead if they wanted it, so both Smith and the city agreed to go with the NFL and on June 30, 1965, the City was awarded the NFL franchise.

The City of New Orleans was awarded a franchise on (appropriately) Nov. 1st, 1966 - All Saints Day. No owner was announced at the time, and local papers began discussing potential owners:

SAINTS.jpg

According to Rozelle, there were as many as "six local groups and individuals had expressed interest". With some input from David Dixon, who spearheaded the expansion effort, John Mecom, Jr. was announced as the owner of the franchise on December 15, 1966, six weeks after the franchise had been awarded to the city.

The Dolphins and Bengals expansions were of the AFL, not the NFL (though the Bengals expansion did take place after the merger agreement, but before the actual merger was finalized).

Finally, let's get to the expansion of 1974. This expansion occurred after a League study on potential expansion sites was completed in 1973, and a list of five finalists - Seattle, Phoenix, Tampa, Memphis and Honolulu - was presented in February 1974 at the league's winter meetings. In April 1974, the league resolved to expand to Tampa with the following verbatim language:

"RESOLVED, that the National Football League grant an expansion franchise to the City of Tampa to begin play in the 1976 season and that the NFL expand by at least on more city before the end of 1974. The price for the franchise is to be sixteen million dollars to be fully paid no later than the spring of 1976. The Expansion Committee is authorized to research potential ownership for the Tampa franchise and to make recommendations to the full membership after discussing the financial terms and methods of payment with the parties interested in ownership"

Seattle was admitted to the League on June 4th, 1974 under the same terms.

The League goes into great detail on how the ownership for the two franchises was to be subsequently chosen, including criteria and standards. It also details how the Tampa franchise was first awarded to Tom McCluskey on October 30, 1974 - six months after the franchise was awarded to Tampa. Hugh Culverhouse, a finalist for Tampa, was actually then offered the Seattle ownership (which he declined). Good for him, as McCluskey bowed out, and on December 5th, 1974, Culverhouse was announced as his replacement in Tampa, and the Sarkowsky group in Seattle were awarded ownership of that franchise - six months after the city was awarded it.

Jacksonville also guaranteed visiting teams the most money at the time, $1.1M/game.
The 1993 expansion was undertaken differently compared to previous expansions. In previous expansions, the city/metro area was first chosen, then an ownership group for that franchise was selected. After the NFL's adventures with such owners such as Al Davis, Bob Irsay, and Leonard Tose, on the 1993 go-round they asked that not only did a city need to offer its credentials, but also an owner or ownership group be identified.

Um, yeah, all except for the part where... no, actually, the entire thing. Every time the NFL has expanded in its history (dating back to Dallas and Minnesota some 55 years ago), the league has had one (in some cases two competing) ownership group in place, ready to roll upon award of a franchise. Davis, Irsay and Tose? None were involved in an expansion process, and all were approved in accordance with AFL or NFL ownership vetting processes in place at the time.

Mac, tell you what, I'll split this with you.

You stated: "Every time the NFL has expanded in its history (dating back to Dallas and Minnesota some 55 years ago), the league has had one (in some cases two competing) ownership group in place, ready to roll upon award of a franchise" which I think I just disproved. On the other hand, I did say "previous expansions". While I didn't say ALL previous expansions, I guess I could have clarified better with "the TWO previous NFL expansions".

Fair enough? :P

I thought someone said the NFL granted a franchise to Tampa Bay first and ownership came along later. Could be wrong.

That is true. The original franchise holder, Thomas McCloskey, changed his mind six weeks after being awarded the team in 1974.

Good link, dfwabel. And thanks for having my back, Admiral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know no one cares about things like spelling and grammar anymore, but the fact that the Rams misspelled Los Angeles in their proposal to move to Los Angeles is just so perfect and pathetic at the same time.

What page was this on lol? I missed that.
Page 20 of the PDF attached to this Deadspin article:

http://deadspin.com/in-application-to-move-to-los-angeles-rams- :censored:-all-ov-1751320853

Under the "relocating will strengthen the league" part:

"...conduct studies of Los Angles, St. Louis..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2016 at 7:55 AM, leopard88 said:

He also left out the part about Jacksonville's ownership situation being so stable that Wayne Weaver backed out about four months before the vote. Obviously, he was coaxed to rejoin the effort. Whether that coaxing was directed by the league or not is open to speculation.

Yeah, I did leave that out, but since you brought it up, I will expand (not speculate) upon it.

