Field of Schemes
sports stadium news and analysis

  

This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article. Comments on this page are closed. To find the current version of the article with updated comments, click here.

April 03, 2012

Anschutz: I'll buy NFL team if needed, but won't cave to league on stadium lease

AEG owner Philip Anschutz now says he's willing to buy an NFL team if that's what it takes to get a stadium built in downtown Los Angeles. Which isn't really big news given that his original plan was to buy 50% of a team, and that his offer is still contingent on getting a "reasonable" deal with the NFL — read, something that lets him pay his stadium bills and still turn a profit — which would likely mean getting a team at a cut-rate price, which is what the NFL (and team owners) have been objecting to since last fall.

Anschutz lieutenant Tim Leiweke threw out a stick to go along with the carrot, as well, saying that AEG is exploring plans to just expand the Los Angeles Convention Center without a stadium if no NFL deal can be reached. Which means one of two things:

  • The whole NFL stadium thing was a dodge to get the city of L.A. to go along with redevelopment near AEG's L.A. Live complex, as was rumored last week.
  • Or, this is all just a negotiating ploy to get the NFL to cave on its demands and cough up a team on the cheap, in exchange for ... forcing football fans in the lucrative L.A. market to watch the local team no matter how crappy, and face blackouts if they don't buy enough tickets?

I'm actually not clear what Anschutz and Leiweke thinks their leverage is with the NFL, but clearly they're trying something. In any case, we could be here a while.

COMMENTS

Seems like AEG is grasping at straws here. They're acting like the NFL wants and needs to be in LA. Problem is that's of course a false assumption. And even if it weren't, it's not like AEG is the only stadium plan out there. Roski's is actually further along and far more palatable to the NFL brass should they really want LA. NFL stadiums, unlike say baseball parks, don't need to be anywhere near downtown.

Posted by Dan on April 3, 2012 01:49 PM

Based on what Neil published here, if I were a Cincinnati Bengals or Minnesota Vikings fan, I would be real worried.

Posted by Jessy S. on April 3, 2012 09:22 PM

The Bengals? Why would you be worried if you were a Bengals fan? They have a new stadium and an owner who isn't selling. As for the Vikings, Minnesota will get something done. To many people in their gov't back there are too willing to keep the team (or more accurately don't want to the be the ones who lose the team and their next election shortly there after).

Posted by Dan on April 4, 2012 01:39 AM

They think their leverage is that the NFL likes the downtown site about 100x more than City of Industry or Grand Crossing or Lipstick on a Pig or whatever they are calling it now. Which is true... but what is also true is that the NFL loves money more than any of that and they'll stick the Raiders into the industrial park if it comes to that and AEG can pound sand.

Posted by Piggy WIlf on April 4, 2012 11:21 AM

They think their leverage is that the NFL likes the downtown site about 100x more than City of Industry (or "Grand Crossing" or "Lipstick on a Pig" or whatever they are calling it now). Which is true... but what is also true is that the NFL loves money more than any of that and they'll stick the Raiders into the industrial park if it comes to that and AEG can pound sand.

Posted by Piggy WIlf on April 4, 2012 11:22 AM

Pretty much my read of it as well Piggy. The NFL will not be bullied into the downtown site by AEG. If anything I think the hint that the Dodger stadium site would be nice was aimed as much at AEG as the general public. Essentially just saying, "hey we don't need you we can find sites elsewhere." It'll also come down to the team. If the Raiders came back as you hinted, somehow I think they'd fit better out in Industry anyway (not the least of reasons which is because the Raiders leadership have a relationship with Roski). And who knows, they may end up being "the one." Their talks in Santa Clara with the Niners have stalled and they'll never get a new Oakland stadium. Industry might be just what they need.

Posted by Dan on April 4, 2012 12:01 PM

Are you sure the Roski plan even exists?

According to this article -- that has a quote from Neil, no less -- (espn.go.com/los-angeles/nfl/story/_/id/7088271/holes-city-industry-nfl-stadium-plan-los-angeles) Roski has no practical plan to finance the stadium. I have not been able to find a Roski interview since that article was published where any of those problems are refuted.

At least AEG has a proven model. Who knows if an NFL team will be willing to do what the Lakers did, but the idea of handing over a piece of a team in exchange for an awesome stadium upgrade has precedent.

Posted by Ben Miller on April 4, 2012 09:05 PM

Ben Miller: The reason Ed Roski doesn't have a financing plan for his stadium is that the City of Industry, nor probably any other Southern California community, is willing to be as dumb as my city and offer up most of the risk for owning an NFL stadium. I say kudos to AEG and other cities is SoCal for not caving into the NFL demands.

Posted by santaclarawillbebroke on April 6, 2012 09:29 AM

The NFL needs Roski even though his plan can't work financially - unless the NFL ups the G4 contribution by a lot for a one-off deal. Which they might if they ever decide it's finally time to get back into L.A. But having him around helps leverage AEG.

Goodell gave away the game the SB in Indy when he mentioned expansion. If the NFL were in a hurry to get to L.A. they wouldn't have sat around for 18 years using it to blackmail municipalities all across the land. With new t.v. and labor deals already in place, L.A. won't affect the league's bottom line one iota - in fact, a crappy team there could drag ratings downward. It's just a prestige thing - "We have a team in this big, shiny, important city."

Other than that, it's obvious why they have the leverage and AEG doesn't. BTW there's a lot of good work on the various L.A. scenarios at footballphds.com, though I think they get some things wrong.

Posted by Piggy Wilf on April 8, 2012 01:41 PM

p.s. I needs me some taxpayer stadium cash now! -Piggy

Posted by Piggy Wilf on April 8, 2012 01:43 PM

Piggy,

We ain't talking about the past, we're talking about the future. Big markets matter more than ever for NFL TV ratings. For the past 18 years Brett Favre in Green Bay and Peyton Manning in Indy could draw on par with NY/Dallas/Chicago. Those days look like they are over. The NFL needs LA bad and when this Vikings move or expansion happens, the terms of the deal will prove it.

Posted by Ben Miller on April 9, 2012 02:12 PM

"Big markets matter more than ever for NFL TV ratings."

Evidence for that, Ben? I'm with you for other sports, but haven't seen it in football.

Posted by Neil deMause on April 9, 2012 02:22 PM

It started with Brees vs. Rodgers drawing about 10% below the opener in 2010 (for a scintillating game, no less) and continued through the playoffs, where Tebow vs. Brady was the lowest rated game of the divisional weekend (granted, that was a blowout, but in past years a star matchup that strong would have likely outdrawn something). On the flip side in the last game of the season NY vs Dallas drew a massive number despite the blowout.

I thought the real telling this was when Dallas was chosen for the opener over GB. Rodgers vs Eli would have been a slam dunk choice a year ago but whoever makes that decision chose the Cowboys and their big market instead. Unless Fox pulled some kind of quid pro quo for losing that last Dallas/NY game last season, there is no other logical way to explain how the Packers were passed up for that opening game. It is clear that the folks in charge at the NFL see this trend.

Posted by Ben Miller on April 10, 2012 10:23 AM

The NFL already draws big ratings in L.A. with no team there. That is the point, Ben, which you seemed to have missed entirely. As I stated, a crummy new team there could in fact drag those ratings down.

Posted by Piggy Wilf on April 14, 2012 08:56 PM

Latest News Items

CONTACT US FOR AD RATES