LeverPuller
BigFooty Tanker
- Jun 23, 2011
- 35,095
- 40,602
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Newcastle United Seattle Seahawks
Rams to LA. Book it.
NFL Relocations and League Expansion
- Thread starter Alphabet Man
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Feb 28, 2009
- 37,099
- 34,268
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11493438/terry-kim-pegula-tentatively-approved-buy-buffalo-bills
Bills arent going anywhere
Bills arent going anywhere
Dixie Flatline
Moderator
- Jun 3, 2005
- 35,844
- 36,498
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Cartagena C.F., NYJ, A's
- Moderator
- #803
Poor JBJ, he was shot through the heart.
But seriously, it illustrates the difference in value between a franchise based in LA (or NYC, I suppose) and somewhere else. The Bills have been to four Superbowls and were unlucky to not win at least one of them. The Clippers have been historically awful for most of their existence, yet one sells for more than $2 billion and the Bills reap "just" $1 billion.
Funny how it works.
But seriously, it illustrates the difference in value between a franchise based in LA (or NYC, I suppose) and somewhere else. The Bills have been to four Superbowls and were unlucky to not win at least one of them. The Clippers have been historically awful for most of their existence, yet one sells for more than $2 billion and the Bills reap "just" $1 billion.
Funny how it works.
Dirty Bird
Pokémon Master
Please send Oakland to Vegas.
Would work well.
**** the NFL and their displeasure of the city, just go there ffs!
Would work well.
**** the NFL and their displeasure of the city, just go there ffs!
dlanod
Moderator
- Sep 14, 2006
- 52,399
- 81,189
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- GWS; CCMariners; NQCowboys; Ravens
- Moderator
- #805
I agree with the overall point (I definitely think Bills generated less money because of their market, and Clippers more because of theirs) but I don't think historical figures play in there. Bills were very good in the early 90s. They've been very bad more often than not since. You don't pay money for something that happened 25 years ago, you pay for what the situation is now.
larkis
Win it for Him
Lies - only some fluff to keep generating money until he can move the franchise in a decade.
I think the Rams lost the fan base for the season after Mondays shocker. Think that it is the turning point in all this. Getting harder to see them remain in St Louis when they are the least valuable franchise in the NFL and could probably add an extra $200 million by moving the franchise.
Dixie Flatline
Moderator
- Jun 3, 2005
- 35,844
- 36,498
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Cartagena C.F., NYJ, A's
- Moderator
- #807
Ballmer probably (definitely) overpaid for the Clippers, but the Clippers have never been any good. Even recently, they've looked good but finished third in the Western Conference last year and lost in the Conference semi-finals against the Thunder in six games. Clippers have never reached the NBA finals.
So I still contend that a NBA franchise in one of the USA's biggest cities drew an outsized sale price mostly due to the location of said franchise.
Ballmer paid overs to make sure the deal got done and the NBA could be done with Donald Sterling as well as the fact that it's the 2nd biggest market in the country.
As for the NFL the Rams are the team I can most likely see heading back to LA, I'd hate to see a team relocate from outside the state of California that doesn't have any historical link to LA which the Rams do, other than that the Raiders which seems more unlikely now and the Chargers (also unlikely) would be the best options.
As for the NFL the Rams are the team I can most likely see heading back to LA, I'd hate to see a team relocate from outside the state of California that doesn't have any historical link to LA which the Rams do, other than that the Raiders which seems more unlikely now and the Chargers (also unlikely) would be the best options.
Dirty Bird
Pokémon Master
I wonder what the NFL would look like now, if all 32 teams were still in their original cities.
I am legitimately curious on that.
I am legitimately curious on that.
LeverPuller
BigFooty Tanker
- Jun 23, 2011
- 35,095
- 40,602
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Newcastle United Seattle Seahawks
How original? Founding location of the franchise or at the time of the merger?
