City Of Los Angeles

Latest On Raiders’, Chargers’ Relocation

December 3rd, 2016 at 9:00pm CST by Dallas Robinson

Although the Raiders and owner Mark Davis appear to be moving full-steam ahead with their plan to relocate to Las Vegas, not every NFL owner is on board, according to Jason Cole of Bleacher Report (all links to Twitter). Multiple owners voiced various concerns with a potential move to Las Vegas at a recent league financial meeting, per Cole, who adds the NFL is now viewing the situation as a choice between two poor options.

At least two owners on the 15-man finance committee voiced concerns about the “logic” of transferring the Raiders from Oakland to Las Vegas, according to Cole, adding substance to recent reports that have indicated that Las Vegas’ small market size — not its reputation — is giving owners pause. League officials seem to agree, as they presented a study that showed Vegas would have the smallest “potential season ticket base” in the NFL, per Cole.

Another owner was skeptical of the relationship between Davis and financier Sheldon Adelson, and even argued that the Raiders should be wedged out of the NFL’s local revenue sharing agreement if they relocate to Vegas. Meanwhile, owners aren’t sold on Fortress Investment Group, which is set to contribute $600MM in private money towards a new stadium, and don’t believe the company is “trustworthy,” reports Cole.

On the Chargers, Cole corroborates Jim Trotter of ESPN.com’s recent report that the Bolts are likely to move to Los Angeles in the near future, although no “definitive statement” was made at the league’s meetings. The Chargers are progressing towards a deal with the Rams to share a stadium in Inglewood, California, but owner Dean Spanos “loves” San Diego, per Cole, and is presumably ready to exhaust every effort to stay put.

Latest On Futures Of Raiders, Chargers

December 1st, 2016 at 7:52pm CST by Connor J. Byrne

The Raiders remain on track to file for Las Vegas relocation in January, reports ESPN’s Jim Trotter. And, “barring a miracle,” the Chargers will likely declare their intention to move to Los Angeles at the same time (Twitter link). The Chargers have until Jan. 15 to decide whether to join the Rams in LA.

Both Raiders owner Mark Davis and the Chargers’ Dean Spanos will need 23 of their colleagues to OK their respective moves when they file for relocation. But Davis is in for a “battle royal,” according to Trotter, who adds that certain “old-guard owners” and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell are against the idea of putting a team in Las Vegas (Twitter links). Not only would doing so place a franchise in the gambling capital of the United States, but it would also mean trading the the Raiders’ Bay Area market for a smaller one. The Raiders currently play in the league’s sixth-biggest market, whereas Las Vegas is just the country’s 40th-largest market, as Mark Purdy of the San Jose Mercury News wrote in October.

As for Goodell, his wariness of Las Vegas has been known for a while, with a source telling CBS’ Sports Jason La Canfora in October, “Even if this came to a vote early next year, I wouldn’t at all discount Roger’s ability to garner 9-12 votes against [a move] if he believes firmly that Oakland is in the best interest of the league.”

The main reason the Raiders are exploring relocation is because the city of Oakland hasn’t made much progress toward building a new stadium to replace the 50-year-old Coliseum. That may have changed somewhat earlier this week, though, as Mayor Libby Schaaf outlined a financing plan for a potential facility. Schaaf is hoping a combination of $600MM in private money from former Raider Ronnie Lott and the Fortress Investment Group of New York, $300MM from Davis, $200MM in public money and $200MM from the league will entice the Raiders to stay, according to Phil Matler and Andy Ross of the San Francisco Chronicle. In addition to kicking in $300MM – the same amount he’d put forth for a Las Vegas stadium – Davis would likely have to take on Lott and his group as minority owners. The league’s on board with that idea, per Matler and Ross, but it’s unclear what Davis’ feelings are. At the moment, the plan is for Schaaf & Co. to submit the outline to the league’s owners to demonstrate that they’re serious about keeping the Raiders in Oakland.

