Today in people who used to be famous talking about where the Oakland Raiders might move, it’s former San Antonio mayor Henry Cisneros, who says that the team could be taking his city seriously as — hey, wait a minute! This is a repeat!
In newsier NFL maybe-relocation news, the San Diego Chargers owners have announced that they’re not opting out of their lease for 2015, which means they’re not moving to Los Angeles to play in a stadium that hasn’t even been planned yet, either. The Los Angeles Times’ Sam Farmer takes this as a sign that no NFL teams are moving to L.A. next year, on the theory that if somebody were, then the Chargers would want in too to avoid being left stuck in San Diego with an old stadium and two other teams on their doorstep. I’d stick with the theory that nobody’s moving to L.A. because there’s nowhere to play there that’s any better than teams’ old stadium back home, though.
Just to play devil’s advocate here.
So the Chargers don’t leave San Diego after this year….but is that still evidence that they aren’t actively looking to move to Los Angeles? Does that mean there will be no teams that move in 2015?
Think about this. Say after the Super Bowl, the Rams announce they are moving to Los Angeles. Unless they want to be in a completely lame duck situation in St. Louis, and given that ground hasn’t been broken on a new LA stadium yet, this means they’d have to use temporary digs in Los Angeles for the next 2-3 years while the stadium gets built, which means either the LA Coliseum or Rose Bowl.
Now, we’re talking about the Rams here, who currently play thousands of miles away and would be moving halfway across the country. On the other hand, the Chargers only play 90 miles away from LA. They arguably already lay claim to the LA market, given that they are the closest team and fans can attend games there with a relatively easy commute. (Relative meaning having to deal with notorious SoCal traffic, but still).
The Rams playing in the Coliseum or Rose Bowl over lame duck status in St. Louis certainly makes sense. The Chargers…far less so.
So is it possible that we might see an announcement in 2015 that the Chargers, while staying in San Diego for the immediate time period, are rebranding themselves as the “Southern California Chargers”? And with this regional rebranding, they could do one (or both) of two things: 1) Continue to try to get a stadium in San Diego or the immediate San Diego area…and/or 2) if San Diego continues to go nowhere, then announce they are move into the Rams new stadium in LA as a second tenant without having to further rebrand or remarket the team?
Yes, it’s just a theory, but at this point, all we are dealing with is theories.
The Coliseum or the Rose Bowl has to be better than what the Raiders currently play in. They don’t even have working toilets half the time. Especially if they end up with the #1 pick, why would they want to stay in Oakland? But that #1 pick I guess is not a guarantee, given how bad the Bucs are. I’m thinking tomorrow night’s game between the Titans and Jaguars (both also 2-11), will end a 3-3 tie.
“So the Chargers don’t leave San Diego after this year….but is that still evidence that they aren’t actively looking to move to Los Angeles? Does that mean there will be no teams that move in 2015?”
We actually have never had any evidence that they were actively looking at LA. Just supposition from media talking heads and sportscasters. Nothing concrete from the team itself.
Mike, actually the Raiders situation in Oakland isn’t as bad as the A’s would make you think. The Raiders have their own facilities at the stadium that were built in 1995 and which are still in good working order and an entire level up from where the A’s clubhouse is located. Their toilets don’t back up or any of the disgusting things the A’s have to deal with down in the stadium’s original clubhouse/locker room facilities.
Here is a cool scenario, IMHO. Let’s assume that the San Diego Chargers, Oakland Raiders, and St. Louis Rams all stay put for the 2015 NFL season. And then, for the 2016 season, all three cities simultaneously tell their respective NFL teams that they can sign a new 30 year lease for their existing stadium and are on the hook for 100% of operating costs and capital improvements for the life of the lease. And, if they want a new stadium, they can build it in their present city of residence with the respective teams paying for 100% of its cost. For those of the 3 teams that do not agree to these conditions, they are then on their own to find a new place to play for the 2016 season. End of discussion.
Wouldn’t it be cool to see the 3 teams all scrambling to play in LA at once and with no stadium issues resolved?
Thank you, Dan.
BRING BACK THE LOS ANGELES RAMS 2015
That #1 pick is also not a guarantee given how bad Jamarcus Russell was (and the list goes on, but I think he’s the most recent Raider #1 Draft failure right?)
Scott: If I were negotiating for any of the cities you named, the only deals on the table would be minimum 10yr term that included SHARED investment by both the team and host city in upgrades (assuming replacement is not possible in either case). I’d like to think that I could put the costs for upgrades on the tenants (who didn’t pay for the original construction in any of the three cities), but that probably wouldn’t fly.
If they won’t sign a minimum ten year lease, the cities should not accept any sort of renewal (year to year, etc). I believe the Chargers present lease gives them an annual window to unilaterally withdraw, so they are probably fireproof in that regard until the present lease expires. The others? Their leases end, and as far as I know, they do not contain provisions for automatic extension/renewal.
Want to make the NFL stand up and take notice? Instead of wooing them with bribes in the hundreds of millions of dollars, evict their sorry asses at the earliest opportunity.
The Rams have a unilateral renewal clause as well. Don’t know about the Raiders.
Raiders are the only ones with no renewal clause, so Oakland could tell them “long-term lease or go play in the street” if they want:
http://newballpark.org/2014/12/19/no-teams-no-developer-no-deal/
The Chargers are not getting a new stadium in San Diego. San Diego is struggling to get the $520 million convention center expansion.
Their $1.4 billion stadium/convention center plan is idiotic. It’s destined to fail thanks to the 2/3rds majority vote requirement.
Dean Spanos is a corporate welfare queen.