The NFL’s decision to relegate the Raiders to the third spot in the two-team race to L.A. has "repercussions on the A’s, who share the outdated" O.co Coliseum and will be "forced to continue waiting for a resolution to their ballpark ordeal," according to Jorge Ortiz of USA TODAY. The NFL's decision was "perhaps the worst possible outcome for the A's," who might have to "continue sitting idly with little certainty of what lies ahead." Had the Raiders been "granted a direct entry into the L.A. market, their departure would have opened a clear path for the A’s to negotiate the terms of building a new baseball facility at the Coliseum site." Even if the Raiders had been "flatly rejected" in their bid to return to L.A., the A’s at least would have "gained clarity on their prospects for a new facility." Instead, the A's are "left to again ponder where to turn" (USA TODAY, 1/14). NBCSPORTS.com's Craig Calcaterra noted the Raiders as part of the L.A. deal will "receive a consolation prize in the form of loan money earmarked for a future stadium in Oakland." That could make it "more likely that the Raiders build themselves a new stadium there." If they do -- and if it "interferes with the A’s playing in the Coliseum" -- the A’s are entitled to a two-year notice "to get out of their current 10-year lease." If this has "either bothered or encouraged the A’s, they’re playing it close to the vest" (NBCSPORTS.com, 1/13).