The Chargers have shown a desire to stay in San Diego, but they’re “out of ideas” for securing a new stadium and will essentially need a miracle over the next month and a half to avoid relocation, per Trotter (Twitter links). The Chargers and Rams are reportedly progressing toward an LA agreement, so it seems increasingly likely that the Bolts are in their final season in San Diego. While their lease at 49-year-old Qualcomm Stadium runs through 2020, it’s possible the Chargers will break it and spend the next two years either sharing the LA Coliseum with the Rams or playing at the StubHub Center in Carson, Calif., until the $2.6 billion facility in Inglewood opens in 2019.

Chargers, Rams Progressing Toward LA Deal

November 27th, 2016 at 8:05pm CST by Connor J. Byrne

Chargers owner Dean Spanos said earlier this month that he was shelving relocation talks until after the season, but he and the Rams’ Stan Kroenke are in close contact and progressing toward an agreement to share a stadium in Inglewood, Calif., according to Jason La Canfora of CBS Sports.

The $2.6 billion facility in Inglewood won’t be ready until 2019, so the Chargers are considering relocating to Carson, Calif., for the next two seasons and playing at the StubHub Center. Although its capacity is just 27,000, some in the Chargers organization prefer temporarily utilizing the StubHub Center in lieu of sharing the Coliseum with both the Rams and USC Trojans, reports La Canfora.

For their part, the Rams are motivated to make a deal with the Chargers happen. Rams chief operating officer Kevin Demoff made clear last week that there aren’t any roadblocks in the way of an agreement. Further, the Rams can’t sell personal seat licenses and suite deals until they know whether the Bolts will join them in Inglewood, notes La Canfora. That could give the Chargers leverage in negotiations and result in the franchise paying a less expensive relocation fee if it heads to Los Angeles.

The Chargers could have joined the Rams in LA this season, but they opted to give the city of San Diego more time in hopes of landing a new stadium. Little progress has been made on that front, and the Bolts’ Jan. 15 deadline to decide whether to partner with the Rams is fast approaching. Theoretically, given that the Chargers’ lease with San Diego runs through the 2020 season, they could extend the LA deadline again and continue lobbying for a stadium in the city they’ve called home since 1961. However, given that relations between the Chargers and Rams have improved from where they were a couple weeks ago, it seems likelier the Bolts are playing their final season in San Diego.

Rams’ COO: “No Hurdles Between Bolts, L.A.”

November 20th, 2016 at 6:57pm CST by Sam Robinson

Although the Chargers announced they’re not making a decision on a potential Los Angeles relocation until after the season, they are talking to the Rams about the long-rumored move, Ian Rapoport of NFL.com reports.

Rams’ chief operating officer Kevin Demoff confirmed the two franchises are talking about a Chargers northern migration, one that became much more realistic after San Diego citizens resoundingly voted down the Bolts’ downtown stadium proposal on election day.

“There are no hurdles to any deal,” Demoff said, via Rapoport. “The relationship between the two owners is in a good place, and I believe the Chargers feel welcomed. Nothing stands in their way of moving if that is what they want to do. I would also say we have no insight on what their decision will be. It’s only that we have worked hard to make sure their L.A. option is a good one.”

The Chargers and Rams agreed to a deal in principle earlier this year just before Dean Spanos announced his team was going to play 2016 in San Diego, and the Bolts subsequently attempted to craft a desirable stadium deal. The latest coming out of San Diego is the city will continue to host Chargers games next season, but that’s not certain yet. Neither is the viability of Los Angeles being a two-team city, with Roger Goodell’s preference remaining to keep the Chargers and Raiders — who still have a Los Angeles path — in their respective markets.

The Rams and Chargers, though, have a green light to share Stan Kroenke‘s $2.6 billion stadium, which is set for a 2019 unveiling, thanks to the owners’ decision in January. Although the Bolts haven’t yet asked the league for an extension on deciding on L.A., they could do so soon. Should the Chargers pass on Inglewood by Jan. 15, that would give the Raiders the opportunity to move back. The Raiders remain committed to Las Vegas, but that venture isn’t certain yet either due to the likely relocation vote having no consensus yet and potential hiccups regarding the financing of the proposed stadium.

