Rams win LA, Chargers and Raiders in limbo, reactions

At the very least, you have to give it to the NFL owners for being decisive. They wanted a team in LA. They wanted a team with strong (rich) ownership in LA. They got it. Everything else is unresolved. Here are the big takeaways from today’s LA-centric owners meetings:

  • Earlier in the afternoon, the LA Committee voted 5-1 in favor of the Carson proposal.
  • After a few hours, an initial full ownership vote favored Inglewood over Carson 20-12, not enough votes to win outright
  • After some additional horse trading, the owners held a final vote before 8 PM local time (Central). The outcome was 30-2 in favor of the Rams moving to LA in 2016 with the Inglewood stadium being their future permanent home starting in 2019. The Chargers can also move to LA. The Raiders withdrew from consideration for LA.
  • The Chargers were given first dibs at being the Rams’ tenant in Inglewood. They could also choose to stay in San Diego with an extra $100 million (aside from G-4 loans, I’m assuming) towards a local stadium.
  • The Raiders will also get an extra $100 million to use in Oakland. In a post-vote press conference, Commissioner Roger Goodell said, “We want to incentivize the community to get the stadium the Raiders need. That’s what the $100 million is for.”
  • Chargers have 1 year to decide on moving to LA. If at any point they balk, the Raiders will have 1 year from that point to decide on whether to move to LA.
  • Nothing precludes either the Raiders or Chargers from considering other markets. What is not clear is whether either team will get any sort of discount or waiver from a relocation fee for other non-LA markets.

Reactions, first from the Raiders:


Chargers owner Dean Spanos:


Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf:


The Coliseum JPA:


San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer:


The winners here are Stan Kroenke, since he clearly won the deal, and to a lesser extent the NFL, because it got a team back in the #2 media market and a future LA Super Bowl home, along with a new headquarters for the NFL Network.

The Raiders and Chargers are both serve in heaven, rule in hell positions. Either they figure out how to get additional public money from their respective cities, or they agree to be tenants in LA. They could also look at San Antonio or St. Louis, but that’s for another day. The $100 million the NFL pledged to the Raiders is far short of the $400-500 million funding gap. The new money could help in San Diego, where the plan is more fleshed out, though it’s too early to call that until the Chargers’ stadium vote goes through in July.

Most importantly, both teams and the NFL have lost LA as a reliable, utterly predictable stalking horse. St. Louis and San Antonio don’t inspire the kind of fear that Los Angeles does. Neither Spanos nor Davis talked much about their current cities. Davis evaded questions about San Diego and San Antonio after the presser, summing up his options in clumsily grand fashion.

“America, the world is a possibility for the Raider Nation.”

92 thoughts on “Rams win LA, Chargers and Raiders in limbo, reactions

  1. It’s funny you say “rule in hell” as Better To Reign in Hell was the name of a book about Raider fans

    as to my prediction for what happens? 2016 season will take place in…ATT Park.

  2. AT&T park??? Neither the NFL or MLB would allow another shared stadium. Especially in one of MLB’s jewels.

    It’s either the Alamo Dome, Levi’s, or an indefinite string of year-to-year leases at O.co, in reverse order of likelihood in my opinion.

    • The XFL played at AT&T, as did Cal for a year. But it’s not optimal.

    • Why does anyone thing San Antonio is even a remote possibility? As if the Cowboys and Texans would allow another team in Texas.

      • Just to play devil’s advocate, what would stop Davis from pulling a Baltimore Colts and just up and moving in the middle of the night? I’m sure something’s changed since then, just not sure what it is.

  3. Haha….Raiders are staying around and screwing the A’s even longer. City of Oakland and Alameda County leaders are a joke if they Raiders walk when only 250-300 mill is needed to bridge the gap now. 450 from Davis….and 200 loan from NFL and than the extra 100 mill. Oak and County can make that back quick by adding an airport tax for crying out loud.
    I can see Mark trying to get to Portland instead of San Antonio if anytjing. Mark should just sell to Larry Ellison. This is a game of billionares now anyways.

  4. After crunching all the #s …Spanos would be a fool to not partner up with Kroenke in Inglewoood. That facility is gonna make bank and it will make big money quick. If he decides to go thru hell with SD again…he is a fool.

  5. Vincent Bonsignore from the LA Daily News recently commented that the Chargers will likely soon agree to partner with Kroenke and then mentioned that San Diego would become a very possible destination for the Raiders, San Antonio would also be on the table (San Diego would be tempting. That city can fund a new stadium without direct public tax dollars – and wants an NFL team. Most Charger fans would also evidently form a quick allegiance with the Raiders if the team moves there – according to their local polls – San Antonio not so much. The Raiders would likely be better off financially staying at the Coliseum than that option.

