At "some point soon, perhaps in the next 30 to 60 days, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell will announce that the league is going to focus in 2015 on identifying a stadium site" in the L.A. area and is "moving forward without a specific team in mind," according to Sam Farmer of the L.A. TIMES. Focusing "entirely on a stadium site will be a somewhat
new approach for the league, and will allow it to maintain some momentum
in working toward an L.A. solution." It is a "way to keep politicians
engaged" after "another year has gone by without any significant
progress on the L.A. front." It also is a way for the NFL to "keep the
pressure on AEG to make a deal." The league could "zero in on an L.A.
site" with the "intention of picking out the team or teams later." As
for who would "finance the stadium, whether it be a team or teams, or
the league -- the NFL would keep all options on the table" (L.A. TIMES, 12/21).
PUTTING THEM ON HOLD: ESPN.com's Adam Schefter cited sources as saying that Goodell last week "put an end" to any questions about a team moving to L.A. next year, as he told the Rams, Chargers and Raiders that "any team that is considering relocating" to L.A. should look to '16 instead (12/20). In N.Y., Ken Belson cited a source as saying that those three teams "told the NFL that they would remain in their cities next year" (N.Y. TIMES, 12/21). However, PRO FOOTBALL TALK's Mike Florio wrote Schefter’s report "creates the impression that Goodell dictated the outcome to the teams." Given the "year the league office has had, that’s not the most favorable message to send" (PROFOOTBALLTALK.com, 12/20).
MEN ON A MISSION: In St. Louis, Bernie Miklasz
notes Anheuser-Busch Senior Adviser and St. Louis Sports Commission
Chair Dave Peacock and Edward Jones Dome attorney Robert Blitz "have taken firm command
of a long and arduous process" in the Rams' plans for a new stadium.
Miklasz: "Though a positive end result for St. Louis isn’t guaranteed,
I’m impressed by their early strategy." It was "important for Peacock to
go directly to the NFL to make league executives fully aware of the
initial stadium plans and establish immediate credibility." Goodell
"knows Peacock well and has described him as a friend." During Peacock’s
time with A-B, he "made a bunch of business deals with Goodell and the
league." The NFL "had to be made fully aware of the hard work that’s
being invested to keep the Rams in St. Louis." By "going around Rams
owner Stan Kroenke to take their plans directly" to Goodell and NFL Exec
VP/Business Ventures Eric Grubman, Peacock and Blitz "can keep Kroenke
in check." Miklasz: "At least for now, anyway." If the league "believes
there’s a realistic chance of a new stadium rising in St. Louis, it has
no reason to give Kroenke a fast green light to zoom off to L.A." Kroenke also has "yet to comply with the league’s rules on cross ownership."
The NFL has "given Kroenke an extension to comply with the rules, and
it isn’t a good time for Stan to pick a fight and make enemies within
the league" (ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 12/20).
HOLD THAT THOUGHT: In St. Louis, D.J. Gelner wrote, "Despite the
encouraging reports of progress being made by Dave Peacock and company
in securing a stadium plan for St. Louis without having to bring the
proposal to the voters of the city and/or state, why do I still
get the uneasy feeling that Stan Kroenke would bolt out the door
tomorrow if he could?" Now that it "appears that Peacock, Blitz, and
everyone else involved in the stadium plan are coming out 'guns blazing'
enough to come up with a creative stadium proposal that doesn't require
a public vote, Kroenke might feel cornered." He "might be threatened
enough to 'go nuclear' and do the unthinkable: sue the NFL." Gelner:
"Or, maybe he'll be just fine with his new downtown development on the
north riverfront." If Kroenke "gets desperate, or thinks he can win a
lawsuit, this situation could get really ugly, really quickly" (INSIDESTL.com, 12/21).
BLACK HOLE, SON: In S.F., Vic Tafur cited sources as saying that Raiders Owner Mark Davis is "expected to sign a one-year lease extension" with the O.co Coliseum to "play there next season ... despite little progress in talks with the city of Oakland regarding a new stadium." Davis said, "Getting a deal done here has always been what we’re trying to do. These fans are unbelievable." Tafur noted there are "plans to send out season-ticket renewal forms to Oakland fans as soon as the lease is extended" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 12/21). NFL.com's Ian Rapoport noted the Raiders have, in "under-the-radar fashion, closely aligned themselves with the league when it comes to relocation." Davis has "worked to build relationships with other owners to mend the fences after his father, Al Davis, spent many years opposing the league." The "first thing the younger Davis did was pay off his father's debt for breaking league rules." The settlement, into the "tens of millions of dollars, went a long way in removing animosity" (NFL.com, 12/21). In San Antonio, Tom Orsborn notes local officials "continue to hold out hopes" the Raiders have not "closed the door on possibly moving to the Alamo City" in '15 despite reports of the O.co Coliseum extension. Former San Antonio Mayor Henry Cisneros in a text message wrote, "The on-going discussions between San Antonio and the Raiders continue with almost daily exchanges of business points. The Raiders have been very straightforward at every step and, as of this time, have not altered their positions that San Antonio is a viable alternative" (SAN ANTONIO EXPRESS-NEWS, 12/22).
SUPER-CHARGED: In San Diego, Kevin Acee noted the Chargers' latest stadium proposal is a "multi-use venue downtown that would be part of a convention center expansion." The team is "eyeing a November ballot measure," likely in '16, and it "needs two-thirds approval by voters in order to receive the public assistance it is seeking in the form of land and a hotel tax" (SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, 12/21).