Moving parts remain, but Demoff’s comments represent a step for a Rams-Chargers union.

Latest On Futures Of Chargers, Raiders

November 17th, 2016 at 9:01pm CST by Connor J. Byrne

It’s conceivable that either the Chargers or Raiders could relocate to Los Angeles in the coming years, but NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said Thursday the “ideal” scenario is for the two teams to stay where they are (Twitter link via Alden Gonzalez of ESPN.com). Goodell was in attendance when the Rams broke ground on their $2.6 billion stadium in Inglewood, Calif., where the Chargers have the option of sharing the soon-to-be built facility with the Rams. They must decide by Jan. 15 whether to do it, and while an extension is possible, the Chargers haven’t asked for one, Goodell revealed (Twitter link via Vincent Bonsignore of the Los Angeles Daily News).

Chargers owner Dean Spanos said last week that he’s tabling relocation thoughts until the end of the season, which wouldn’t leave him much time to negotiate a deal with the Rams’ Stan Kroenke. His organization would gladly team with Spanos’ franchise, though, with Rams chief operating officer Kevin Damoff saying, “We’d welcome [the Chargers] with open arms” (Twitter link via Gonzalez).

If the Chargers stay in San Diego – which is possible for at least 2017 – and the Raiders’ Las Vegas plans fall through, there’s “growing support” within the league for the Silver and Black to return to LA, per Bonsignore. Although an October report indicated the NFL could force Raiders owner Mark Davis out, a high-ranking league official told Bonsignore that notion is “total BS.” On the contrary, there’s “growing admiration” for the job Davis has done since taking over the Raiders after his father, Al Davis, died in 2011.

While the league would be OK with the Raiders going back to LA, where they played from 1982-94, or staying in Oakland, Bonsignore writes that Las Vegas remains the likeliest option. The Raiders aren’t interested in remaining in Oakland, relays Bonsignore, as the city hasn’t made much known progress toward a new stadium to replace the 50-year-old Coliseum. Meanwhile, Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval has already signed off on $750MM in public money toward a potential $1.9 billion Raiders facility.

Davis will file for relocation in January, and once that happens, he’ll need 23 approval votes from the league’s other 31 owners to make his Las Vegas dream a reality. Goodell isn’t fully on board with the Raiders going to Vegas, but Bonsignore doesn’t expect Davis to have difficulty garnering the necessary number of votes.

Doubt Emerging On Rams-Chargers L.A. Deal?

November 13th, 2016 at 8:13pm CST by Sam Robinson

San Diego citizens resoundingly disapproving Measure C on Tuesday sent a clear signal to the city’s desire for public funding to go toward a Chargers downtown stadium. Although the Chargers are currently leaning toward playing 2017 in San Diego, their long-term future seems to point toward Los Angeles.

The Chargers and Rams have agreed in principle on a deal to share a stadium in Inglewood, Calif., reaching that agreement fairly quickly after the Rams received the vote to relocate. But doubt has emerged on the teams following through on striking an official deal, Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk reports. The concern resides at the league level regarding the teams’ ability to share a market and rebuild the Los Angeles fanbase. Rumors have not tabbed Stan Kroenke as being particularly enthusiastic about sharing the coveted market.

For the Rams, that’s a more natural fit given their history as the city’s longest-tenured occupant (1946-94, 2016). The Bolts, though, played in L.A. in 1960 before quickly moving to San Diego to begin their second year of existence. A move back, from a pure fan-interest standpoint, would be puzzling, even if it’s been long-rumored. The Chargers do not possess a top-flight team, having failed to win 10 games in a season since 2009 and would be the second franchise arriving in a market that was dormant for 21 seasons. It’s difficult to see the interest spawning immediately, especially if San Diego-based Chargers fans are reluctant to support a nearby team that left the city.

Nevertheless, the Bolts’ stadium measure failing on this level — it received 43.1 percent of the vote when a two-thirds majority was required — points them out of town. But Dean Spanos potentially keeping his team in San Diego in 2017 would allow the clock to expire on the NFL’s initial agreement, which gives the Chargers until Jan. 15 of next year to move before the Raiders receive that opportunity. An extension on this agreement seems likely, but the Raiders’ complex path to Las Vegas complicates this.

