The city of San Diego "is a very real and viable option" for the Raiders, as it is "a market the NFL absolutely wants to be in, and one the league is comfortable the Raiders would dominate," according to sources cited by Vincent Bonsignore of the L.A. DAILY NEWS. The league could waive "any relocation fee to facilitate a possible Raiders move to San Diego or set one at a price extremely affordable." Additionally, the $100M the league "promised to the Raiders to go toward a deal in Oakland is expected to be available to them in a move to San Diego." A source said that "waiving a relocation fee could be possible as the Raiders would be yielding a Bay Area market that is attractive to the NFL long term while filling a San Diego market the league wants to keep in the fold." The Raiders moving to San Diego is "advantageous for a number of reasons," as the team has a "strong foothold in Southern California, and can count on support" from nearby counties. More importantly, it "would secure the Raiders’ long-range future, which is what this entire process has been about for the Raiders, Rams and Chargers." Bonsignore asks, "The key is, can the Raiders do what the Chargers could not: agree on a stadium deal with San Diego and get it approved?" (L.A. DAILY NEWS, 1/18). But Former Raiders Chief Exec Amy Trask said she could not see the team moving to San Diego "for the same reason I don't see the Chargers wanting to stay in San Diego and have the Raiders in Los Angeles -- that 120-mile radius with two brand-new buildings." Trask: "That's a tough sell, literally and figuratively. I don't see San Diego as an option” (“That Other Pregame Show,” CBS Sports Network, 1/17).
BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD: Trask noted the Raiders "have to regroup" after last week's vote, as the team had been working "very, very hard for quite a long time to secure that second team position in Los Angeles." Trask: "Do they work to fashion the stadium solution in Oakland or the Greater Bay Area as a whole? Or do they look outside of the region? They can dual track those. They can work both to achieve something in Oakland -- and I believe something is achievable there -- or they can look elsewhere." However, she noted time "is of the essence" regarding the '16 season ("That Other Pregame Show," CBSSN, 1/17). In Sacramento, Ailene Voisin wrote the "most realistic alternative for" Raiders Owner Mark Davis is to share Levi’s Stadium with the 49ers. Former Vikings Owner Red McCombs "is dangling" San Antonio, but the league "does not want three teams in Texas." Common sense is that the Bay Area "simply doesn’t need two NFL stadiums" (SACRAMENTO BEE, 1/17).
NOT QUITE FINISHED YET: In Dallas, Kevin Sherrington noted Cowboys Owner Jerry Jones "helped clear the way for Los Angeles to get another NFL team," and now he "needs to do the same favor for San Antonio." The possibilities "have been discussed before, and it's always been dismissed because the NFL's most powerful man doesn't want any financial competition." Texans Owner Bob McNair "guesses that half of San Antonio's NFL fans pull for his Texans," and he has said that he "wouldn't necessarily oppose a third team" in Texas (DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 1/16).
