Journalism can be a big game of telephone, especially in the social media age, and that’s what appears to be happening with NBC Sports’ Mike Florio’s report yesterday on the NFL’s voting timetable on an Oakland Raiders move to Las Vegas, in which he wrote:
As one source with knowledge of the inner workings of the process told PFT on Sunday, a decision is expected within the next six to nine months.
Okay, that doesn’t tell us much. Except that since Las Vegas officials were counting on a relocation vote at the league owners’ meetings in January, there is now much freaking out:
NFL owners reportedly won't vote on Raiders to Vegas move until mid-2017 https://t.co/1T76eYxZZV via @CBSSPORTS
— LeoAndrew (@leighdrews) October 18, 2016
Yeah, that’s not actually what Florio said at all. The league owners could delay a vote until mid-2017, or they could vote sooner than that. They could demand a sky-high relocation fee, or they could not. All we know right now is that some NFL guy Mike Florio knows doesn’t know what’s going to happen or when, which puts him in the same boat as the rest of us.
In other news, Raiders owner Mark Davis has said he intends to keep the team in Oakland for two more seasons, but also is reportedly looking at playing temporarily at Sam Boyd Stadium in Vegas, and given that he has options to play at the Coliseum the next two seasons but also can opt out of them, this also tells us absolutely nothing. Except that everyone involved seems to be intent on keeping their options — and leverage — open, all of which is to be expected. Except for that “purple monkey dishwasher” remark.
So, realistically, what would keep the NFL from turning down this pile of cash from Nevaaada?
– Departure to a much smaller media market?
– High risk of an empty stadium b/c of the lower income levels (and the Raiders are right back where they started)?
– More financial security if the raiders go back to LA (assuming the Chargers don’t)?
And what would the NFL give to keep the Raiders in Oakland since the city seems to be holding its line?
The owners delaying the vote means the NFL is trying in vain to keep the Raiders in Oakland and here why I think why:
-Media market is far smaller in LV than Oakland, also per capita and the fact the Raiders now have 55k in season ticket holders after 20+ years. But this is secondary to the other reasons.
-The Rams project in Inglewood slated to open in 2019 would lose major muster if a Las Vegas stadium opens at the same time. They both would cannibalize each other and the NFL wants the new LA stadium to be the crown jewel of the West Coast. Also, what if San Diego gets approved as well? 3 stadiums within 100 miles of each other opening at the same time? Not good.
-Mark Davis is making a big assumption his fans in LA and the Bay Area will follow. Sure, for single games here and there. But who in their right mind would pay for PSL in the Bay Area or LA for a Las Vegas stadium? The cost to fly or drive, stay in a hotel, tailgate, and go to the games? Raider fans don’t have that kind of money period for an entire season.
-Las Vegas locals do not have the $$ for PSLs either, Davis could see only 30k-40k sold in PSL sales with 30k leftover because of lack of locals investing in the team. I could easily see this happening since most Vegas locals are transients and not from there and have their own teams from where they grew up from.
-Finally, relocation fee. Rams paid $550M, Mark Davis does not have this money period. He never factored it in and it does not surprise me seeing how he is. That means his stadium would cost him 850M (300M+550M) dollars out of his own pocket. A stadium in Oakland would cost that pretty much, I am not including the 200M subsidy the NFL is giving because of them stopping Davis’ LA project with the Chargers.
Will the NFL stop this? I don’t know 100%, because of all these variables I brought up. If Davis can muster up the 550M relocation fee and all the rest of the financing is set and the NFL cannot get anything done with Oakland……Let him move.
My bad on the stadiums beings 100 miles apart, that would not be the case, but 1 hour apart in plane travel.
Thansk for the the thoughts. I don’t quite understand what davis’ contribution would actually be (forgot about the $200M subsidy from the NFL for giving him the Heismann on LA) and how, beyond PSLs he would fund it.
I don’t think his relocation fee would NOT be the same since the LV market isn’t the same as LA.
Forgot about the proximity to LA. That may factor in. Stan K might not be too happy, but he was going to have to potentially share with the Raiders or Chargers anyway, so not much of a leg to stand on there.
Las Vegas is 300 miles from Los Angeles, not 100. They are not going to “cannibalize each other” any more than the Rams, 49ers, Chargers and/or Cardinals cannibalize each other. And the NFL does not care about a stadium upstaging another stadium. The 49ers just opened a stadium, the Rams will be opening a stadium, the Chargers are trying to get a stadium. The NFL is all about newer, crazier stadiums, all the time, everywhere.
Stop mentioning media market size people. It doesn’t matter in the NFL. Get that through your heads. It is not a difficult concept to grasp.
It doesn’t matter *as much*, because local cable deals aren’t a factor. As we saw with the Rams, though, there is still some allure from higher PSL/ad sales/naming rights in a bigger market. And as a league, the NFL cares a little bit about how having teams in smaller markets might affect its national TV contracts.
That said … yeah, it’s not that big a deal. But it’s important to remember that what’s most profitable for Mark Davis may not be the most profitable for his fellow owners. There are differing incentives here.
I skip the word “media” and just think of it as an identifier of “market” size.
So, in conjunction with the relative wealth of the given market, can Vegas support an NFL team in terms of tickets and sponsorship in the amount needed to fill Davis’ pockets or do those factors cause the NFL to worry about the viability of a franchise there? Especially after seeing the Raiders come back to Oakland and completely face planting on selling PSLs
The only way the Raiders would stay in Oakland is if they come up with a competitive deal, and I don’t see them making any kind of deal, competitive or not. It would take new ownership providing a lot of stadium money for them to say. I really don’t think anyone will step up and do that.
This is happening… When youu have support from Jerry Jones and Bob Kraft and Woody Johnson and Stan Kronke…You pretty much got the deal done. All the other owners fall in line.
We used to just cook up a nice picture of an imaginary venue and then yell “LOS ANGELES!” at the rubes in some town and presto, new stadium on the public dime. They’d start falling all over themselves to hand us money–take Minneapolis, for example. But I digress…
Now we can’t shout “L.A.” any more, and the vaportecture pic isn’t enough. You have to go visit some place you really don’t care to move to and grease some locals and talk to news hacks and get the movers and shakers to hatch some scheme to pay your way and sheesh, it’s a lot of work! All that just so you can go back home and say, “See? SEE!? We’re moving to Podunk unless you pay up!”