  6. Here is reality: Does anyone really believe that the Chargers are NOT going to LA? Especially with the Raiders having the option to go if they decline? The big question is where are the Raiders going to play? Basically it is Santa Clara, San Antonio, St Louis, San Diego or Oakland. If I am Mark Davis the best choice is Santa Clara until the Oakland Stafium is ready. But is that option available?
    Whatever happens at least between now and sometime during Spring Training happens we will know the fate of the A’s. Oakland, San Jose or Montreal? The Hundred Year PLUS search for a New Stadium is coming to an end.

    • The onus is back on Oakland city officials (as it typically has been) With the extra $100 mil. the NFL will finance the Raiders because of they missed out on LA, Davis will be now able offer $600 mil. (of the $900 mil. total coast) towards building a new proposed Raiders stadium in Oakland – a very reasonable offer (67% of the total cost) by the Raiders. if Oakland officials screw this one up – they will be the goats big time.

      Oakland will need to act fast also. Even though technically the Chargers have a year to decide if they join Kroenke) they actually need to inform the the NFL by March on what they intend to do. Including, LA still being a possibility, Davis still has plenty of leverage, San Diego (if the Chargers move to LA) or even San Antonio,. The NFL believes that the San Antonio NFL market will be strong in five years. The Raiders could get a good deal on a lease over there for a few years at the Alamo Dome, and wait out for a new NFL stadium in San Antonio.

      • If anyting I also see the Raiders possibly considering Portland, still in West Coast and they are starting to boom.

      • I disagree that the onus is back on Oakland. Oakland presented a completely viable plan to the Raiders. I can see the Raiders negotiating for a bit more land for more parking and possibly some other concessions but Oakland’s proposal was by no means a non-starter.

        Oakland is not and should not come up with public funds for the Raiders. Personally I don’t even think they should be eating the Mt Davis debt that the Raiders have already dumped on them, but the Oakland proposal even agreed to that.

        The onus is on Mark Davis. If he wants to stay in Oakland, he has a viable option on the table. If he can’t make it work, Oakland should kick him to the curb.

      • Oakland called the bluff. And they didn’t lose.

    • There is a possibility he tries to build in Concord at the old Naval Weapons Station but it’s probably lower down on the list of other possibilities like; San Diego, San Antonio. All of this could have been avoided if he had just gone to Santa Clara in the first place, they would have a dual stadium the A’s could be discussing a stadium at the current site.

      Maybe Libby Schaff and several Oakland pols can get somebody to render some new stadium drawings.

    • “Whatever happens at least between now and sometime during Spring Training happens we will know the fate of the A’s. Oakland, San Jose or Montreal? The Hundred Year PLUS search for a New Stadium is coming to an end.”

      What are you referring to?

  7. From the A’s perspective, this could be one step backward before several steps forward. Davis’ statements (and observations people have made about his demeanor today) sure don’t sound like a guy who wants to stay in Oakland very long.

    Once again, we need to wait for someone else to make a move. Now the ball is in Spanos’ court. What he does will help determine Davis’ next step, which will help determine Wolff’s. It’s crazy that a baseball team in Oakland has to wait to see what a football team in San Diego does in order to move forward with their stadium.

    • @Turin

      We would not have to wait for anyone else to make a choice, if Lew Wolff had not already made a choice to wait on Davis.(NFL)

      It was the strategy Wolff chose, right, wrong, good, or bad, it’s the strategy he ( A’s) chose.

      Everybody in this soap-opera has a series of choices to make, the Raiders, Warriors (who have made plenty ), A’s, Giants, apparently even teams outside the Bay Area, Rams, Chargers, along with leagues, the NFL, MLB, NBA , and municipalities, Oakland, Alameda County, San Francisco, San Jose, even the state of California.
      Wolff may not have realized all of what he was in for when he decided to join this soap-opera, but he has made a calculated choice, one of many he and the other players will make before this is over.

      • In other words some people make choices to wait on other people’s choices, in hopes that their future choices become better then they presently view them.

      • @Lakeshore/Neil – I’ve heard this argument many times, almost entirely from the Wolff-must-sell crowd. I don’t buy it. Can you explain such a scenario in which Wolff and Oakland commit without the City throwing a ton of public money into it (including infrastructure)? There’s a solid portion of the citizenry that doesn’t want to spend ANY money on pro sports.