 

After Jacksonville made the first cut, the Jacksonville City Council refused to agree to Weaver's demand that the City (not the team) finance any cost overruns on a major stadium renovation. Weaver bowed out in July 1993, but the City continued their bid. In late August, Jacksonville's city council caved. It agreed to pay up to $121 million for stadium renovation and practice fields, plus more for concession workers and ticket takers. Even then, Weaver announced he wouldn't go back to making a bid until local businesses bought 10,000 season tickets at $1,500 apiece. They did, and so he came back on as potential owner.

 

You don't think the NFL owners and Paul Tagliabue didn't notice and appreciate that kind of bargaining with the local government? Many articles back in the day (they are on the net; you can look them up) said that the NFL and Tagliabue "prodded" him to rejoin as potential owner.

 

The book "Glory for Sale: Fans Dollars and the New NFL" provides a great deal of behind-the-scenes insight on the expansion process and Weaver/Jacksonville's eventual selection for the last NFL slot. One line was telling:

 

"Afterwards, owners cited several factors for their votes. The potential of the Jacksonville market was appealing, they said, but so, too, was franchise owner Wayne Weaver. Weaver was viewed as a strong addition to the league and a future leader." (p. 194)

 

... I also had a whole file of articles and clippings on the 1993 expansion which I lost in Katrina. I can't find confirmation online, but I swear I remember reading that at one point NFL officials tried to get him to go as owner of St. Louis or Baltimore; they wanted him that bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jason Cole ‏@JasonColeBR · 14h14 hours ago
It's important to note about 20 #NFL owners in favor of #Chargers & Carson. Roughly 10 are solid with #Rams, Inglewood AND against #Raiders
John Clayton also said the same thing about how the votes are roughly divided right now:
https://soundcloud.com/101sports/espns-john-clayton-says-he

Jason Cole ‏@JasonColeBR · 25m25 minutes ago
According to 3 sources, two #NFL teams have submitted different resolutions on how to solve 3-team race to LA. These are alternate ideas ...
Jason Cole ‏@JasonColeBR · 24m24 minutes ago
One idea is from the #Cowboys and likely includes the Rams in Inglewood. Another team to submit resolution that includes a delay of process.
Cole has also posted part of the Chargers relocation application.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember during lead up to the 90s expansion, that the Redskins were deadset against Baltimore, which was probably the favorite. They also hated the Carolina idea, as they still considered the eastern seaboard as 'their turf' going back to their days when there were no NFL teams south of them. Skipping over St. Louis, though, was a huge surprise.

Carolina, with Charlotte growing by leaps and bounds economically to support another major league team (after having the Hornets), were a shoe in. Redskins couldn't fight both battles, so they protected 'their' territory around DC first, giving up the Carolinas to the expansion team.

I honestly think St. Louis failed due to stadium issues. Even when they got the Rams, the stadium built wasn't the best you could have for an NFL venue. It was built too small for a Super Bowl (a huge whiff, really). Jacksonville already had the very large Gator Bowl/Alltel Stadium/Everbank Stadium, etc that needed little renovating. Turns out Jacksonville was a horrible market, despite having the 'great owner' and 'great venue' and 'great city' and 'great weather for Super Bowl'. Super Bowl XXXIX turned out to be a mistake with the floating hotels.

Always wondered what the NFL would look like if Baltimore and St. Louis got teams in the 90s expansion. Would Charlotte have dragged away the Rams or Browns? The Charlotte market may not have had the drive to steal away a team after missing in the expansion round. Would the Rams have tried to stick around LA longer with the Raiders gone? Or would they have moved to Charlotte? Would the Browns have left as easily without an NFL-starved Baltimore?

Would Nashville have pulled away Houston over a potentially vacant Charlotte? Would Jacksonville ever sniff a relocated team if they missed on expansion? Would any NFL team be so quick to leave their current markets in the 90s if the two best markets weren't left open? Would the stadium-building-extravaganza have happened or would some teams still be in older aging venues without the great threat of leaving? Would the NFL revenue be that much lower that they couldn't leverage cities for new venues by 'being the greatest league' they way they seem to now. Would Arizona been able to demand a new venue, or would they have also migrated again to another venue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't have surprised me if Real-Life Rachel Phelps did another franchise swap where she got the St. Louis expansion team and someone else made a go of the L.A. Rams. The league didn't let the Rams go to St. Louis without considerable protest (and relocation fees).