“If Dean stays, it’s not because he thinks he can get a stadium in San Diego,” one ownership source said, via Jason La Canfora of CBSSports.com. “It’s just because he doesn’t want to take the deal in Inglewood.”

Spanos’ franchise having suffered two stinging defeats regarding a stadium in 2016 lead owners to believe he will relocate to L.A., per La Canfora, with no stealth plan existing to make everyone happy in San Diego. Sources told the writer the Inglewood arrangement would be one Spanos is willing to live with, regardless of the team delaying a move as long as it can.

The Chargers putting a new proposal on a future ballot would give the team more of a chance to find a workable solution for the city since this one came about rather quickly. But unless a California Supreme Court decision results in the super-majority requirement being again reduced to the 50 percent threshold at which Measure C was previously set to face, the Bolts may not have a better option than joining the Rams in Los Angeles. Otherwise, it will mean continuing to play at a 49-year-old stadium they’ve long since resented.

La Canfora’s Latest: Browns, Stafford, Chargers

November 13th, 2016 at 10:55am CST by Rory Parks

Let’s take a look at the latest notes and rumors from CBS Sports scribe Jason La Canfora:

In the wake of the Browns’ 0-10 start and head coach Hue Jackson‘s curious decision to bench rookie QB Cody Kessler in the second half of the team’s loss to Baltimore on Thursday night, La Canfora writes that tensions are mounting once more in Cleveland. The benching of Kessler–who has been one of the few sources of optimism for the club this year–created a rift between the front office and coaching staff, and it appears that more changes are on the way. At the very least, defensive coordinator Ray Horton could be relieved of his duties sooner rather than later, but owner Jimmy Haslam, who has a penchant for wholesale changes, could initiate another major shakeup. La Canfora adds that Haslam and his wife, Dee, have become increasingly hands-on, with roughly 10 departments reporting directly to ownership. Morale is especially low within the organization, as the Haslams are not football people by trade and their increased involvement is only serving to alienate their direct reports.
Matthew Stafford is enjoying a terrific 2016 campaign, and his performance thus far, combined with the Lions‘ status as a playoff contender, has put him into the middle of the MVP discussion. Although it is too early to consider such awards, it is not too early to consider what a new contract for Stafford might look like. The Georgia product is under club control through 2017, and it has become increasingly likely that the team will explore an extension for their star signal-caller after this season is over. La Canfora confirms that those contract talks will indeed happen, and he adds that Stafford’s reps will be seeking to secure a deal that pays their client over $25MM per season. Given rising salaries for quarterbacks, including those less accomplished than Stafford–who has thrived since Jim Bob Cooter took over as offensive coordinator last November–it seems likely that Stafford will hit that target. That is especially true since Stafford’s franchise tag number for 2018 would be $26.4MM, as former NFL agent Joel Corry tweets.
Although the Chargers will likely play out the 2017 season in San Diego, league sources believe the club has little choice but to ultimately join the Rams in Los Angeles. Even after voters resoundingly opposed the plan to construct a publicly funded $1.15 billion stadium for the Chargers in downtown San Diego, there was some optimism about an eventual deal, but La Canfora writes such optimism is misplaced. The voting results were even more lopsided than many anticipated, and league sources believe team owner Dean Spanos will relocate in the wake of the defeat. Those sources suggest that there is no “secret plan” to keep the Chargers in San Diego.
The Raiders are sitting pretty atop the AFC West, and they have spent very little cash to get to that point. So little, in fact, that they are the only team yet to reach the spending threshold mandated in the collective bargaining agreement. The CBA requires that each team spend at least 89% of the salary cap in cash in a four-year period by the time the 2016 league year concludes, and Oakland has yet to reach that mark. If they fail to do so, the NFLPA would receive the difference in cash and could assign the funds as it sees to fit. For instance, the union could distribute that money to needy current and former Raiders who played for the team during that four-year span. However, as La Canfora observes, it is more likely the Raiders use the excess cash to reinvest in the club, with a new contract for pending free agent Latavius Murray a possibility. Plus, a player who received a signing bonus between now and the start of the 2017 league year on March 9 could have a portion of that bonus applied to the 2016 cap to comply with the spending rule.

