Q&A: How does Chargers/Raiders stadium plan
affect NFL in L.A. issue?
By SAM FARMER
FEBRUARY 19, 2015, 6:30 PM

Questions and answers about where we stand now that the San Diego Chargers,
Oakland Raiders and St. Louis Rams are all mulling a relocation to the nation’s
second­largest market:

Does this mean the Chargers and Raiders are moving to the Los Angeles area?

Not necessarily. Both teams say they are going to be working on dual tracks, trying to get deals
done where they are as well. But the plan for a Carson stadium is a big step toward L.A., and it
sends a message they are serious about weighing their options.

But what about the Rams at Hollywood Park?

Rams owner Stan Kroenke is plowing ahead with his plans for an 80,000­seat stadium on that
site. This won’t deter him. He’s a formidable force as the NFL’s second­richest owner (to Seattle’s
Paul Allen), and Kroenke is someone who has a track record of doing what he says he’s going to
do. That said, the L.A. decision probably will come down to a vote of NFL owners on which
project, if any, is the one to pursue. At the moment, it’s not likely Kroenke will go rogue and move
his team without league approval.

Why so much activity now?

This is like a game of musical chairs, with three teams and two chairs. Last month, when Kroenke
said he was building a stadium, the music came to a screeching halt. Now, everyone’s sprinting for
an empty chair.

Is that a problem for the league?

It sure could be. Two chairs for three teams means somebody’s got to lose, and that team might
have to skulk back to a market it left with its tail between its legs. Awkward.

Which of the two projects is further along?

The one at Hollywood Park in Inglewood is, because its backers have already gathered enough
signatures for a ballot measure. That’s a big step in the entitlement process. It wouldn’t take the Carson project too long to catch up, though.

What’s this mean for Farmers Field and the City of Industry proposals?

It takes any remaining steam out of both of them. Never say never in this process, but it’s hard to
see either of those plans clawing back into the race.

Is there any way the NFL supports the construction of two stadiums, and a total of
three teams?

Not a chance. It’s hard enough to build one stadium, let alone two. And three teams would be
flooding the engine of a market that previously lost all three of these teams.

Aren’t the Raiders and Chargers mortal enemies?

On the field, yes. But Chargers owner Alex Spanos was friends with the late Al Davis. In the
biography “Just Win, Baby: The Al Davis Story,” the eccentric Raiders owner said: “Alex and I
always sat close to each other at league meetings. Once I came into the room, and his son, Dean,
was there. I said to Alex, ‘You know, you can get [$400 million] for your team now.’ He turned
around and went, whack, to Dean’s head. ‘Listen to Al,’ the father said. ‘He knows what he’s
talking about.'”

Did Davis have any ties to the Chargers?

He was backfield coach for the Los Angeles/San Diego Chargers from 1960­62. Davis was the guy
who recommended and then signed Lance Alworth, the future Hall of Fame receiver.
We’ve been down this NFL­in­L.A. road so many times before.

Isn’t this another instance of the league creating leverage to sweeten the deals in other cities?

Leverage always comes into play. But this situation is much different, in that it was generated by
existing NFL owners, not somebody in L.A. trying to push a stadium concept. Those owners are
saying they can’t get it done in their current cities, and they have control of viable stadium sites in
the L.A. area. That has never happened before.

So with this situation building to a crescendo, what does it mean for the NFL in
L.A.?

It’s going to be awfully hard for the league to punt this time.

sam.farmer@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-nfl-stadium-qa-20150220-story.html

My first thought – after “Eww, that’s the ugliest stadium I’ve seen in my life, and why is it levitating?” – is “Don’t the Chargers and Raiders play in the same division?”

So if the Chargers and Raiders are both going to take home in the same stadium, the league is going to have to realign some divisions.

One of those teams moves to the NFC West, and the Rams move to the NFC East – stay in St. Louis – and enjoy a divisional rivalry with the Chiefs.

But – damn! – I gotta say that is some strange bedfellows, there.

zn wrote:

Well good post.

But I think they can do it.

Just flying the optimist flag.

It’s kind of funny you would fly the “optimist flag” with a picture of Waterloo.

I like the way Snead does business. How refreshing is a quote like this:

“With Joe, that one, he was a starter, we’ve had some pretty serious dialogue with those guys,” Snead said. “A lot of times players once they get through, they get close, it’s good to test the market. And it’s not the worst thing for the team, either, because now no one is guessing. Hey, here’s the options. I think it makes the club, the player especially because he now knows reality versus make believe. And it helps the agent make the best decision.”

Thank god zygmunt and all those wankers are gone.

I have to say that if the report on Hundley is accurate that he cannot ever keep his eyes downfield to follow progressions, then that’s a killer to me. I don’t like the chances of a guy learning to do that if he couldn’t ever do it in college. The NFL is bigger, faster, and more painful. That’s a guy who needed to do some Kill Kurt drills a long time ago, and I fear it’s too late now.

I admit the thought has crossed my mind. I was just thinking about it this morning. There seems to be consensus that OL is fairly deep in this draft, but it’s somewhat light in top tier guys. So that first round pick could be used for just about anything. The two biggest needs, everyone knows, are QB and OL, but it doesn’t look like either makes sense at #10 (unless Scherff or someone really shoots up after the combine).

The Rams very well may go BPA there regardless of position like they did with Donald at #13 last year. Going into the draft last year, DT was not a Big Need.

I think LB or WR could be that position this year. On paper, not the biggest need, but a position that could use a boost if it could get it. As far as JL in particular, I’m thinking they ought to try to considering a replacement to develop there this year. If it doesn’t fall that way this year, I would think MLB would move up to a Need in 2016.

