This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article.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.
September 28, 2009
Media playing "Guess who's coming to L.A. stadium?"
With an Industry NFL stadium looking more likely, newspapers are busying themselves with the game of figuring who'd play there. The Los Angeles Times declares the San Diego Chargers the frontrunner "because the Chargers have a window each year to get out of their Qualcomm Stadium lease without the threat of a lawsuit." The Jacksonville Jaguars, who are blacking out their entire season on TV thanks to poor ticket sales, are considered next most likely, with the Minnesota Vikings, St. Louis Rams, Buffalo Bills and Oakland Raiders earning honorable mention.
Of course, the Times also notes that Industry developer Ed Roski wants to own part of whatever team moves to his new building — but wants to pay for it not with cash, but with development rights to other parcels in Industry, which is a bit dicey, considering that "California development rights" is the new "swampland in Florida."
The Chargers, meanwhile, are rushing to take advantage as their newfound belle of the ball status, meeting today with Escondido officials to discuss a new stadium there. Ironically, the team's main demand there is development rights, though a North County Times estimate shows that they'd actually want a huge swath of the city's property:
In order to generate $400 million in revenue, the ancillary development would have to be either 1,400 condos, a retail complex significantly larger than the Westfield North County mall or about 2 million square feet of office buildings, which would nearly double the amount of office space in the city.
Escondido, the paper notes, currently has two half-built condo complexes sitting empty, and a 30% vacancy rate on its existing office space. I know it's old-fashioned, but the Chargers really might want to hold out for actual cash.
It's going to be the Jags. The NFL won't stand for the 8 blackout season and half full stadiums that they're enduring.
Posted by Dan on September 28, 2009 07:32 PM
I should know this, but I don't: Does the NFL lose any money under its TV contract if games are blacked out? Or does it just potentially mean lower bids when the contract is up for renewal?
Posted by Neil on September 28, 2009 08:58 PM
I'm pretty sure it's just when it's up for renewal. However isn't the TV deal part of the CBA which is due to be renewed in the next 2 years?
Posted by Dan on September 28, 2009 09:27 PM
The TV deal is not part of the CBA. The TV deal is brokered with the major networks every few years. That's why ESPN and NBC flipped ownership of Sunday Night and Monday Night Football a couple years back. I don't remember when it is back up again, although in theory the number of blackouts could potentially diminish the value of future contracts. I believe the NFL has the same deal as college football where the contracts are set and can't be renegotiated so they can't lose money. The part of the TV deal that comes up during CBA negotiations is how the revenue from the television contract gets divvied up.
If I had to guess, the team the NFL would want in LA is either the Raiders or Vikings. Oakland will not produce a new football stadium for the Raiders, they've been in LA before, and it wouldn't mess with the divisions the league painstakingly realigned less than a decade ago. Plus, it would make them more lucrative to potential owners once Al Davis passes away, finally giving that franchise some stability. The Vikings probably won't get a new stadium as they want and their owner has no interest keeping them in Minnesota and only wants to increase their value (the Rams could get flipped to the NFC North while the new LA Vikes would keep all NFC West divisional games on PST). The Bills will get moved to Toronto once owner Ralph Wilson dies, as that has been long in the making. The Jags and Rams would be too entangled in their stadium deals (I think) to just up and leave. And the Chargers seem to be making progress on having a stadium in San Diego County.
As for the Jags there actually is a compelling reason for them to stay in J'ville, same as why the NFL granted an expansion there in the first place: they want a team in north Florida, which is football-crazy. The only problem is that Jacksonville isn't a very big media market. I wouldn't be surprised if the Jags moved, but my money is if they don't go to LA they'll try to make to San Antonio or Austin.
Posted by Ian on September 28, 2009 11:56 PM
The TV deal is brokered every few years, but I don't remember when it is back up again. The NFL has the same deal as college football where the contracts are set payments from the network and can't be renegotiated. In theory the number of blackouts could potentially diminish the value of future contracts, although the biggest determiner in the value of the contracts are the playoff and prime time (Sunday and Monday night) games. The part of the TV deal that comes up during CBA negotiations is how the revenue from the television contract gets divvied up between the owners and the players.
If I had to guess, the team the NFL would want in LA is either the Raiders or Vikings. Oakland will not produce a new football stadium for the Raiders, they've been in LA before, and it wouldn't mess with the divisions the league painstakingly realigned less than a decade ago. Plus, it would make them more lucrative to potential owners once Al Davis passes away, finally giving that franchise some stability. The Vikings probably won't get a new stadium as they want and their owner has no interest keeping them in Minnesota and only wants to increase their value (the Rams could get flipped to the NFC North while the new LA Vikes would keep all NFC West divisional games on PST). The Bills will get moved to Toronto once owner Ralph Wilson dies, as that has been long in the making. The Jags and Rams would be too entangled in their stadium deals (I think) to just up and leave. And the Chargers seem to be making progress on having a stadium in San Diego County.