Chargers Likely To Play 2017 In San Diego

November 10th, 2016 at 9:03am CST by Connor J. Byrne

The plan to construct a publicly funded $1.15 billion stadium for the Chargers in downtown San Diego went up in flames on Election Day, as just 43.1 percent of voters signed off on a proposal that needed two-thirds approval to pass. Nevertheless, there’s optimism about an eventual deal, writes David Garrick of the San Diego Union-Tribune.

“While there isn’t support for this particular measure, the results demonstrate that a large number of San Diegans love the Bolts and want them to stay,” said Mayor Kevin Faulconer. “We now have momentum to work together with the Chargers to develop a new solution to keep the team in San Diego.”

For his part, owner Dean Spanos revealed Wednesday that he plans to put the franchise’s future on the backburner until after the season (via Josh Alper of Pro Football Talk).

“Over the coming weeks you may hear news about steps that we must take to preserve all of our options. But please know that I don’t intend to make any decisions until after the regular season ends and that, in the meantime, I hope to enjoy with you one great Chargers game after another,” stated Spanos.

The Chargers have until Jan. 15 to choose whether to relocate to Los Angeles and eventually share an Inglewood facility with the Rams, but Ian Rapoport of NFL.com reports that they’re likely to delay the LA decision until 2018 and put a new San Diego stadium on the ballot again next year. In another scenario, the Chargers and Raiders could agree to avoid LA relocation in 2017 and focus on San Diego and Las Vegas, respectively, as neither wants to share a stadium with the Rams, according to Rapoport (Twitter links).

The Chargers’ best hope for a long-term solution in San Diego is for the California Supreme Court to drop the need for two-thirds approval on taxpayer-funded projects to a simple majority, contends Mike Florio of PFT. Even if that happens, the Chargers might not return a stadium proposal to the ballot until 2020, per Florio, which differs from Rapoport’s 2017 suggestion. The Bolts’ lease in San Diego runs through 2020, so the team could continue playing at Qualcomm Stadium over the next few years and reassesses its options after the next presidential election.

While a move to LA in 2017 is still possible, the Chargers will only have a two-week window to execute it if Spanos actually does table his relocation thoughts until season’s end. Further, the leverage in negotiations would belong to Rams owner Stan Kroenke, notes Florio, making an agreement all the more difficult to hammer out. Should they reach a deal, the Chargers would likely head to LA immediately and split the Coliseum with the Rams over the next two years. The clubs would then move into the Inglewood stadium in time for the 2019 campaign.

Owners More Agreeable To Raiders Move?

October 22nd, 2016 at 9:03pm CST by Sam Robinson

As a Raiders relocation vote for a second straight year becomes closer to a reality, the stances of many owners around the game aren’t known, creating an air of mystery around this likely forthcoming decision. But some owners have voiced praise for Mark Davis‘ efforts in securing a deal with Las Vegas, potentially opening the door to a better outcome for the owner’s efforts to leave Oakland.

“I completely respect how he’s handled the process over the last year,” Chiefs CEO Clark Hunt said, via Albert Breer of TheMMQB.com, from the owners’ meetings in Houston. “I know he had to be incredibly disappointed in not being one of the teams selected, at least initially, to go to L.A. And I just think the way he’s handled it speaks to his maturity. I think people respect that he’s created another option for himself in Las Vegas.”

Davis’ increasing trust among his peers has led to this process moving forward instead of better-regarded owners having stonewalled the effort, Breer writes. This represents a contrast from how the son of Al Davis was viewed previously in this group. Most owners did not expect Mark Davis to be able to secure the financing when this venture began earlier this year.