      • @ ML
        I don’t think Wolff should have to sale, he can own or sale really doesn’t speak to my point. I agree with you I don’t think this can be done without money from somewhere, which also really doesn’t speak to the point I was making.
        I was only talking about choices, of which of course you know many people and municipalities have to make. You also know that a lot has been made about Oakland “choosing” the Raiders over the A’s, which I do believe they have in the past, but at this point it’s really about Oakland’s choices being limited to the choices that the Raiders, Warriors, and A’s.
        As much as you have invested in this, surely you know Wolff is waiting, and not simply (only) some poor victim of Oakland, MLB, or the San Francisco Giants.

      • If I understand you correctly, you are saying Wolff made the decision to assess all his options. One of those options (the Coliseum) required he wait to see what the NFL will do. If that is your point, yes I agree he made that choice. A very prudent one, that I think any owner in any league would make.

      • I don’t really see Wolff as waiting for others to make decisions so much as he’s had his hands tied in these specific circumstances. He certainly wasn’t waiting on Davis when he tried to build in Fremont, or again in San Jose. I think he views the Coliseum as the most viable ballpark site in Oakland proper, but until very recently his hands were tied by the Raiders’ ENA re: Coliseum City. I really can’t blame him for not throwing his support and $ behind CC when the A’s didn’t have a seat at the table (especially with so much $ and the team’s future home at stake).

      • “I don’t really see Wolff as waiting for others to make decisions so much as he’s had his hands tied in these specific circumstances.”

        Exactly. Look at it this way, because of the economics of the three sports, the A’s in Oakland is the least viable. With salary caps and less reliance on local revenue, it’s much easier for the NBA and the NFL to be profitable in Oakland. Even with this, both the Warriors and the Raiders are running away from Oakland.

        MLB has blocked Wolff from this, which means his hands are tied.

        As has been discussed many times before, without significant involvement/investment from the city, the Coliseum is the most viable site in the A’s current territory. Oakland has kept this site tied up with Coliseum City. Now that that’s gone, Oakland’s first attempt was to pitch this to the Raiders. They presented a viable option, that the Raiders flat out rejected.

        The A’s have no other options right now. If Wolff jumps in, he’s essentially negotiating against himself. From a business perspective this makes no sense. His only leverage is the 10 year lease.

        If Oakland truly starts negotiating with the A’s and Wolff drags his feet, than you might have a point. Until then Wolff is waiting because he has no other options.

      • @ Slacker

        “The A’s have no other options right now. If Wolff jumps in, he’s essentially negotiating against himself. From a business perspective this makes no sense. His only leverage is the 10 year lease.”
        RE: That’s exactly why he is waiting which is my only point, or as I say employing his wait Davis (NFL), out strategy. I’m not saying it’s a good (probably is), or bad strategy, I’m only saying Wolff is obviously using it. He could be using it because he wants leverage with MLB in hopes they will give him San Jose if the Raiders build on the site, he could be doing it in hopes that the Raiders will somehow leave town (not as likely anytime soon now), so he can have the site to himself, if he is truly willing to build in Oakland, he could be doing it for both reasons and many more we don’t know about, the fact id he is doing it.
        This idea that Oakland is once again choosing the A’s over the Raiders is absurd; while it was true more times then I care to recall in the past, it’s not true today. Oakland can only choose to work with who works with them, if it’s Davis (who also has not come up with a plan), that puts something together, thereby cosing the A’s not to have a home it’s not only partly Wolff fault, its obviously part of his strategy.

  8. I didn’t see any writing about relocation fees in the aftermath. Presumably the Rams must pay the $550M few to go to LA, but what about the other two teams? Would the Chargers (or the Raiders) still have to pay $550M just to be a tenant in the Rams stadium? Seems unjustly steep.

    Anybody know?

  9. Why were the Chargers so adamant about wanting to share a new stadium with the Raiders in LA, but apparently are so against the idea of sharing a new LA stadium with the Rams? The answer seems so obvious. By sharing LA with the financially weaker Raiders in Carson, the Chargers would have been better able to maintain the dominance financially in their stadium sharing arrangement. On the other hand, the Rams at Inglewood, with their huge financial resources and potential for additional revenue streams, would have the dominant financial arrangement over the Chargers. Also, a move of the Chargers to LA would likely open up San Diego to the Raiders, or eventually some other team. For these reasons, the Chargers will do everything in their power to get a new stadium deal done in San Diego. Not the best scenario for the Chargers, but the alternative of sharing the Inglewood stadium with the Rams would be much more financially limited and constrictive.

    • Nope. Spanos will still make bank of he shares with Kroenke in LA. Instead of going thru hell in SD. Its a no brainer for him to pair up with Kroenke.

    • There is a Bleacher Report video that says there is bad blood between Kronke and Spanos… basically Spanos does not trust Kronke. Apparently there was something about an idea that Spanos had that Kronke took and ran with as his own and that did not sit well with Spanos at all.