As for the Jags there actually is a compelling reason for them to stay in J'ville, same as why the NFL granted an expansion there in the first place: they want a team in north Florida, which is football-crazy. The only problem is that Jacksonville isn't a very big media market. I wouldn't be surprised if the Jags eventually moved, but my money is if they don't go to LA they'll try to make it to San Antonio or Austin (or Minneapolis if the Vikes left).
Posted by Ian on September 29, 2009 12:01 AM
I think the team that will end up in LA is the Raiders. Oakland has become a blight on the nation, and it is getting WORSE (I saw a piece on Oakland Street Gangs, and I noted that 22% of the POPULATION of Oakland is on parole or probation (The HIGHEST in the nation)).
A big factor is the age of Al Davis. Davis is 80, and not in the best of health. When he dies, there is going to be a huge estate tax liability that Davis's heirs will have to pay (Another issue of course, is California State Taxes, which means another financial hit), It might make a whole lot of sense for Davis to sell a piece of the Raiders now.
Another piece is of course, the dump of the Stadium (Mt. Davis), that no one wants to go to (And only two years left on the lease). Finally, the election where you will have a: Another term of Ron Dellums. b: Jean Quan. c: Don Perata. d: Van Jones (Talk about Moe, Larry, Curly, and Shemp).
I think it will be a race to see who is gone from Oakland first the Raiders or A's (My money is on the Raiders).
I
Jacksonville may not be "a very big media market" yet Orlando, a much bigger metro area, gets all the Jaguars away games on TV.
San Antonio and Austin loyalties are Dallas Cowboys first, Houston Texans second. Not only that Austin is a hardcore college football town.
Posted by Charles on September 30, 2009 01:24 PM
Raiders lease is up in 2010
Posted by Beano on October 1, 2009 10:42 PM
Beano, 2010 likely means after the 2010 season. The Raiders can play at the Coliseum or Rose Bowl for the 2011 and 2012 seasons while the new stadium gets built. If the Raiders go there, odds are you will not see the Chargers move there (Two AFC West teams in the same facility). But the Rams or Vikings (NFC), could become a co-tenant (Like the Giants & Jets). It would make a lot if sense for the NFL as well, because of the geography involved: If the Rams move, they leave St Louis, and play teams closer to them. If the Vikings move, the Rams can be switched to the NFC North (Playing teams like the Bears close by), wjile the Vikings play San Francisco, Arizona, & Seattle.
Posted by Januz on October 2, 2009 05:30 AM
LA would not and does not want the Raiders back. Its a fact, they ruined the LA community while they were here.
Chargers land in LA.
Posted by Danny on October 2, 2009 08:15 PM
I would sooner root for a soccer team than ever root for the Chargers. I would rather have the Raiders, Vikes or Jags here. I wouldn't have to switch my loyalties if the Raiders came back, but, I would be willing to drop all of the anguish and BS that goes along with being a Raider Fan (after 32 years, I have had enough) for a competitive, drama free team.
Posted by Martin on October 5, 2009 01:19 PM
Having a lot of Dallas fans in the area will not preclude San Antonio from supporting its own NFL team. Far from it. San Antonians are hungry for their own team and would be all over a franchise should one decide to move here. I should say when a team decides to move here. Because I see it as inevitable. The Spurs enjoy tremendous support from the local citizenry and so would a pro football team.
Posted by Edward on October 7, 2009 04:05 PM
Where would the team play in San Antonio?
Posted by Daniel Francis on October 10, 2009 09:15 PM
Please don't let it be the Chargers, who wants a team that has done nothing but let down its fans...San Diego already sent us the Clippers!!!! What's next the Padres!!!
GO Raiders!!!
Please don't let it be the Chargers, who wants a team that has done nothing but let down its fans...San Diego already sent us the Clippers!!!! What's next the Padres!!!
GO Raiders!!!
Please don't let it be the Chargers, who wants a team that has done nothing but let down its fans...San Diego already sent us the Clippers!!!! What's next the Padres!!!
GO Raiders!!!
I cant believe how many fans in L.A r still loyal to those f**n T-RAIDERS after they had left our wonderful city as many times they had wanted, twice to be exact.As a L.A native i would welcome any team remaining hopefully Roski wont commit the error of bring those suckers back, cause he'll be losing a true hungry fan, and there alot of people here in town that thing like that.Besides we want a year in year out superbowl contender, not like those good for nothing in black n silver that are always bring disatisfaction to there fans and waiting for a miracle to happened, lately being in the news for other than there performance. I think we just deserve something better than that here in L.A. N i really admire those fans that grew up with the T-RAIDERS that had to go thru this embarrasments, I thing they should move on just like their team went without them.
Posted by NFL Fans L.A on November 25, 2009 04:18 PM