Other owners with whom Breer spoke this week were open to the idea of Davis being the owner who breaks through to the Las Vegas market after there was widespread hesitation among them earlier this year regarding the Raiders owner being the one responsible for reintegrating the Los Angeles market. One of them praised Davis’ ability to be able to score the largest-ever public money contribution for an NFL stadium as evidence he could handle the move and his own market.

“He’s gained a lot of respect in the room,” an NFC team president told Breer, “Who else has come up with $750MM in public funding?”

Hunt, interestingly, was not behind a Raiders/Chargers Carson, Calif., joint move earlier this year, instead preferring only one team go to Los Angeles if a relocation was inevitable. Fellow AFC West owner Dean Spanos‘ opinion on Davis moving may be more predictable since the two nearly struck a deal to share a stadium in Carson.

“He’s earned a great deal of respect amongst the owners,” Spanos said, via Breer. “He’s a committed owner. He loves the business. He’s in this for the long haul. And I think he’s gonna be successful in Las Vegas if he gets there, which I think he will. It remains to be seen obviously, but that’s my opinion — he’ll get there.”

Breer still notes a small group of owners are with Jerry Jones and his pro-Vegas stance and a small group have voiced opposition to the Raiders moving from a well-regarded market to a questionable one. But there’s enough unknown viewpoints to could swing the final tally.

The MMQB scribe adds Oakland — which has lost Davis’ interest even as the NFL and city civic leaders remain in talks — is expected to make another push with the help of the NFL, which is still believed to prefer the Bay Area to Vegas. The league plans to conduct a market study of its own to follow up on one Davis conducted recently regarding Vegas’ viability as a long-term NFL city.

Additionally, owners see a Raiders-to-Vegas move as a way to protect the Rams’ brand in Los Angeles since the Raiders have a substantial footprint in L.A. compared to the Chargers, who remain in front of the Raiders in line to move there should their downtown San Diego stadium venture fail. The Bolts having only played in L.A. in 1960 leaves them well behind the Silver and Black in terms of prospective fan support in the city. Davis hasn’t mentioned Los Angeles as an option for the Raiders in months, having been successful in generating a route to Vegas, but that would still theoretically be an option if the Chargers balked and owners voted Davis’ latest relocation proposal down.

Latest On Mark Davis, Raiders’ Future

October 15th, 2016 at 9:01am CST by Connor J. Byrne

Although Raiders owner Mark Davis’ plan to move the team to Las Vegas took a significant step Friday, there are conflicting reports about his status in the NFL. Jason Cole of Bleacher Report (video link) says some powerful owners are wondering if the league will force Davis out. Conversely, a source told Vincent Bonsignore of the Los Angeles Daily News that the prospect of the league booting Davis is “nonsense” (Twitter link).

The Raiders have been under the control of the Davis family for most of their 56-year existence. Mark Davis’ father, Al Davis, took the helm of the franchise in 1972 and didn’t get let go until his death in 2011. That paved the way for Mark Davis to grab the reins, and with the Raiders and the city of Oakland not progressing toward a new stadium, a departure to Las Vegas looks likelier than ever for the organization.

In a key development, the Nevada Assembly signed off Friday on $750MM in contributions from the state toward a proposed $1.9 billion stadium for the Raiders. Dan Graziano of ESPN.com then reported that the league’s owners wants to extend the current collective bargaining agreement as a way to help fund a stadium in Las Vegas. Davis has vowed to contribute $500MM, 40 percent of which ($200MM) would come from an NFL loan.

While Davis wants to head to Las Vegas, a return to Los Angeles remains an option for the Raiders, according to Bonsignore, though the Chargers have the option of joining the Rams there by Jan. 15. Davis’ Nevada plan likely has the league’s support, per Bonsignore, which would ultimately rule out LA for the Raiders. Unsurprisingly, the league “will take a very hard and thorough” look at Davis’ relocation proposal before it gives him the green light (Twitter links). Davis will need approval from 23 of the league’s other 31 owners to move his franchise.

Since their inception in 1960, the Raiders have played only in California – either Oakland or LA – but it appears that run is on the verge of ending.

Load More Posts