      So that has to be overcome. It’s hard to invest nine digits of money in a partnership with someone you do not trust or respect.

  10. “you are catching me in the middle of a six- to eight-month study period,” he said. “We are studying all the options including the coliseum and laney college and we just want to complete our analysis.”

    ^ anybody catch this quote from wolff from yesterday? why did he even mention laney college as an option unless privately he’s working on some plan that nobody knows of ????

  11. NFL was never going to allow two AFC teams in the same TV market.

  12. does this quote also mean the a’s have no intentions to release any kind of plan/images of what their vision is for a new baseball park in oakland if wolff says they’re in the middle of a “6-8 week study”.

    if true would he release it sometime during the 2016 mlb season?

  13. @lesgoas- I wondered the same thing about the quote- I don’t know the answer about Laney College and why he would mention it but it was interesting to single that site out- and yes- assume that his most current study won’t be done for another 3-4 months and then who knows how long before results are release. At this pace a 10 year lease is probably not long enough…

    • this is probably the site at laney that would even come close to fitting a baseball park. what is it? a football/track field, baseball field, and some offices. i still have serious doubts the college is want to give up that land not to mention the office buildings that would also need to be demolished to make room for a baseball park.

      visually it’d look great with the backdrop of downtown oakland, lake merritt, and the oakland hills. maybe try to connect the lake with what’s happening at brooklyn basin in a way?

      heck it maybe even more feasible than the other downtown/waterfront sites that have been mentioned but that still doesn’t mean the laney site doesn’t have a lot of obstacles to get past to make it even viable.

    • this was the laney college plan by hok in the early 2000s.

  14. Anyone reading into what Lew says at this point, hasn’t been paying attention for very long. Until he back tracks on Howard terminal publicly, it’s coliseum or bust. The only thing that is of interest to me, does Fisher “really” get involved.

  15. So the LA Committee recommends the Carson site by 5-1, then later those 5 affirmative Carson votes flip to the Inglewood site. I heard some of the owners today mention that this was the most ‘Spectacular’ site. So that was all it was about all along. The only compromise/change was the 100 million to Chargers/Raiders to help out w/ a potential stadium in their home market. The NFL obviously was hell bent on this outcome all along. Kroenke gets L.A. handed to him, while STL comes up with a legitimate plan. Raiders, Chargers and A’s get screwed. I hope the NFL fail miserably in L.A..

  16. LW is dotting his i’s and crossing his t’s…. Again…. to show MLB he has evaluated all options in Oakland and to confirm that the Coli site is the only reasonable site for the A’s to build. In the event that Oakland has negotiated for the Raiders to stay at the Coli site I’ll determine if Cisco Field is re-incarnated-

    • Cisco Field is what I’m wondering about too. If Oakland/the County cave and agree to a public subsidy for the Raiders, MLB would be looking at the real possibility of a homeless team. I would kind of hope that that might be enough for Manfred to arm-twist to overrule the Giants’ territorial rights in SJ. At the very least it would probably force MLB to act.

      • That scenario will be the only way to force MLB to give way on that ridiculous so called “territorial rights” issue.

      • Davis is handing the Raiders to Oakland giftwrapped – Oakland is required to contribute only $300 mil. towards a new Raiders stadium? There are plenty of municipalities willing to pay upwards of $500 mil. to host an NFL franchise and host a superbowl by building a new stadium (even locally) – since Davis is now willing to spend $600 mil. – perhaps the SF, San Jose, or Walnut Creek Raiders?

      • “Davis is handing the Raiders to Oakland giftwrapped ”

        I wouldn’t exactly call getting saddled with $300M in debt a gift. You’re right there are lot’s of stupid cities out there willing to shell out money for an NFL team. Look how well that’s worked out for other cities in places like Cincinnati, Glendale and Miami.

        Also, the $300M shortfall assumes a scaled down stadium that would not host a Super Bowl or other big events like the NCAA championship. Levi’s will still get those events. If the Raiders/Oakland want a stadium to attract those events, the shortfall will more than double.

      • yeah even if the raiders magically somewhere were to build a new stadium in oakland reports are they want a smaller stadium around 50k i think? that’s nowhere close to the size in seat capacity it’d take to get a super bowl to that venue.

        niners have levis and that’s probably the go to venue for a super bowl in this area. could see that and the new los angeles stadium built being part of the super bowl rotation now.

        new orleans, arizona, miami, dallas, los angeles/santa clara? maybe throw in an indy or cold weather city like nyc out there once in a while?

