Cole County (Mo.) Circuit Court Judge Jon Edward Beetem on Thursday removed Gov. Jay Nixon "from a lawsuit seeking to block state spending on a new football stadium in St. Louis," according to a front-page piece by David Hunn of the ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH. Beetem also "transferred the case to St. Louis." The decision "clears yet another barrier in Nixon’s effort to build a new downtown football stadium in St. Louis and keep the Rams from leaving" for L.A. St. Louis stadium task force co-head Bob Blitz said, "It's another thing we really don't have to worry about. Big picture, it gives us a lot of momentum." Hunn notes this was the "second recent ruling in Nixon’s favor." Earlier this month, St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Thomas Frawley ruled that the city "does not need voter approval to spend tax dollars on the stadium" (ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 8/14). ESPN.com's Nick Wagoner noted since the stadium was "first proposed, part of the financing plan for it included Nixon's ability to extend state bonds currently used for the Edward Jones Dome to pay for the new venue." The lawsuit, originally filed by six state legislators, intended to "prevent the governor from using state money to fund the new stadium" (ESPN.com, 8/13).
LOOKING FOR ANSWERS: NFL Exec VP/Business Eric Grubman said of one or two teams possibly moving to L.A., "The likelihood has steadily gone up, but I don't want to try to pick a probability." He added, "The base case would look toward making a decision in time for the 2016 season. ... The focus is on doing this right, not on meeting some particular timing. We have not eliminated any options, but our current work plan is looking at 2016." Grubman said of ongoing stadium plans, "St. Louis and San Diego are working on specific plans. They have not yet proved those plans are attractive to clubs or actionable. To the best of my knowledge, there is no specific plan that has been put in front of the Raiders, and no plan from Oakland has been put in front of the league." But he added, "It is not over in Oakland. The Raiders and the league are still hopeful" (USA TODAY, 8/14).
NUTS & BOLTS: In California, Jim Alexander writes it is "hard to tell which camp San Diego fans fall into as their NFL team continues its slow drift" toward L.A. It may "be an even split," with some telling Chargers Chair Dean Spanos "not to let the door hit him on the way out, others desperately holding on to their licensed jerseys and car flags and putting reality on hold for at least one more season." There were "no overt signs of protest from Chargers fans" during Thursday's preseason home game against the Cowboys. The only sign visible was a "'Bolt Pride' banner behind the west end zone -- presumably approved by management." Alexander: "Maybe the mood is now one of resignation, probably to be expected given the team’s involvement in the Carson stadium project and its refusal to work with those who are attempting to keep the team in San Diego" (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 8/14).
PROCEED WITH CAUTION: In San Jose, Mark Purdy writes despite the NFL's "huge ego, there are measured voices within the league who wonder if bringing two teams simultaneously to market" in L.A. is "such a terrific idea." A "safer choice would be to award just one team" to L.A. and "test the waters to gauge the area's true pro football demand before adding a second franchise." Purdy writes the league also should "approach with caution" the words of Carmen Policy, the lead consultant on the Carson stadium project. Policy is an "awesomely smooth talker and intelligent negotiator," but he also "has been the carnival barker for three previous failed NFL stadium deals." Purdy: "It's strange, the utter disdain [Raiders Owner Mark] Davis has shown for the idea of splitting home dates at Levi's Stadium with the 49ers, even on a temporary basis." Geographically, the venue is "actually closer" to Oakland than S.F., and the 49ers' contract with Santa Clara "already provides the financial parameters for a second team" (SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, 8/14).
