Rams Owner Stan Kroenke is "fixated on moving his franchise" to L.A. for '16, and the prospect of remaining in St. Louis "for any extended period of time does not appeal to him," according to Jason La Canfora of CBSSPORTS.com. Sources said that should Kroenke "lose out to the Chargers and Raiders on the rights to the L.A. market, the league knows it would have to work actively to find other solutions for Kroenke, which could include possibly London or Denver." The future ownership makeup of the Broncos is "very much in doubt when long-term patriarch Pat Bowlen passes on" (CBSSPORTS.com, 11/29).
GET TO THE POINT: In California, Scott Reid cited league employees as saying that this Wednesday's NFL owners meeting in Irving, Texas, will "establish neither a timetable for a January decision on relocation nor set a relocation fee." Both steps are "crucial if the league is to stay on course for a January decision," but a January decision is "no longer the certainty it seemed to be only a month ago." There are some in the NFL who "want a decision on relocation rolled back to after the Feb. 7 Super Bowl." A March vote on relocation "would not only make it extremely difficult for the Rams or Chargers and Raiders to get situated and sell tickets and sponsorships in their new markets or mend fences in the current cities, but it also makes it a lot easier for the NFL to put relocation off" until '17. The NFL "doesn’t need to have a team" in L.A., and L.A. "has certainly shown it can live without the NFL." Reid: "The question is can Roger Goodell survive without the NFL back in Los Angeles in 2016? Can the NFL’s commissioner survive another leadership crisis, because that is exactly how the league kicking the relocation can down the road to 2017 would be viewed. ... Doesn't Roger Goodell need L.A.?" Goodell "wants the matter resolved behind closed doors, but to do that a weakened commissioner has to broker a deal between the two sides, both bolstered with plenty of clout and ego." A failure to do so this year "would send three franchises, three fan bases through another season of purgatory." It would "further fuel indifference" within the L.A.-Orange County market to the league’s return. It would also "further loosen Goodell’s already tenuous grip on the most powerful job in American sports" (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 11/28).
SAN STORM: Former Padres Owner John Moores on Wednesday said that he is "supporting a ballot initiative that would raise hotel taxes and pave the way for redeveloping Qualcomm Stadium into a university campus if the Chargers vacate the 166-acre site." In San Diego, Dan McSwain reported Moores also "contributed $45,000 to help gather signatures necessary to qualify the initiative for the June or November ballot." Campaign spokesperson Jeff Powers "called the sum an 'initial investment' for Moores." The initiative would "prohibit use of any public funds for stadium construction" (SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, 11/26). The UNION-TRIBUNE's McSwain said of NFL owners possibly interested in delaying a relocation vote until March or later, "Really? San Diego either loses its team, or endures yet another cycle of drama?" Last week, the city released -- "after trying to keep it secret" -- a 24-page "term sheet" San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer gave NFL officials. Faulconer’s term sheet reveals it "as a political document, not the outlines of a stadium deal." Until the NFL "closes the door to L.A., there is no business reason for the Chargers to seriously consider staying in San Diego" (SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, 11/29).