      • @slacker: Supply and demand – if Oakland won’t finance $300 mil. there are several other municipalities likely willing to invest more than that. The NFL isn’t the NHL – $500 mil. for an NFL franchise, a new stadium and a superbowl site is a bargain in pro sports. Davis will likely have no problem finding a new market for the Raiders if Oakland doesn’t close the deal soon.

      • @duffer – You’re right there are other cities willing to spend money on this. It’s been proven though time and again, that this isn’t an investment but rather flushing money down the toilet. How has that Mt Davis “investment” worked out for Oakland so far?

        If another city is stupid enough to do build a stadium for the Raiders, the Raiders should leave. Oakland will be better off in the long run, without the additional debt.

      • @slacker: After observing how Super bowl 50 will pump up to $500 mil. into the economy locally, the smart money says Oakland will hash out a deal with the Raiders – if Oakland doesn’t, San Jose, SF, or some local muncipality could – the Raiders may likely not require a long commute if they build a stadium at a location other than Oakland.

      • That’s $500M spent by individuals across the entire Bay Area. SF will definitely be the major recipient for SB 50 but that’s true as well for a Super Bowl held in Oakland.

        No one is going to build hotels, restaurants, convention facilities, etc. banking on a once every 10 year event.

        In terms of additional tax revenue that Oakland would receive for hosting a super bowl, in the most optimistic view of it, you’re probably looking at $20M factoring in the expense of running the event.

        Davis doesn’t want to pay for a Super Bowl ready stadium. That will cost between $500M – $1B more than what’s proposed.

        It’s not smart money for a city to spend $500M – $1B to take in extra $20M in tax revenue every 10 years.

  17. I called this one from a mile away.

    The NFL got it right, their so called “Committee” is a bunch of politicians who are old and decrepit. They were not looking at merits of the proposals but were trying to help a friend in Dean Spanos out.

    In the end, logic prevailed and the Rams are moving back to LA. As a 49ers fan I am stoked, we get to chant “beat LA” at games and that saves a 10am start time plus 3200 in total miles in travel.

    As for the Raiders who are ironically stuck with the A’s in the Coli against both their wills by their respective leagues in favor of other franchises.

    The Raiders are worth 1.43B and the Davis’ own 47% of the team. This playing in bar none the worst stadium in the NFL.

    With a new Oakland stadium the value of the team would increase to 2B for argument’s sake perhaps to 2.2B.

    With the NFL pitching in another 100M of free money, the funding gap is now 300M roughly.

    Davis and his partners should each sell a piece of the team to get the last 300M. They can negotiate based on the new value of the team once the stadium is built in Oakland.

    Davis would still be majority owner, while a new investor would see automatic dividends once the new stadium is done.

    Or Oakland can borrow the 300M thru the JPA and charge the Raiders 15M-20M a year in rent and there it is.

    Mark Davis is a moron, the other owners know it. He has not tried in Oakland one bit but wants LA on a silver platter. Not going to happen.

    As for the Chargers, they are going to LA if they know what is good for them.

    If they say now, then LA will have 2 teams and the Chargers will lose full TV rights over LA. Even with the Rams there now they are an AFC team so it is OK.

    If they say no and the Raiders go, then the Raiders get full LA TV for AFC games. Not happening.

    Raiders are stuck in Oakland only because of Mark Davis and the ineptitude of Oakland. They are married to one another.

  18. Did Selig give Wolff false expectations about relocating to SJ? Did Wolff read the room wrong thinking he had a good chance of moving to SJ? Did the A’s really pursue SJ without a “Plan B”? Wasn’t it the job of the BRC to study all possible ballpark options? If so, why this new study? What about Wolff’s 2″ binder, with all of his previous studies? All of this BS, and all we’ve been doing is marking time.

    It’s time for the A’s to be proactive. It’s clear from Davis’ comments (post decision) that he’ll be looking to move out of Oakland. No more waiting for the Raiders to make a decision, otherwise you’ll be waiting forever.

    Mr. Wolff, if there is a feasible plan to build a ballpark in Oakland, move forward with it NOW and get it done. No more BS.

    Become relevant in the Bay Area again.

    • @Kevin- the key in your comment is “feasible”. I can guarantee that Oaklands definition of what is “feasible” varies significantly from LW/MLB definition of “feasible”. Sounds like LW will release his findings in another 3-4 months- but if Oakland resists giving a significant amount of land and development rights – as they did with the Raiders- than there may not be any location in Oakland that is deemed feasible-

      • That’s fine. It’s time for Oakland to get their “sales manager” in the room and offer up their best offer. If it’s not sufficient, fine, we move forward. Dickering around with this makes everyone in this 3 ring circus look foolish and inept.

