There is no plan for the Raiders to "change their branding -- from the silver and black color scheme to the famous pirate logo -- should the team move to Las Vegas," according to Lindsay Jones of USA TODAY. Raiders Senior Dir of Media Relations Will Kiss: "No rebranding is under consideration" (USATODAY.com, 1/20). In Las Vegas, Jon Saraceno wrote under the header, "NFL Will Approve Raiders Move Because Las Vegas Showed It The Money." Moving the team is "in the best financial interests of the league" and Owner Mark Davis. Saraceno: "The Las Vegas Raiders. Get used to hearing it this year" (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 1/22). The N.Y. Daily News' Bob Raissman said he was "really sad" the Raiders were abandoning a city like Oakland, where "they’ve meant so much to that community.” However, Las Vegas “is a good place to go” ("Daily News Live," SNY, 1/20). A LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL editorial stated, "Beyond the hype and congratulatory rhetoric, an NFL franchise would represent a true milestone in the evolution of Southern Nevada -- and could potentially change the landscape of American sports, particularly when it comes to sports wagering." The city is "on the verge of a very big score" (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 1/22).
WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT: In Sacramento, Ailene Voisin wrote Davis "has a lot of nerve," and his "tone-deaf behavior is nothing short of outrageous." He wants the Raiders to "remain in the Coliseum until the new stadium is constructed in southern Nevada." Voisin: "If the NFL owners approve the relocation during their meetings in March, Oakland’s Raiders fan should flee the Coliseum. ... Boycott the games" (SACRAMENTO BEE, 1/22). The AP's Paul Newberry wrote, "OK, Raider Nation. It's time to rise up -- by staying home." The NFL has "shown plenty of arrogance over the years, but the idea of the Raiders playing up to three lame-duck seasons in Oakland before moving to Las Vegas might be its worst nose-thumbing yet." There is "no reason for the good folks of the East Bay to stand for it" (AP, 1/20).
