Los Angeles Rumors: 1/11/16

3:12pm: A consensus is building within the league for the Rams and Chargers to share a stadium in Inglewood, according to Sam Farmer and Nathan Fenno of the Los Angeles Times. Multiple league officials and owners not involved with either the Inglewood or Carson proposals have made note of that momentum, with one owner (whose preference hasn’t been previously reported or stated) telling the Times that the Carson plan isn’t even close to being as strong as Inglewood’s.

According to Farmer and Fenno, league insiders think Chargers owner Dean Spanos doesn’t want to have to turn his back on a partner – Mark Davis and the Raiders – but there’s a belief that the issue can be resolved during this week’s meetings in Houston.

While the majority of owners favor a plan that would land the Rams and Raiders in Inglewood, one owner acknowledged that “we just can’t solve all three stadium problems in one fell swoop.” So this week’s discussion will be crucial, as the NFL’s 32 owners debate how to clear some of the hurdles involved in the plan.

11:34am: The NFL’s team owners are meeting in Houston this week to discuss the Los Angeles situation, and in a perfect world, a vote would take place on Wednesday to determine the fate of the Rams, Chargers, and Raiders. However, according to Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk, there’s a chance that owners could postpone that vote in order to finalize the details of their preferred outcome.

Florio cites a source with “intimate knowledge of the dynamics” who says there’s a 25% or 30% chance of that vote being postponed, perhaps for a few weeks at most, which means it’s still more likely than not that some sort of resolution is agreed upon in the coming days. But no matter what solution the NFL’s owners decide, there figure to be plenty of roadblocks to overcome, particularly if the league wants to move forward with a new proposal like the one Jerry Jones has reportedly suggested.

As we wait to see what happens in Houston this week, here are a few more details to keep in mind:

  • For a Rams/Chargers partnership to work, Chargers owner Dean Spanos would have to overcome his distrust for Rams owner Stan Kroenke, and would have to believe that Kroenke would give the Chargers a fair shot if they play in Inglewood, says Jason Cole of Bleacher Report (video link).
  • Additionally, a Rams/Chargers team-up would put the Raiders in an interesting spot. In his previously-linked piece, Florio suggests that Mark Davis‘ franchise would benefit from the deal enough financially that it would be more viable for the team to build a new stadium, presumably in Oakland. However, Cole indicates that Davis and the Raiders may resume their exploration of a move to San Antonio if the team’s L.A. plan falls through. According to Cole (video link), Davis has a parcel of land between San Antonio and Austin that could house a stadium, and Jerry Jones may not have as much leverage to keep another franchise out of Texas if he essentially helped push that franchise out of its L.A. deal.
  • Peter King of TheMMQB.com reports a few interesting Los Angeles nuggets in his latest column, writing that the Chargers are “heavy favorites” to move to L.A., and would likely be one of two teams to relocate. According to King, the NFL would allow teams to pay the $550MM relocation fee at a rate of $64.5MM annually over 10 years, which obviously accounts for interest.
  • King also weighs in on the issue of the odd team out, suggesting that if the Rams and Chargers move to L.A., the Raiders would be set up with “one of the most golden of parachutes.” As an official familiar with the league’s thinking explains: “Whoever is not going to Los Angeles will be generously taken care of. The league will create a safety net for that team.” If that’s the case, the franchise may not need to create extra leverage by exploring a relocation to San Antonio, as noted above.
View Comments (12)
newest oldest

12 comments on “Los Angeles Rumors: 1/11/16

  1. Gary Kreie

    So St. Louis fans, in the only city to offer a $1.1B stadium using tax money, are screwed? Oakland is rewarded for doing nothing? I don’t thing so. If the NFL says St. Louis was out because we assumed the extra $100M offered by head of their finance committee, McNair, and then give that much or more to Oakland, this will be a very easy lawsuit for St. Louis to win. They lead St. Louis to believe they would follow their own Policy and Procedures on Franchise Relocation, and then did not.

  2. This is Bull. This league first of all is classified as a non-profit so they don’t pay anything in federal taxes. Now they’re going to screw my Raiders out of a large amount of money when they deny them from moving. Whatever team gets Los Angeles will double in net worth. That is why they’re going to give Mark Davis to build a stadium in Oakland. If I was him, I would say no build me a stadium where I want and fight like DAD!

  3. Thanks for screwing San Diego NFL. We appreciate the way you are tuning your back on NFL fans in San Diego. I guess your ok with turning off this market. Good luck …I know I won’t be buying or watching anything with NFL on it if you close the door on chargers in San Diego.

    • wbricker

      Stick to your guns you will save a lot of money and if u golf lower ur handicap

  4. jrwhite21

    I don’t understand why San Diego would move. It’s a big enough city that they should have a competitive market. I recognize the LA is far bigger, but to me it makes more sense for the Rams or Raiders to move. In case it isn’t obvious, I’ve paid almost zero attention to the relocation story…lol.

  5. Dwalt

    NFL actually gave up its status as a Non-profit this year and will start paying taxes after 70 years.

    • whtstr314

      Only because they were threatened with a bill revoking their non-profit status.

  6. STLFann

    Stan kroenke is everything that is wrong with sports. Some rich douche decides he wants to play God. The things he said about St. Louis is embarrassing on his part. The league should have never allowed him to buy the Rams. But wait the league likes money so that’s how that goes. That fact that the nfl doesn’t pay federal taxes is ridiculous.

    • STL Sports Fan

      My thoughts exactly. The city of St. Louis has done absolutely everything it was expected to do, and yet it looks like they will lose their team anyway while Oakland (the city that did nothing whatsoever) gets to keep their team. Forget about the loyal fans, as long as the NFL and Kroenke get that extra buck
      #KeepTheRams #GetRidOfStan

  7. St Louis Raiders?

  8. STLFann

    It would be better than no football but rather have the Rams stay. It would be hard to watch Todd kill it for a different team

  9. robb fett

    the LA Rams were ripped out of LA because of their greedy owner, and not because we did not support them. in ’91, when she demanded a new stadium, she started to pull away.
    StLouis fans, you have had the Cards, and you were the tools that helped the greedy owner pull away from LA. You guys have no leg to stand on.
    That said, The Rams should return home, Chargers remain in SD, and move the Raiders to Ferguson/St.Louis. (this gives you guys a 3rd team to work with).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 Notify me of followup comments via e-mail.