        I think ultimately it will be MLB which decides on the A’s fate. Oakland will probably offer up very little towards an A’s ballpark, and Wolff will go back to MLB looking to rehash SJ. At that point MLB will either grant the A’s sole or shared rights to SJ, or they will assist the A’s in getting something done in Oakland.

        Whatever the case, can we please get this process moving forward.

  19. i find it really amusing that papa on 95.7 isn’t happy that the nfl power owners bullied the raiders.

    this coming from the same guy who works for that dog s*** org across the bay who’s bullied the a’s on territorial rights here locally and papa has defended their rights to the south bay.

    as an a’s fan i’m chuckling right now.

  20. About the only thing that seems certain is that this blog will continue to provide us with interesting reading material for quite some time. My thoughts:

    1. Davis has shown that he’s in over his head in dealing with both the city and the NFL. He either needs to accept another ownership partner or agree to play at Levi’s, preferably the latter. Take the $100 MM from the NFL and alter Levi’s so it’s home to both teams.
    2. Wolff is smart to remain non-committal and to say publicly that he’s still interested in Oakland, but it’s hard to believe that there’s a site out there that he hasn’t already rejected. Maybe Schaaf really has convinced him to reconsider those other sites.
    3. Why would the city even bother putting Laney, Howard Terminal and the Post Office sites on the list if they’re non-starters? Just for PR purposes, so they can say they tried? Or is there new information, or ways that the city can use “infrastructure money” to solve their issues?
    4. I know that Howard Terminal is considered infeasible and dead from a practical standpoint, but Schaaf really wants it! Per the recent Matier and Ross article, the city has been working on putting a cap on the site to mitigate the haz mat issue and may pay for the cost of a bridge over to Market St. Putting it in their downtown specific plan may help to expedite the EIR process (and possibly create an infrastructure financing plan), but the soils issue will need to be addressed in any case. Another problem is the distance from BART.
    5. I don’t see why they both couldn’t build at the Coliseum at this point. I’d prefer that one of the downtown sites work out, but this may have to be the fall back position. Forget the Coliseum City plan, forget about trying to fund a Raider’s stadium with development, leave a sea of parking, including parking over the sewer easement, and give them each the go-ahead. Maybe Wolff can squeeze in a bit of retail, and Davis will either come up with the money or he won’t.

    • Davis is being very accomodating – a $600 mil. investment towards $900 mil. stadium? and Oakland only paying 33% of the cost – stadium deals don’t get much better than that for muncipalities. Oakland officials must be preparing to deal with the Raiders – that’s why they are offering the A’s several sites other than the Coliseum site (which Wolff is only interested in)

  21. Spanos wanted Davis as a partner and not Kroenke because he knew he could push Davis around and Davis was OK playing second fiddle.

    Now Spanos has to play 2nd fiddle to Kroenke and that was his worst nightmare….it has come true.

    Spanos is going to LA, no way he stays in SD even if the SD vote passes, he will not let the Raiders into LA with him not there,

    He remembers how it was with So Cal as 3 teams and it did not favor him from a TV perspective until the Rams/Raiders left when he had the entire LA market to himself.

    The Raiders should take the free 100M throw into Levi’s, change the seats so they change color like they proposed with the Chargers, build out the 2nd home team locker room, build a couple of team stores and add a museum.

    Levi’s has 1.875M square feet. It can easily be upgraded for a 2nd team.

    But Davis is dumb and will sit on the A’s heads.

    One thing is for sure, he is not leaving the Bay Area in 2016

    • Mark Davis has no money and he doesn’t have a brain him and the people that try and run the city of Oakland that’s a match made in heaven

    • Sid, why are you so fixated on this concept of “TV rights” to LA? All NFL TV revenue is shared; LA “TV rights” don’t bring the chargers a nickel more in revenue than any other NFL team.

  22. Chargers/Rams negotiations are apparently moving along very quickly, so it looks like Spanos will make his decision to move to LA sooner than later. That will put Davis on the clock.

    He could negotiate a year-to-year lease at the Coliseum or Levi’s while looking for something permanent in Oakland, SA or SD (he apparently is not open to STL and STL says they will not pursue another team anyway). Or he could move to SA or SD right away while working on a new stadium in his new market.

    I doubt he would do the later until a new stadium is more fleshed out and I don’t think that can be put together quickly enough for next season. So for 2016, my guess is he plays in either the Coliseum or Levi’s. As an A’s fan, I hope it’s Levi’s — imagine not having our field turned to crap in September. Then it’s a matter of who is willing and able to put together a stadium deal for him.