I think Jacksonville got a look at the Houston Oilers in the '70s but nothing came of it. From the stuff B-Rich posted, I'm guessing there'd have been no Jacksonville without Wayne Weaver, and Bud Adams would have held on to the franchise no matter where it went, so no. Other than the obvious in Green Bay, I don't think professional sports have ever so obviously "put a city on the map" as the Jaguars did with Jacksonville.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't have surprised me if Real-Life Rachel Phelps did another franchise swap where she got the St. Louis expansion team and someone else made a go of the L.A. Rams. The league didn't let the Rams go to St. Louis without considerable protest (and relocation fees).

I think Jacksonville got a look at the Houston Oilers in the '70s but nothing came of it. From the stuff B-Rich posted, I'm guessing there'd have been no Jacksonville without Wayne Weaver, and Bud Adams would have held on to the franchise no matter where it went, so no. Other than the obvious in Green Bay, I don't think professional sports have ever so obviously "put a city on the map" as the Jaguars did with Jacksonville.

In '87, Bud Adams (Oilers) and Rankin Smith (Falcons) went to Jacksonville and threatened to move there.

Adams was successful in getting more seats and suites in the Astrodome (whose bonds for that job are still not paid off) while Smith did this to make sure the Georgia Dome funding was approved.

Oilers: http://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/whats-bud-adamss-legacy-in-texas/

Falcons: https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=348&dat=19870410&id=SlIvAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ITYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6249,1914302&hl=en

EDIT: I forgot to add another team whose issue I remember living in the area in middle school: Tampa Bay. Around the same time, the Bucs were looking into playing three games/year in Orlando to become more "regional" and to try to not be one of the four lowest grossing teams of the time with the Lions, Falcons and Packers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the best article I've read on the situation, I advise everyone to read the whole thing. Here are some juicy bits:

— To make it to Carson, Spanos has to put Mark Davis in the U Haul and that’s apparently a little unnerving. I agree with Sam Farmer, Jason Cole and other national-media reporters who say that Davis is a drag on the Carson plan. There are too many owners who don’t want Davis in the LA market. Why? (1) old scores to settle; Mark’s late father Al Davis had many enemies within the league, always went his way alone, and had no interest in being a loyal “league” guy. Al Davis had no interest in being popular in the owners’ club — if anything he thrived on conflict, loved to be the maverick and the outcast, and had no conscience about hurting the league or his other owners. There are long memories in the NFL. (2) Current owners aren’t thrilled with the idea of going back into Los Angeles after a 21-year absence and having Mark Davis in a high-profile, front-and-center position. If you have seen Davis perhaps you will understand why. (3) Davis compared to the other 31 owners, has about $182.20 in his checking account, with about $891.96 in his savings account. Of course I exaggerate here, but Davis is in a weak financial position relative to the other NFL owners. Does Davis have enough loot to fund a highly competitive team in a crucial market? That’s the concern. (4) Raiders fans in LA are a feisty bunch that seem to enjoy a spirited wrestling, boxing or MMA match … with each other, or with delegations that support the Raiders’ opponent … before games, during games, after games. The Raider Nation aren’t necessarily representative of the high-end fan profile that the NFL covets, especially in LA — which is basically a nice way of me saying that the league and its owners are probably reluctant to provide a venue for real-life “Sons of Anarchy” scenes in lovely Carson. What happens in Oakland should stay in Oakland … or something like that.

— The most popular theory, of course, is that fellow owners are pushing Kroenke and Spanos to hug it out and agree to become partners (if not pals) in Kroenke’s proposed palace in Inglewood. It makes sense on a surface level — great facility, one NFC team and one AFC team, and two franchises that have a following in SoCal. Spanos does not like Kroenke, and this is personal. (Brief history: a few years back Spanos approached Kroenke, told him about some available real estate near Hollywood Park, and suggested that they explore the idea of going in together to develop a stadium there. Kroenke agreed. But instead of following up with Spanos, Kroenke bought the land for himself and Spanos felt betrayed.) Spanos still has an aversion to Kroenke. A while back, when Kroenke offered Spanos a chance to move in to Inglewood, Spanos put Kroenke’s letter in the shredder. Spanos was said to be furious with Kroenke after reading Bornstein’s relocation application — which took shots at the Carson project and touted the attractiveness of the San Diego market.

