From the article:

Oakland since sending Mark Davis home from his attempts to get a new stadium in LA. And with Davis's attempts to move the team to Las Vegas, it only strengthens Goodell's resolve that Oakland remain the home of the Raiders. Putting a team in Vegas is something Goodell would prefer to not have to consider.

So, while those machinations take their course, in walks a development group led by former Raiders Ronnie Lott and Rodney Peete looking to take a crack at getting a stadium built in Oakland. This after several previous attempts by other development groups were not considered viable by the Raiders and the NFL.

Roger Goodell likes this idea. And what Goodell wants, Goodell usually gets.

So, he made a call to Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf who had told the San Francisco Chronicle previously that she would only speak to a development group if they were brought to her by the Raiders. Goodell asked, and so she met with the group.

http://www.silverandblackpride.com/2016/...ment-group

Silly me. I thought the commissioner worked for the owners. It seems the owners work for him.

For the love of God stop. Why does Oakland need a stadium? There's already a stadium in the area that wouldn't fleece taxpayers or even private investors from even more money. If not, other municipalities are willing to pony up some money.

(06-06-2016 09:56 PM)lew240z Wrote:  Silly me. I thought the commissioner worked for the owners.

Goodell absolutely works for the owners. Goodell would not be doing any of this if a majority of NFL owners wanted Mark Davis owning the Raiders in Las Vegas. IMO the Vegas stadium proposal is a mirage, but Davis' shenanigans still need to be addressed in case it turns out to not be a mirage.

Note that this idea would require Davis to sell a portion of the Raiders to the Lott-fronted group... which would be one step in the direction of easing Mark Davis out entirely, which has been a goal of the NFL since Al passed away.

It's a gentle push. It may not get very far. But it certainly seems like a push consistent with the league's goals related to the Raiders, which include

(a) Raiders not moving to LA, because the NFL thinks LA is better off as a one-team market, and
(b) Someone other than Mark Davis controlling the Raiders.

Now, there's another problem with (a), which is that Dean Spanos & Co. have bungled their San Diego stadium push and are probably going to lose their initiative vote in November, if it even qualifies for the ballot. That means the NFL will either have to give up on (a) and let the Chargers go to LA, or find some other way to get the Chargers and San Diego to make a different stadium deal after the November vote fails.

(06-07-2016 01:00 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 09:56 PM)lew240z Wrote:  Silly me. I thought the commissioner worked for the owners.

Goodell absolutely works for the owners. Goodell would not be doing any of this if a majority of NFL owners wanted Mark Davis owning the Raiders in Las Vegas. IMO the Vegas stadium proposal is a mirage, but Davis' shenanigans still need to be addressed in case it turns out to not be a mirage.

Note that this idea would require Davis to sell a portion of the Raiders to the Lott-fronted group... which would be one step in the direction of easing Mark Davis out entirely, which has been a goal of the NFL since Al passed away.

It's a gentle push. It may not get very far. But it certainly seems like a push consistent with the league's goals related to the Raiders, which include

(a) Raiders not moving to LA, because the NFL thinks LA is better off as a one-team market, and
(b) Someone other than Mark Davis controlling the Raiders.

Now, there's another problem with (a), which is that Dean Spanos & Co. have bungled their San Diego stadium push and are probably going to lose their initiative vote in November, if it even qualifies for the ballot. That means the NFL will either have to give up on (a) and let the Chargers go to LA, or find some other way to get the Chargers and San Diego to make a different stadium deal after the November vote fails.

Jerry Jones let the cat out of that bag to the public earlier this year....plus it would give the league a minority owner.

- The Chargers have bungled the stadium push??? How so??

I love their stadium idea. It's exactly what it should be: domed stadium/multi-event cetner and in downtown SD next to Petco. They just have to bribe/make a deal with the "I hate spending" people like Wedge.


- Why does East Bay NoCo need a team? SF market has the 9ers. Done. Get the Raiders out of there. Vegas is perfect. Get it done.

One market, one team. That's how it should be. Give someone else a chance.

(06-07-2016 08:06 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  - The Chargers have bungled the stadium push??? How so??

I love their stadium idea. It's exactly what it should be: domed stadium/multi-event cetner and in downtown SD next to Petco. They just have to bribe/make a deal with the "I hate spending" people like Wedge.


- Why does East Bay NoCo need a team? SF market has the 9ers. Done. Get the Raiders out of there. Vegas is perfect. Get it done.

One market, one team. That's how it should be. Give someone else a chance.

Easier to keep Vegas open...use it as the new leverage since Los Angeles is filled...now the City of Buffalo has been put on notice...also, should the Jets/Giants move...one market one team...

The option to put a 2nd team in LA will be the new threat for existing teams to use to get a new stadium, just like San Diego is using that option now.

And if the Chargers do end up moving to LA, there will still be plenty of other threats teams can use. San Antonio, St. Louis, Toronto, London, 2nd team in Santa Clara, Portland, etc.

Although to be honest, I believe St. Louis may be done inviting teams to move from other cities. But St Louis may decide to bid on a new expansion team if the NFL decides to expand.