  23. The Chargers are NOT going to L.A. It would be suicide for the organization. The Chargers have zero support in L.A. and would destroy their San Diego support by moving. They would be a tenant In a Rams stadium in a Rams town. All excitement would be for the Rams and the Chargers would play to an empty stadium. The name of the game here is extortion for public dollars. Everything has gone exactly as planned by the NFL. The Carson proposal was never a realistic consideration. From day one it was an NFL plan for leverage in negotiating tax payer money from San Diego and Oakland. Now is phase two. Chargers play HARD ball with San Diego. When they get their best deal possible it will be the Raiders turn to threaten to move in with the Rams. These threats will seem very real but keep in mind that the NFL will NEVER allow three So Cal teams again, but Oakland will not understand that and will cave as much as they can. Most likely if the form of a bond backed by the city but paid back by the Raiders. Worst part is the process could take up to two years. The A’s should figure out which downtown site is most suitable as soon as possible. BTW Jaguars to St. Louis in three years.

    • The would be 50 /50 partners with Kronk. This has been stated and they will make big money in LA A’s opposed to SD…with all the Hollywood events and such.

      • Yes, they will make money from the venue, but how long can they survive as an organization with very minimal psl’s/season tickets sold? no merchandise sales, no t.v. revenue? how long can they exist embarrassing themselves playing to an empty stadium. They have zero support in L.A. No one will come from S.D. to watch them.How long will Kronke put up with them hanging around and contributing nothing? how long will the NFL put up with that? Mark my words,the Chargers will NOT move to L.A. This is all about extortion. The Raiders turn will be next If they don’t get a deal done in the meantime. The NFL designed this exact outcome from the start.

  24. I wonder if other cities will throw their hat into the ring at this point, like Oklahoma City or Sacramento? I think of both because they have proven they can support a junior league sport, and the former especially because of how football crazed they are–not to mention they have a voter base that would throw money at it.

  25. People who keep questioning whether “SoCal” can support 3 NFL teams are kidding themselves. San Diego is a completely separate market from Los Angeles, and “SoCal” easily has the population, discretionary income and corporate base to support 3 teams. It is actually a bigger risk to put a 2nd team in the same stadium in LA than it would be to put a team in San Diego if the Chargers move in with the Rams.

    • Then why has the NFL been such a consistent failure in Southern California? Just because the Chargers suck?

    • So Cal can’t support 3 teams between 2 in LA and a 3rd in SD. It won’t work short term or long term. Bandwagon fairweather fans in both towns. They will just gravitate to the team that is winning. The other two will rot.

  26. http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/As-Raiders-dominate-headlines-Oakland-scouts-for-6754427.php?t=bbbcba1527f294ee0d&cmpid=twitter-premium

    Libby is smart. Building a more urban style ballpark closer to DTown is the way to go whether the A’s are stubborn or not about it. Getting it at HT or Laney will cause more films to stay DTown before and after games and spend money at local reataurants, bars, lounges and clubs. Or works great for the Pads in SD and Giants in SF. Wolff and Fisher are idiots if they refuse the waterfront HT site and even Laney College site.

    • A downtown ballpark sounds great. Except that the A’s and MLB have already spent years looking for a site that works and haven’t found any. Schaaf can’t just will contaminated, industrial-use-bound HT to be viable if it’s not, especially if Oakland is not going to pay for site remediations. Right now, it looks like the A’s are in the middle of (another) study of Oakland sites. We’ll see what comes out of that. Had the Raiders split for LA, it would have made it much easier for the A’s to get started but there is still a $300-$400 million gap for the Raiders that the city won’t fill. And I’ll bet Davis won’t be able to attract big-time investors to fill that gap as long as he, and not they, will be in charge.

  27. I have been reading about the possibility of the Chargers going to LA and the Raiders going to San Diego. This would open up the Coliseum to be renovated to a baseball only facility ( starting with fixing the plumbing and saying bye bye to Mount Davis). Would the City and County agree to give the Land to Wolff in exchange for the A’s staying for say 25-30 years? I suspect that the A’s fate will be determined sooner then later.

  28. All about the money folks.
    After the Mt Davis debacle, and considering the state of the City’s finances, any Oakland pol who spends public $$ on a stadium for either team is finished.


    And they know it.

    • In that case, it won’t be long before Oakland will have zero professional sports teams. Oakland will have lost its strongest positive identity. A bad omen for Oakland’s future.

    • where are the pitchforks and torches from those in the east bay who would be doing this if wolff tried to pull this with the a’s org except all he wanted to do is move the team 40 miles south to sj

      not 400 miles south to la or even 1700+ miles south east to san antonio like we’re seeing from davis.

      the double standards here locally when it deals with these sports teams is dumbfounding.

      • I’ve noticed that Mark Davis pushed the talking point “We don’t even have a lease!” when the reason is that *they haven’t asked the JPA to renew*.

