In what the Los Angeles Times calls “a bold move to undercut an NFL stadium at Hollywood Park” — “bold” being an adjective usually reserved by journalists for the sort of things done by, say, Vladimir Putin — AEG has attempted to throw a roadblock in the path of St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke’s proposed Inglewood stadium by getting former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge to write a report that it would be too tempting a terrorist target and should not be built:
In a 14-page report, Ridge suggests that because the Inglewood stadium proposed by St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke would lie within three to four miles of Los Angeles International Airport and beneath the flight path of airliners, terrorists might try to shoot down a plane or crash one into the stadium, scenarios Ridge described as “a terrorist event ‘twofer.’ “
Because when terrorists want to shoot down an airplane, the first thing they do is look for an NFL stadium to launch surface-to-air missiles from. It’s easy to bring those in, so long as you put them in a clear plastic bag.
The Times reports that “it is not known how widely AEG distributed the report,” which the paper got from Ridge’s PR firm. NFL vice-president Eric Grubman effectively dismissed its findings, saying, “We feel that the best approach is to look at these things with an independent eye.”
In addition to giving everyone a good laugh, the AEG report should show what we have to look forward to as three different developers and three different NFL owners all circle around the L.A. market, which is full corporate titan smackdown action. Recall that when the owners of Madison Square Garden faced off with the New York Jets owners over a proposed Manhattan stadium, it culminated in a giant ad war, so one can only hope that this will have as entertaining a denouement.
Back nearer to planet Earth, meanwhile, the Oakland Raiders are reportedly looking for a smaller, 55,000-seat stadium in Oakland, which would be more in line with the NFL’s new marketing reality, not to mention with what Raiders owner Mark Davis said two years ago, than an 80,000-seat behemoth in Carson. Not that anybody, including Davis, is proposing how to build such a thing, but it’s a way to get another Raiders stadium story into the paper, so hey, do what you gotta do.
And speaking of getting stadium stories into the paper, consummate NFL insider Peter King has an article at SI.com theorizing that since Kroenke seems to be “the most determined owner to want to move to Los Angeles” (though he hasn’t actually said anything about moving, and has only partnered with a development company in Inglewood on a stadium with unspecified funding) and St. Louis has the most advanced stadium plan (though it has its own problems with mystery funding), maybe the Rams will move to L.A. and then the San Diego Chargers will move in with them and the Raiders will move to a new stadium in St. Louis?
Even King calls this “a virtual sports-talk-show bit of guesswork by me,” but that doesn’t stop him from putting it in print. (And in a pull quote.) Nor does it stop him from writing his entire column with only two people quoted: Grubman and St. Louis stadium plan chief David Peacock, neither of whom say anything other than what you’d expect them to say. (Grubman talks about L.A. having “real momentum,” Peacock says “if we do our job, I can’t imagine 24 votes to approve the Rams moving.”) And now I just wrote almost two paragraphs about this piece of wild speculation, so maybe I’m no better than the rest of them — though at least I reserved the headline for the far more entertaining piece of wild speculation. That’s the defense I’m going with, anyway.
Maybe if we weren’t giving organizations like the NFL tax exemptions and spending billions on stadiums with various tax subsidies, we could afford the Department of Homeland Security.
I’m betting on the St Louis Raiders. Or maybe the St Louis Jaguars, or Panthers, or Bears, or somebody playing in a worn-out stadium more than 5 years old. Since St Louis (at least its pols) is willing to throw huge gobs of money at an NFL team, there’s bound to be some poor owner willing to give up his day gig selling pencils on the street to move in.
Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara is directly in the flight path of planes taking off from San Jose International. It is 2.4 miles from the end of the runway. The Inglewood site is also ~2.4 miles from the end of the runway at LAX but is much more significantly off to one side rather than directly lined up with the runways. So even despite the ludicrous terrorism argument, that report doesn’t even get basic geographic facts right.
So… A new stadium in the LA area would be a magnet for terrorists, while the Rose Bowl is not.
Okay. That makes sense.
Wow, the Colorado Buffaloes can pack 55,000 into their joint. Not that they ever do. I always thought 60,000 was about the minimum for NFL teams. The Raiders should just stay where they are. Tremendous greed. After the new wears off of their new, smaller dump in Oakland, they will be back to getting 30,000 per game again. Contraction is starting to sound pretty good.
There is a 70,000 preferred minimum for a Super Bowl in the bid packets, but it can be waved in certain situations.
I don’t think there is an official minimum for a stadium anymore. There is an unofficial minimum of 50,000 (i.e. it’s not written but they won’t approve a stadium smaller than that), with two stadiums under 60,000 but above the 50,000 limit (the Oakland Colosseum and the temporary TCF Bank Stadium).
Ahhhhh, a billionaire pissing match. Sit back and enjoy the show, everyone!
I’m no expert but wouldn’t it be just as easy to take out the USBank Tower from the AEG site with the same weaponry? Wouldn’t it be easier to just smuggle in a bomb and just detonate yourself in a crowd of 50,000 people in any stadium? I mean – terrorism….effective terrorism is possible any any stadium, not just one that is close to a flight pattern.
I’m no expert on MANDPAD’s, but I was under the belief that these could hit a plane in flight from the ground if you got close enough to the point of lift off. I don’t think the roof of a building will be say, anymore effective than simply getting a bit closer to LAX. I hope Ridge took them for all they were worth for that report.
As much as I, personally, would love to see a new football stadium built in downtown L.A, it’s quite obvious that this is a desperation move by AEG! No offense, Mr Anschutz, but you’ve had your chance.
So, if I understand former DHS sec Ridge correctly, nothing at all should ever be built for a five mile radius around any airport.
Good to know.
And these are the people in charge?