The Raiders, Chargers and Rams yesterday "submitted relocation applications" to the league in an "aggressive move to end the NFL's two-decade absence" in L.A., according to Farmer & Fenno of the L.A. TIMES. Yesterday was the first available date the teams were "eligible to do so," and this marks the "first time any teams have formally requested to fill the L.A. vacancy." In an interview with the Chargers' website, team Chair Dean Spanos "blamed the Rams for forcing his team to take action on L.A." Spanos: "That is what really was the catalyst that got this whole thing going, because when the Rams decided to make their move there, this was a move to protect our business more than anything. So we find ourselves where we do right now" (L.A. TIMES, 1/5). A statement from the Chargers read in part, "We are sad to have reached this point" (SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, 1/5). Spanos: "There’s no certainty on anything as I sit here. It’s a very fluid situation. You read this stuff in the paper and everybody’s tallying votes nobody knows for sure.” He added, "It was very difficult to come to this decision. But it’s been 14 years we’ve been working very hard to get something done here. We've had nine different proposals that we've made, all of them basically rejected by the city." San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer: "San Diego developed a fair stadium proposal and a plan to hold a special election by the NFL's deadline, but the Chargers’ owner walked away from the table" (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 1/5).
THE PROPOSALS: ESPN.com's Nick Wagoner notes the NFL Committee on L.A. Opportunities, along with the league's stadium and finance committees, "will gather" in N.Y. tomorrow and Thursday and "hear extended pitches for the Carson and Inglewood projects" (ESPN.com, 1/5). In California, Scott Reid notes Carmen Policy, the lead consultant on the Carson project, will "make a 30-minute presentation" on the Chargers-Raiders plan (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 1/5). In St. Louis, David Hunn notes owners "will lean on a six-page list of NFL relocation guidelines" and "weigh the economic benefit to the league of each proposal." They will "compare those to a lengthy list of relocation guidelines, which include discussions of fan loyalty, previous relocations, previous tax incentives, club financial performance and stadium adequacy, among other issues" (ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 1/5). In L.A., Vincent Bonsignore notes the "likely scenario" is an impasse due to not enough team support, and that "will be the catalyst for a negotiated outcome" (L.A. DAILY NEWS, 1/5).
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL: SPORTSBUSINESS JOURNAL's Daniel Kaplan notes Rams Owner Stan Kroenke and the developer of his Inglewood project "have until Thursday to reply" to the FAA's November determination that the venue "would be a hazard" for nearby airplanes flying into LAX. The NFL "commissioned a study on the Inglewood site, but that looked largely at the safety issues, not the technical ones the FAA raised in its findings, which declared the venue would interfere with air traffic radar." An NFL source said, “We hired a consultant to look at safety and security for all the sites. The report indicated that the stadium at Inglewood met all posted FAA regs. We went back to that consultant and have been told that it is not uncommon for stadiums near flight paths to draw FAA technical objections, but that their firm is not expert in this matter. It is a design, not a security, issue. (The) Rams have advised us that there are a number of remedies and that they will pursue one of those remedies to get sign-off from (the) FAA” (SPORTSBUSINESS JOURNAL, 1/4 issue). INGLEWOOD TODAY noted regardless of whether the NFL approves Kroenke's stadium plan, the Rams owner and Inglewood Mayor James Butts "have maintained the city will move ahead on its plans for an NFL level stadium and entertainment venue." The facility "can be built to accommodate future World Cups, Olympics, award shows and other major events" (INGLEWOODTODAYNEWS.com, 1/3).
BAY WATCH: CSNBAYAREA.com's Joe Stiglich noted the A’s will be watching the NFL meetings "from a distance with curiosity." A's co-Owner Lew Wolff: "Any planning that either we or the Raiders do, we both would be better off knowing what decisions would be affecting either club. We’re just interested in seeing what their plans may be, and we respect their position. I don’t have any idea if (the NFL) will reach a decision or not. We’re continuing our studies in Oakland. It would be nice to know what (the Raiders’) plans are. I’m sure they would like that themselves.” Though the O.co Coliseum site has remained the A’s top choice to build a new ballpark, Wolff confirmed the team is “exploring any and all sites that might be available” in Oakland (CSNBAYAREA.com, 1/4).