  29. Re: the Walmart across 880 closing.

    The ‘Oakland Fan Pledge’ twitter pic correctly shows the Panda Express, the In’N’Out, and the businesses across the parking lot (the Wing Stop, Raider Store (oh the irony…), etc.) are all on separate lots from the 12-acre Walmart lot.

    Lack of any parking (new ballpark would take up almost all of the lot) and public transit access is still a big issue, and the impact of gameday traffic on the Airport would need to be studied.

    Other bit of irony … it’s the same exact lot that the Coliseum City plan reserved for ‘possible future acquisition’ by the A’s.

  30. From Jason LaCanfora who knows more than that joke Vinny B….Jason hits on all points:
    Where do you place the odds of the Raiders landing? And how long is this Mark Davis’ team?
    Don’t make me laugh. Where the hell is he going? Kroenke, for all of his means and wealth and for having shovels in the ground already in a prime location where the NFL league office wanted to build a stadium, had to sweat it out through a challenging process that was clearly controlled by the league. Davis has none of that, and the NFL won’t let him in San Diego to try to undermine their LA project, and Jerry Jones — who made the proposal to get the Rams and Chargers together in the first place — doesn’t want him anywhere near San Antonio. No way Davis gets the votes to go anywhere the league doesn’t want him — and every indication I get is that the league wants two teams in the Bay Area. Beyond that, the league could set the relocation fee easily out of his reach as well. He can huff and puff, but he ain’t blowing anything down, and his best bet is to work really hard securing additional owners and putting that $100 million to work in the Oakland area, or the league will eventually find a big-time owner who will.

    • While I think this is largely right about the Raiders, it needs to be pointed out that Jason LaCanfora’s coverage of the LA rely saga was not great. Like Mike Florio, he just kept spewing out the Chargers’ spin about Carson, which turned out to be a mirage.

      Jason Cole of Bleacher Report did a much better job. So did Sam Farmer, Vinny B., and especially Fred Roggin in LA.

  31. Its time for you to shut this site down, nobody but your minions, which are most likely you posting under hella account, give a damn about what you have to say anymore.

    I was always right and you were always wrong. Time to wake up and realize both the A’s and Raiders are staying in Oakland blady. Deal with it.

    • Keith, congratulations. This is the most cogent post I’ve ever seen written by you.

      Now be nice. No one was telling you to shut down your video blog when Coliseum City, Victory Court, and the first attempt at Howard Terminal failed. Oh right, no one was watching the video blog. Never mind. Carry on.

  32. There is question about a possible Raiders move to San Antonio which is overlooked – what about the $550 mil. relocation fee?. (Relocation fees are waived only if the franchise moves into a market vacated by a team, example: if San Diego joins Kroenke in Inglewood, the Raiders could then move to SD and avoid paying a relocation fee because the Chargers bolted)

    Not the case with San Antonio – how would San Antonio officials and/or Davis finance the additional $550 mil. relocation fee (nearly the cost of a new NFL stadium) besides funding a new NFL stadium? neither San Antonio or Davis is loaded with enough cash to afford that evidently. Also moving from a 7.5 mil fanbase to a 2.3 mil. one (San Antonio/Austin) doesn’t appear to be a wise move – even though the NFL believes that market will become a strong NFL market in five years. Recouping their investment may require to take a while for the Raiders/San Antonio if they make that move.

    The Raiders would likely be better off investing their $300 mil. {now $400 mil because of the latest NFL gift since the Raiders struck out with their Carson plan) – on the Coliseum. With 2016 technology available – a Coliseum retool for $300-$400 mil. could likely upgrade it into a slick-looking new NFL-only stadium (after Oakland boots the A’s out – which they appear willing to do)

    • The relocation fee for either the Chargers or Raiders in LA will be $550 million, same as for the Rams.

      There is no rule for relocating to other markets. The NFL can set whatever fee it wants based on size of new market, as well as NFL interest in discouraging the move.

      The Raiders would be hit with a sizable fee if they went to San Antonio or San Diego, but probably well below the $550 million Los Angeles price.

    • I do agree that the Raiders should find a way to build in the East Bay.

      My strong suspicion though is that Davis will do nothing until the Chargers make a final decision on LA. If Spanis can somehow work out a deal in San Diego, the Raiders will exercise their LA option immediately. That has always been Mark Davis’ first choice.

      • I just don’t see how the Charges don’t work something out with the Rams, but I agree Davis would be packing his bags at midnight, the day the Chargers option for LA expires. Davis would have finally gotten what he wants, somone else to build his broke ass a stadium.

    • Exactly, and you put Jerry Jones in the mix and San Antonio just not happening for a long time. Probably never for the Raiders.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.