http://www.101sports.com/2016/01/07/fasten-seat-belts-race-la-nears-conclusion/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the best article I've read on the situation, I advise everyone to read the whole thing. Here are some juicy bits:

To make it to Carson, Spanos has to put Mark Davis in the U Haul and thats apparently a little unnerving. I agree with Sam Farmer, Jason Cole and other national-media reporters who say that Davis is a drag on the Carson plan. There are too many owners who dont want Davis in the LA market. Why? (1) old scores to settle; Marks late father Al Davis had many enemies within the league, always went his way alone, and had no interest in being a loyal league guy. Al Davis had no interest in being popular in the owners club if anything he thrived on conflict, loved to be the maverick and the outcast, and had no conscience about hurting the league or his other owners. There are long memories in the NFL. (2) Current owners arent thrilled with the idea of going back into Los Angeles after a 21-year absence and having Mark Davis in a high-profile, front-and-center position. If you have seen Davis perhaps you will understand why. (3) Davis compared to the other 31 owners, has about $182.20 in his checking account, with about $891.96 in his savings account. Of course I exaggerate here, but Davis is in a weak financial position relative to the other NFL owners. Does Davis have enough loot to fund a highly competitive team in a crucial market? Thats the concern. (4) Raiders fans in LA are a feisty bunch that seem to enjoy a spirited wrestling, boxing or MMA match with each other, or with delegations that support the Raiders opponent before games, during games, after games. The Raider Nation arent necessarily representative of the high-end fan profile that the NFL covets, especially in LA which is basically a nice way of me saying that the league and its owners are probably reluctant to provide a venue for real-life Sons of Anarchy scenes in lovely Carson. What happens in Oakland should stay in Oakland or something like that.

The most popular theory, of course, is that fellow owners are pushing Kroenke and Spanos to hug it out and agree to become partners (if not pals) in Kroenkes proposed palace in Inglewood. It makes sense on a surface level great facility, one NFC team and one AFC team, and two franchises that have a following in SoCal. Spanos does not like Kroenke, and this is personal. (Brief history: a few years back Spanos approached Kroenke, told him about some available real estate near Hollywood Park, and suggested that they explore the idea of going in together to develop a stadium there. Kroenke agreed. But instead of following up with Spanos, Kroenke bought the land for himself and Spanos felt betrayed.) Spanos still has an aversion to Kroenke. A while back, when Kroenke offered Spanos a chance to move in to Inglewood, Spanos put Kroenkes letter in the shredder. Spanos was said to be furious with Kroenke after reading Bornsteins relocation application which took shots at the Carson project and touted the attractiveness of the San Diego market.

http://www.101sports.com/2016/01/07/fasten-seat-belts-race-la-nears-conclusion/

So after months of posting on this thread (and violating copyright laws with your excessive cut/paste), you finally looked at Bernie Miklasz longform column?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Even if an NFL team was owned by a deranged chimpanzee, coached by a staff of rabid squirrels, had a small-brained ostrich dancing backwards in the 'war room' while trying to draft the players, and played home games -- guaranteed profit."

http://www.101sports.com/2016/01/06/kroenkes-relocation-application-troll-job-backfire/

I really wanted that sentence to end with a reference to the "on-field gorilla" rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spanos does not like Kroenke, and this is personal. (Brief history: a few years back Spanos approached Kroenke, told him about some available real estate near Hollywood Park, and suggested that they explore the idea of going in together to develop a stadium there. Kroenke agreed. But instead of following up with Spanos, Kroenke bought the land for himself and Spanos felt betrayed.) Spanos still has an aversion to Kroenke. A while back, when Kroenke offered Spanos a chance to move in to Inglewood, Spanos put Kroenke’s letter in the shredder. Spanos was said to be furious with Kroenke after reading Bornstein’s relocation application — which took shots at the Carson project and touted the attractiveness of the San Diego market.

:lol:

Dean Spanos is a GOOD GUY. Stan Kroenke, on the other hand, is a businessman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, are there really that many owners left who are STILL holding a grudge against Al Davis' corpse? I think it's about time to let it go.

I don't think it's so much that as looking at Mark Davis and seeing him as the idiot son who inherited the team from Dad, and who'll eventually have to sell it because he's not capable of running it profitably.

Meanwhile, in LA:

CYQLq7SUsAAYSO3.jpg

Actually, this is the worst thing they could do, if for no other reason than it could really, really backfire. Not that I expect that, but imagine if this thing's attended by only 50-100 people.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.