After acknowledging the Raiders’ future "might not be bright in Oakland," NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell yesterday "spoke in a positive tone about Las Vegas" at the league's owners' meeting in Irving, Texas, according to a front-page piece by Matt Youmans of the LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL. Goodell: "We have not made great progress in Oakland and San Diego. We feel strongly about keeping our teams where they are." Youmans notes Goodell in the past "expressed concerns about gambling and never had been complimentary of Las Vegas." But yesterday he said that an independent analysis "showed encouraging signs for the market’s growth and potential to support an NFL franchise." Goodell: "There are some real strengths to the Las Vegas market. It’s clear the Las Vegas market has become more diversified and more broadly involved with entertainment and hitting big events. There is a growth to the market. You can see the trajectory and where it’s going when you look at the data." Youmans notes Las Vegas would "rank as the NFL’s fifth-smallest market, ahead of Green Bay, Buffalo, New Orleans and Jacksonville." Texans Owner Bob McNair: “It’s not the biggest market, and you would prefer a bigger one. But sometimes you have to go where the opportunity is” (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 12/15). In L.A., Farmer & Fenno note Goodell and some owners "spoke in glowing terms" about Vegas' potential (L.A. TIMES, 12/15). USA TODAY's Tom Pelissero reports it "sounds more and more like March, not January, could be the time for NFL owners to consider" the Raiders’ expected application for relocation. Steelers President Art Rooney II, who chairs the NFL's stadium committee, said, "If they apply after the season, then we’ll have a lot of work to do, probably between then and March" (USA TODAY, 12/15). Raiders Owner Mark Davis said, “They have asked us not to talk about relocation, so I won’t. There is a gag order. I guess it’s just on me. But we’re doing what’s best for the franchise" (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 12/15).
LONG WAY TO GO: ESPN.com's Eric Williams notes Oakland's latest stadium proposal "still has a long way to go to satisfy what the NFL wants in order to stay there." NFL Exec VP/Business Ventures Eric Grubman, who attended Monday's meeting between NFL officials, the Raiders and Oakland city officials, said, “We’ve seen this movie before" (ESPN.com, 12/15). The L.A. TIMES' Farmer & Fenno note several owners and league officials yesterday "dismissed the latest plan to keep the Raiders in Oakland" (L.A. TIMES, 12/15). Goodell yesterday said that the city of Oakland needs to negotiate with the Raiders, and not a third-party developer like Fortress Investment Group, which just inked a two-month exclusive negotiating period with the city to potentially build a new stadium. Goodell made the comments after being asked about the Fortress deal as he left the podium. The NFL through Grubman earlier in the day, and then through Goodell, has now publicly all but ruled out a deal emanating from Fortress. However, it is unclear how the league might ultimately view a Raiders deal with casino magnate Sheldon Adelson in Las Vegas, as presumably that relationship also inserts a third party between a municipality and the team. No deal has yet emerged for the league to review in Vegas, where Davis said he intends to file for relocation to (Daniel Kaplan, Staff Writer). A S.F. CHRONICLE editorial is written under the header, "Can NFL Wean Itself Off Public Assistance?" As backup plans go, Oakland's proposal has "plenty of pluses." The framework of the deal is "sound and the market here is far more vibrant and sustainable than Las Vegas, if only Davis and the NFL were willing to wean themselves off public assistance" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 12/15).
SIN CITY BOUND? In Sacramento, Andy Furillo writes everything "appears to be lining up Las Vegas." The good news for Oakland still is that Goodell "appears to want the team to stay where it is, the reason being that there is still plenty of money to be made there, and that is what the league is all about." Furillo: "We’ll see if Goodell can get his owners to do the right thing" (SACRAMENTO BEE, 12/15). In S.F., Scott Ostler writes, "The Raiders are not getting a new stadium. They are not getting it in Oakland, Las Vegas, San Antonio, Mexico City or Irwindale." The team's three "most realistic options: Rent Levi’s Stadium, move to Los Angeles and rent the Rams’ new stadium, or keep playing" at the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum. Ostler: "Read my lips: No new stadium" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 12/15). In Las Vegas, Ed Graney writes under the header, "All Signs Seem To Say Raiders Are Coming To Las Vegas." Goodell was "positive in his comments about Las Vegas, which doesn’t necessarily mean hell has frozen over, but it requires you to wear a parka." Graney: "More and more, it appears the Oakland stadium plan is the Hail Mary most assumed the city would throw as a last-ditch effort to avoid losing the Raiders" (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 12/15).
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/andy-furillo/article120985308.html#storylink=cpy
