NFL owners voted 24-5-1 yesterday to pass a resolution
to approve cross-ownership, according to Armando Salguero of
the MIAMI HERALD. The provision allows an NFL owner to own
a team in another league within the same market as the
football team, or in a city with no NFL franchise. Also, an
owner of a team in another league can buy an NFL team in the
same market or open city. Salguero writes that the
"accomplishment was possible" because the Bucs, Vikings and
Panthers changed their vote "on the heels of pleas" from
Dolphins President Eddie Jones and 49ers President Carmen
Policy. Five teams -- Bengals, Bills, Redskins, Bears and
Lions -- cast opposing votes. The Raiders abstained. The
"teams cited reasons ranging from financial considerations
to personal ones." The Redskins voted against it because
Jack Kent Cooke was "forced to divest of the L.A. Lakers
when he entered the NFL and didn't think an exception should
be made now" (MIAMI HERALD, 3/12). The Dolphins' Jones:
"The team will be taken out of trust, and it will now be a
full-fledged ownership." Previously, the "only exception"
to the cross-ownership policy was in regard to pro soccer
teams. NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue said that "in
changing its position, the league also reaffirmed its long-
standing opposition to corporate ownership" (N.Y. TIMES,
3/12). In Baltimore, Vito Stellino writes that the "key to
getting the rule changed" was potential Seahawks Owner Paul
Allen's "promise to keep the team in Seattle if he gets
stadium funding" (Baltimore SUN, 3/12).
OPEN SEASON: In Akron, David Adams reports that the new
policy would allow Indians Owner Richard Jacobs "to be part
of an ownership group of the reconstituted Browns." Indians
VP/Public Relations Bob DiBiasio "refused to say whether
Jacobs has asked the NFL about taking part in an ownership
group for the Browns, but league officials confirmed that
Jacobs has expressed an interest" (AKRON BEACON JOURNAL,
3/12). In Houston, John McClain writes that Padres Owner
John Moores "will not be able to own an NFL team in
Houston," since he owns a team from another league in an NFL
market. But Moores "didn't seem to place a lot of stock in
it." Moores told KRIV-TV in Houston: "If anyone thinks this
is the end of the road for cross-ownership, they're going to
be disappointed" (HOUSTON CHRONICLE, 3/12).
O'MALLEY BACK IN FRONT? In L.A., T.J. Simers notes with
cross-ownership, "there are some" L.A. officials and
"rumblings within the NFL that suggest [Dodgers Owner Peter]
O'Malley will not necessarily sell the Dodgers so much as
acquire a corporate sponsor, while maintaining control of
the baseball team and the land in order to still build a
football stadium." Simers notes that NFL owners "basically
ignored" L.A.'s "hospitality" at the owners meetings, and
"unless NFL owners experience a dramatic shift in opinion,"
the viability of a Coliseum plan may come into question,
"leaving the door ajar for someone like O'Malley to make his
run for NFL attention" (L.A. TIMES, 3/12). The ORANGE
COUNTY REGISTER's Barbara Kingsley writes that in its
audience with owners in Palm Desert, L.A. officials "tried
their hardest to replace a negative image of the Coliseum
with a glittering new one worthy of an NFL team." Kingsley:
"Many owners were dubious. Others said they would keep an
open mind" (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 3/12). The TORONTO
SUN's Gary Picknell notes Raiders Owner Al Davis had said
that "he owns the NFL market rights to L.A." But Tagliabue
"countered yesterday that he doesn't feel Davis has any
basis for asserting that claim" (TORONTO SUN, 3/12).