Ouch.

Boy. You think about what the Rams got for the RGIII trade as opposed to one player from this draft. There are quite a few names on this list that there was strong sentiment for taking. And just imagine if the Rams had taken Blackmon or Richardson instead of making that trade. What a disaster.

wv wrote:

Relocation might be an issue
for some free agents, i suppose.
w
v
=================================
Laram

We were doing some promos for the combine and I had an opportunity to speak with this player.

It’s an issue, at least for him.

Makes complete sense.

Less likely to matter to someone without kids.

There goes the last credible news anchor in America.

I guess I will have to rely on Jon Oliver for worthwhile coverage of the news, now.

rfl wrote:

Zooey wrote:
I have always been at odds with the home town fans, and I guess I like it that way. Being the contrarian. You know.

Yeah, that’s how I feel.

But Zooey, you grew up in So Cal, didn’t you?

No. I was born in Los Angeles, but moved to NoCal when I was 6-months old.

I became a Dodgers fan because one of my idiot brothers told me that they had a player who hit a lot of triples, and had “3-dog” written on his shoes (Willie Davis). That was enough for a 6-year old to become a Dodgers fan.

I became a Rams fan because I became sensitive to my mom saying that I liked or disliked certain things just because my idiot brothers did, and two of my idiot brothers are Cowboys fans. So I chose the Rams because they had the coolest helmets, and they were from the same place as the Dodgers, and I was born there, and it all seemed to add up in a nice, tidy package.

Later, I learned the benefits of contrariness.

Dak wrote:

Yeah. I can’t get too upset with the local effort right now. There’s movement on the stadium construction front. It looks doable in STL.

I wonder, if at the end of this, we don’t have the St. Louis Chargers or Raiders. I really think it could be either team that could decide they want a sure-thing new stadium for a few hundred million dollars, rather than continue to dick around in those cities.

I guess the Rams could stay here, and the Chargers or Raiders could move to Kroenke’s stadium. I just don’t see that happening, though. I am inclined to believe that SK wants to move HIS team to HIS stadium, and help build that entire Inglewood development. And, I just don’t see an owner swap, where SK owns the L.A. Chargers or Raiders. I guess it’s possible, since SK would control the lease on the stadium. It’s conceivable that it would be cheaper to build a new stadium than lease SK’s new stadium. And, the NFL likely would not want an owner of one NFL team leasing to another NFL team. Although, at the same time I write that, I remember that they’re sure ignoring the cross-ownership rule in place right now in order for SK to continue to own the Rams, so maybe those little details aren’t that important to NFL ownership.

It’s an interesting situation, for sure. And, it seems to evolve weekly.

I don’t see it (the Rams staying), either. If Kroenke is going to present the league with a crowning jewel, he’s going to want to wear the crown himself. I’m not 100% sure of the Rams moving to LA, but I am 100% sure of Kroenke moving to LA. Well, 99.9%, with a 0.1% chance of trading franchises with the Bowlen family.

I don’t think it would be a big issue for a team to lease a stadium from another owner. Most teams have a lease. So what does it matter? Any relocation and stadium lease gets passed by the Committee for Overseeing Opportunities to Make Fortunes in Los Angeles, or whatever it is. I can’t think of anything that would be an inherent conflict of interest in that kind of arrangement.

My intuition tells me that the Rams, and eventually the Raiders, end up back in LA, with St. Louis getting either the Chargers or the Jaguars.

It’s a strange world. I mean, if you look at the St. Louis stadium…that’s a nice looking stadium. Right on the River. It’s nice. It’s certainly better than what the Rams have right now, better than what the Chargers or Raiders have. That stadium is an upgrade for any of those teams.

It’s just that the LA project trumps it. It just does.

wv wrote:

Well, they are not letting him go. They may not trust him
but they are not letting him walk.

Seems to me, Bradford has all the cards. I keep
hearing he has to take a pay cut to stay,
but i dont see what leverage the Rams have.

w
v

He could take a pay cut as part of an extension. I mean…he’s not giving up the money, but he might defer it into the future. His incentive to do that is that an unproductive year this year leads to a greatly reduced offer for his second contract. He could be better off signing an extension now. Both sides may want to see how it goes during the season, though, and it may depend upon how badly the Rams feel they need to free up cap space.

zn wrote:

Remember, it was just an example. I said, just one example. And personally I don’t think they caught Seattle napping…I think coverage units respect him that much. Plus of course he was 3rd in punt return yards in spite of playing just 8 games.

There are other examples from the season of him being used as a decoy on offense to set up a big play by someone else.

There’s the fact that when they had Bradford, he actually was a deep threat. And, with a qb who can throw those, will be again.

There are the runs that nearly broke so many times that you have to figure one will … and in the meanwhile he was averaging 6.2 a rush.

To me, all they need is to add in some other routes as a receiver when he becomes more proficient at that.

In fact his combined yards rushing, receiving, and returning in 2014 amounted to 857 in 8 games. Across 16 of course that’s 1714.

The 6.2 per rush is nice. I felt like he was becoming more proficient at that this season. I think a lot of people want a Big Play every time TA touches the ball, but I was satisfied with his carries this last season. I didn’t realize it was as high as 6.2, but I thought those play calls were getting an undeserved bad rap. I will take 5 or 6 per carry. I also did not know he was averaging over 100 per game combined yardage. I would have guessed a figure a lot lower than that.

I’d still like to see more out of him to justify the draft position. I’d like him to develop as a receiver, mostly. I would like him to be part of a mix on offense that makes the defense pick their poison. It will take growth from Bailey, Quick, and Austin to make that happen. And a QB would be nice.