Maybe Mark Davis was behind the hacking of the NFL twitter feed today?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/16023019/nfl-says-hacker-posted-false-tweet-roger-goodell-died

Pinterest
@EmailEmail
°print
£comment

The NFL said its Twitter feed was hacked Tuesday after a tweet was posted announcing that commissioner Roger Goodell had died.

The tweet, which was deleted minutes after it was posted, said "We regret to inform our fans that our commissioner, Roger Goodell, has passed away. He was 57. #RIP"

(06-07-2016 01:00 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 09:56 PM)lew240z Wrote:  Silly me. I thought the commissioner worked for the owners.

Goodell absolutely works for the owners. Goodell would not be doing any of this if a majority of NFL owners wanted Mark Davis owning the Raiders in Las Vegas. IMO the Vegas stadium proposal is a mirage, but Davis' shenanigans still need to be addressed in case it turns out to not be a mirage.

Note that this idea would require Davis to sell a portion of the Raiders to the Lott-fronted group... which would be one step in the direction of easing Mark Davis out entirely, which has been a goal of the NFL since Al passed away.

It's a gentle push. It may not get very far. But it certainly seems like a push consistent with the league's goals related to the Raiders, which include

(a) Raiders not moving to LA, because the NFL thinks LA is better off as a one-team market, and
(b) Someone other than Mark Davis controlling the Raiders.

Now, there's another problem with (a), which is that Dean Spanos & Co. have bungled their San Diego stadium push and are probably going to lose their initiative vote in November, if it even qualifies for the ballot. That means the NFL will either have to give up on (a) and let the Chargers go to LA, or find some other way to get the Chargers and San Diego to make a different stadium deal after the November vote fails.

Oakland has no money, full stop. If Goddell wants either Mark team control diminished or the Raiders to die on a vine in the Coliseum. I don't think either plan is actually viable because there are a group of owners who don't have a problem with Davis owning the team.

Goof,

If true, that ruins my plan to put the Jags in St Louis, in a new riverfront stadium!

(06-07-2016 01:09 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Oakland has no money, full stop.

Oakland won't give anything other than free land and tax breaks. That seems to be the point behind the Lott group, though - - the pitch is that in exchange for getting a share of the franchise, they'd add enough money to Davis' contributions and the NFL loan money to get the stadium funded.

Or, if we want to take a cynical alternative view of this news item, the NFL might just be making this small gesture so that if the Raiders leave the NFL can spout their PR nonsense about having done all they could to help Oakland.

The easiest and least expensive option for the Raiders is still Santa Clara, of course. But the NFL is either not pushing Davis to go there, or they are doing it in complete secrecy.

(06-07-2016 02:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 01:09 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Oakland has no money, full stop.

Oakland won't give anything other than free land and tax breaks. That seems to be the point behind the Lott group, though - - the pitch is that in exchange for getting a share of the franchise, they'd add enough money to Davis' contributions and the NFL loan money to get the stadium funded.

Or, if we want to take a cynical alternative view of this news item, the NFL might just be making this small gesture so that if the Raiders leave the NFL can spout their PR nonsense about having done all they could to help Oakland.

The easiest and least expensive option for the Raiders is still Santa Clara, of course. But the NFL is either not pushing Davis to go there, or they are doing it in complete secrecy.

The Santa Clara option was slammed shut years ago. York wants I part of Raiders sullying up his new yard. Besides doesn't Davis make more money by staying in a decrepit coliseum than moving across the bay?

I'm not convinced that Davis is a rational decision maker. Spends too much time talking about the importance of tailgating and the Raiders' image.

(06-07-2016 05:08 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  I'm not convinced that Davis is a rational decision maker.

I don't think anyone, including Mark Davis, would argue with you on that point.

What, this guy??

(06-07-2016 08:06 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  - The Chargers have bungled the stadium push??? How so??

I love their stadium idea. It's exactly what it should be: domed stadium/multi-event cetner and in downtown SD next to Petco. They just have to bribe/make a deal with the "I hate spending" people like Wedge.


- Why does East Bay NoCo need a team? SF market has the 9ers. Done. Get the Raiders out of there. Vegas is perfect. Get it done.

One market, one team. That's how it should be. Give someone else a chance.

I'd rather make money wherever I can, especially if I'm not looking to move a team to my hometown. The Dodgers have a $300 million payroll, I'd rather be thee 4th team in SoCal and 3rd team near LA than the only team in a place like San Antonio or Austin.

(06-07-2016 08:25 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  What, this guy??

Some please get this man a haircut...

Why, do you realize that man once inadvertently mediated a hostage situation by recovering his limo passenger's briefcase then haphazardly drove thousands of miles to Aspen, Colorado to return it to her with his friend Harry Dunn? It suits him right.

(06-07-2016 01:21 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Goof,

If true, that ruins my plan to put the Jags in St Louis, in a new riverfront stadium!

St. Louis might make an exception for the Jags because the Jags owner once tried to buy the St Louis Rams before Kroenke invoked his minority clause to buy majority ownership in the Rams instead. Plus the odds of the Jags returning to Jacksonville once they leave are pretty low.

But I really believe the Jags are serious about being the first permanent NFL franchise in London. It's just the London move is still at least 5 years away and a lot can change in 5 years. So who knows maybe St Louis can snatched the Jags if London falls through.