A concert nine days before the planned kickoff left the playing surface at Estadio Azteca in serious disrepairGETTY IMAGES
Poor field conditions at Estadio Azteca prompted the NFL to "pull the plug on the Mexico City game" between the Rams and Chiefs, reverting to L.A. Memorial Coliseum because it is "technically a home game for the Rams," according to Farmer & Klein of the L.A. TIMES. A concert nine days before the planned kickoff "left the playing surface at the Mexico City stadium in serious disrepair." That raised concerns about "player safety with the league." Efforts to "re-sod the turf were insufficient to convince the NFL to stay." According to the league, the decision was based on the determination -- in consultation with the NFLPA, and following a meeting and field inspection yesterday by NFL and club field experts as well as local and independent outside experts -- that the playing field at Estadio Azteca “does not meet NFL standards for play ability and consistency and will not meet those standards by next Monday” (L.A. TIMES, 11/14). ESPN's Tony Kornheiser said, "This is a victory for the NFLPA because they got involved in this. If you're going to say that safety is your No. 1 issue ... then I think they're actually putting their money where their mouth is because they don't want to move this game. They want to be expansionists in London and Mexico City" ("PTI," ESPN, 11/13).
PLAN B: ESPN.com's Adam Schefter noted the Rams will now "scramble to get security, concessions and all other logistical aspects lined up to host a major prime-time game in six days." USC plays UCLA at the Rose Bowl on Saturday, and there "aren't many other sporting events taking place in Los Angeles over the weekend, which helps the Rams with the quick turnaround." Rams Exec VP/Football Operations & COO Kevin Demoff called the development "bittersweet" (ESPN.com, 11/13). CBSSPORTS.com's Sean Wagner-McGough wrote even if the "logistics are messy, this was a no-brainer decision for the NFL." The league "couldn't really afford to put its players at such an obvious risk by playing on an unplayable field." If the NFL "hadn't moved the game back to L.A., it would've faced the possibility of seeing players on both sides refuse to partake in the game, which would've turned the game of the year into an embarrassing debacle" (CBSSPORTS.com, 11/13). THE RINGER's Danny Heifetz wrote the decision was a "no-brainer, but the NFL has messed up no-brainers before, so perhaps this is progress." However, do "not give the league to much credit" (THERINGER.com, 11/13).
TOO MUCH ACTIVITY: In N.Y., Ken Belson writes the decision to move the game out of Mexico City is a "step backward for the league." The field at Estadio Azteca in years past has "received plenty of attention from the Mexican media, with several leaders and coaches of soccer teams that play there complaining about the field’s condition." Some critics noted that recent events were "held in the stadium before the new surface had enough time to take root." The stadium operators "blamed the long rainy season and the high number of events." The NFL was "aware that a new field had been installed this year, but the conditions changed as a result of the stadium having been heavily used." Liga MX teams Club America and Cruz Azul, as well as the Mexican national team, "play there" (N.Y. TIMES, 11/14). CBS Sports' Jason LaCanfora said the "field was just deemed thoroughly unplayable." He added, "It's been so documented now that you run the risk of lawsuits, you start to run the risk of further action by the NFLPA. ... At the end of the day, common sense prevailed" ("Time to Schein," CBSSN, 11/13).
MONEY MATTERS: PFT's Mike Florio said, "Even if you're not concerned about player safety, how about protecting your investment?" NBCSN's Chris Simms: "They wanted to keep it there of course because it's good for the shield and it's money and everything else. That's the only reason the NFL was trying to make it happen, but I really think that the tide turned once the NFL got wind that players were saying, 'We might not play if we have to go down and play on that field" ("PFT," NBCSN, 11/14).
NO OTHER OPTION: THE ATHLETIC's Lindsay Jones wrote it "couldn’t have been an easy decision for the league to abandon a piece of one of its marquee events, the International Series, but it was the right one." The NFL will have to "answer to questions of why, just six days before one of its premier events, it was forced to move the game." Moving the game back to L.A. was "not only the easiest solution, but the only one" (THEATHLETIC.com, 11/13). NFL Network's Lindsay Rhodes said, "I cannot imagine that this was a decision that the league made lightly" ("NFL Total Access," NFL Network, 11/13). USA TODAY's Jarrett Bell writes this "wasn't really much of a choice." Imagine if Rams RB Todd Gurley or Chiefs QB Patrick Mahomes "tore up a knee while sliding around on a sloppy field at Estadio Azteca." The NFL, with a "litany of bruises to its image in recent years, couldn’t dare risk the possibility of blowing this one." The ramifications "could be significant for the NFL’s efforts on the international stage." It is "one more reason for coaches or other detractors from teams to loathe games in non-NFL stadiums" (USA TODAY, 11/14).
BIG WIN FOR LA LA LAND: In California, Rich Hammond notes L.A. Coliseum will now "host what is arguably the biggest game of the NFL season" (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 11/14). In L.A., Bill Plaschke writes the NFL's decision to move the game is "more than just a change in location," it is a "change in the fortunes of both the Rams and the Los Angeles sports landscape." This is like being "awarded a mini-Super Bowl without the price gouging." The Coliseum "will be rocking." It will "arguably be the most celebrated Rams home game" since their return to L.A. two seasons ago (L.A. TIMES, 11/14). ESPN's Trey Wingo: "This is going to be the showcase game on the 'Monday Night' schedule for this season. I think this is only the first or second time teams with this good of a record are meeting this late in a season on the 'Monday Night' stage, so hell yeah we wanted to make sure our interests as a company were protected in this as well, and for the players and health of that field, this was the right decision" ("Golic & Wingo," ESPN Radio, 11/14).
TOUGH LOSS: ESPN's Michael WIlbon said the NFL moving the game to L.A. is "dubious and it just sounds like the players are being divas." Wilbon said he understood Estadio Azteca "looked like junk and then they laid some new hybrid turf ... but if new turf is a reason to get out and go to Los Angeles then they could never play a game" at Heinz Field and Soldier Field "because it always looks terrible" ("PTI," ESPN, 11/13). In K.C., Sam Mellinger writes, "The NFL done messed up." To be fair, the league is on the "unlucky end of a conspiracy of bad events." Moving the game was the "right decision." The hard part will be "explaining how this happened, and how a league obsessed with control lost it here." The result will almost certainly be "tighter guarantees and more control over stadiums for future international games (and, yes, there will be many more, including at Azteca, because that’s how business is grown)." The important thing will be whether a league that is "often and fairly criticized for viewing fans as profit centers is willing to do everything it can to make things right with those passionate enough to make travel plans for Mexico City" (K.C. STAR, 11/14).
