Many of the NFL's most influential owners, including some on the league's Committee on L.A. Opportunities, "continue to have reservations about the Raiders' inclusion in the joint project with the Chargers in Carson, Calif.," according to Jason La Canfora of CBSSPORTS.com. Sources said that owners' concerns "over the strength of the Raiders' ownership group could result in no teams getting approval" to move to L.A. in '16. Furthermore, sources said that the "odds of a move happening to L.A. next year would be significantly higher if the Chargers were either moving by themselves, or if they were paired with the Rams." Sources said that some owners "have doubts about whether or not Raiders owner Mark Davis has the acumen to build a strong franchise in a two-team L.A. market." There "remains a backlash to the Raiders going back" to L.A. Davis "is a polarizing figure," and as popular as Chargers Chair Dean Spanos is among his cohorts, Davis "is not held in as much esteem." Some owners believe it "makes much more sense for the return to L.A. to begin with one team rather than two." Finding a way to get Spanos and Rams Owner Stan Kroenke together "is viewed as the best-case scenario for a two-team L.A. market, and although consideration hurdles exist, it may not be impossible if a vote is pushed back" to '17. The inclusion of Disney Chair & CEO Bob Iger as head of the Carson stadium project "has helped the overall strength of that bid." Iger said that the "bond between the Chargers and Raiders is tight and there is no consideration that will be given to any arrangements with the Rams or other clubs." La Canfora: "He was also adamant that two teams should enter L.A. simultaneously, though I continue to hear that is something on which several owners are not sold" (CBSSPORTS.com, 12/13).
BLOCK PARTY: In Boston, Ben Volin noted it is believed that both L.A. projects "have the necessary number of votes to block the other from happening, so there will be a lot of behind-the-scenes politicking from all three teams before a vote is held among the NFL owners Jan. 12-13 in Houston." Three things "remain clear: The NFL wants two teams in L.A. next year; most of this stuff won’t get sorted out until right before or during the January owners’ meetings, as deadlines spur action; and don’t expect the NFL to get teary-eyed about leaving one or more of its current cities" (BOSTON GLOBE, 12/13).
WHAT ABOUT BOB? Iger said that he "first became involved" in the effort to build a Carson stadium "at the invitation" of Panthers Owner Jerry Richardson. PRO FOOTBALL TALK's Mike Florio noted that has "prompted some to question the impartiality of Richardson," who serves on the league’s committee. But it is "inaccurate to assume that the members of the Committee are or ever were or ever should be impartial." A source said that Richardson "entered the process with strong feeling" about L.A. He has been "opposed from the outset to the idea of bringing a fourth team to California when two of the three teams already in that state occupy two of the worst stadiums in the league." Also, it "wasn’t Richardson’s idea to reach out to Iger, and Richardson had no involvement in recruiting Iger beyond the initial meeting." Iger thereafter "worked directly with the Carson project and the Raiders and Chargers." A source said that Richardson "didn’t even know that Iger would become an official participant in the Carson effort until a day or two before the announcement was made" (PROFOOTBALLTALK.com, 12/13). In L.A., Vincent Bonsignore noted Richardson has said that he "supports the Carson project" over Kroenke’s Inglewood plan -- which "is within his rights." But from "the outside looking in, his participation as a committee member enhancing the Carson effort certainly raises an issue of process fairness." Richardson is a member of the committee, yet he is "also aiding one project over another while trying to claim that he can make a decision that is in best interest of NFL." Bonsignore: "Seems a bit fishy" (L.A. DAILY NEWS, 12/13).
GAME CHANGER: In California, Scott Reid writes what Iger has been selling "is a vision of a football-centric, open-air stadium and fan experience, a distinct contrast to Kroenke’s closed-roof, multi-purpose stadium that is part of a larger multi-use 298-acre development proposed in Inglewood." Iger: "This needs to be about football, not about how the stadium is going to be programmed when football is not being played. Not about anything else other than the football experience and what comes with that. Let’s make football the real focal point.” Reid notes the addition of Iger and his "vision of a gridiron California Adventure are the primary reasons why there is a growing belief within the NFL that Carson might actually seal the deal next month after trailing Kroenke’s Inglewood project earlier this year in the league’s more-than-two-decade race" back to L.A. (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 12/14).
MAKING A SOUND DECISION: CBS Sports Network's Amy Trask said, "The league cannot afford to allow football to fail in Los Angeles." The net's Adam Schein added, "There's too much at stake." Trask said of having two teams in L.A., "With the right stadium in the right location, that is possible." But Trask said she is "starting to question" the idea. Trask: "I have some serious concerns about two teams coming to the market. I'm also going to rethink something I've long said, which is make a decision. Just make a decision already. I'm hearing murmurings, and I'm not sure it's a bad idea that maybe a decision might and should be delayed" ("That Other Pregame Show," CBSSN, 12/13).