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,873
- 94,753
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Not much change....off my face
LeverPuller
BigFooty Tanker
- Jun 23, 2011
- 35,095
- 40,602
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Newcastle United Seattle Seahawks
NFC East:
Boston Braves (Washington)
Dallas Cowboys
New York Football Giants
Philadelphia Eagles
NFC North:
Decatur Staleys (Bears)
Portsmouth Spartans (Lions)
Green Bay Packers
Minnesota Vikings
NFC South:
Carolina Panthers
Atlanta Falcons
New Orleans Saints
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
NFC West:
Seattle Seahawks
San Francisco 49ers
Cleveland Rams (Rams)
Chicago Cardinals (Cards)
AFC North:
Pittsburgh Steelers
Cleveland Browns (Ravens)
Cleveland Browns (1999)
Cincinatti Bengals
AFC East:
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
Boston Patriots
New York Titans (Jets)
AFC South:
Houston Texans
Jacksonville Jaguars
Dayton Triangles (Colts)
Houston Oilers (Titans)
AFC West:
Denver Broncos
Dallas Texans (Chiefs)
Oakland Raiders
Los Angeles Chargers (Chargers)
In short: 2 teams in Chicago, 3(!) in Cleveland plus another 3 in Ohio so seven teams total in Ohio, 2 teams in Dallas, a team in LA, 2 teams in Houston and 2 teams in Boston
Also the AFC North is confusing as s**t with two Cleveland Browns
Boston Braves (Washington)
Dallas Cowboys
New York Football Giants
Philadelphia Eagles
NFC North:
Decatur Staleys (Bears)
Portsmouth Spartans (Lions)
Green Bay Packers
Minnesota Vikings
NFC South:
Carolina Panthers
Atlanta Falcons
New Orleans Saints
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
NFC West:
Seattle Seahawks
San Francisco 49ers
Cleveland Rams (Rams)
Chicago Cardinals (Cards)
AFC North:
Pittsburgh Steelers
Cleveland Browns (Ravens)
Cleveland Browns (1999)
Cincinatti Bengals
AFC East:
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
Boston Patriots
New York Titans (Jets)
AFC South:
Houston Texans
Jacksonville Jaguars
Dayton Triangles (Colts)
Houston Oilers (Titans)
AFC West:
Denver Broncos
Dallas Texans (Chiefs)
Oakland Raiders
Los Angeles Chargers (Chargers)
In short: 2 teams in Chicago, 3(!) in Cleveland plus another 3 in Ohio so seven teams total in Ohio, 2 teams in Dallas, a team in LA, 2 teams in Houston and 2 teams in Boston
Also the AFC North is confusing as s**t with two Cleveland Browns
Dixie Flatline
Moderator
- Jun 3, 2005
- 35,844
- 36,498
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Cartagena C.F., NYJ, A's
- Moderator
- #814
Que?
The Jets were originally the Titans of New York. They were originally based in the old Polo Grounds, across the Harlem River from Yankee Stadium. Their first game was a pre-season game played in the LA Coliseum against the LA Chargers (the Chargers' kick returner returned the first ever kick-off for a 105-yard touchdown return) but at no stage have the Jets been based anywhere other than in NY or New Jersey.
The Titans eventually went bankrupt in 1963. The franchise was sold to a five-man consortium for $1 million and renamed the New York Jets.
LeverPuller
BigFooty Tanker
- Jun 23, 2011
- 35,095
- 40,602
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Newcastle United Seattle Seahawks
Mentally went to the Bears. Never mind.
Replace one of the browns with the canton bulldogs, how great would it have been had there been another green bay like deal for a side based at the "home of football"
Dirty Bird
Pokémon Master
NFC South - The most traditional division in football.
AFC East the only one that comes close, but the Titans went and ****ed that up.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,873
- 94,753
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
With Los Angeles looming, NFL envisions $2B sale price for Raiders
September 21, 2014 9:09 am ET
Would Mark Davis take $2B to sell the Raiders to help the NFL fill its LA market? (USATSI)
With the sale of the Buffalo Bills to the Pegula family set to be voted through in a matter of weeks for $1.4 billion, there is considerable attention being paid by NFL officials to the plight of the Raiders.
They still face a highly uncertain stadium situation with their lease in Oakland expiring after the season and the team no longer interested in going year-to-year there. League sources said the NFL now believes the Raiders could generate $2 billion or more if sold, and, selling the team remains the most likely path for a move to Los Angeles.
The NFL will be very careful about who gets that Los Angeles market, and Raiders owner Mark Davis has limitations in real estate, marketing and overall business expertise. Convincing Davis to take a few billion to sell the team to one of the league's short-list of owners-in-waiting -- a list headlined by Larry Ellison, sources said -- would be one way to fast-track getting to that market.
Otherwise, the Raiders remain in a difficult conundrum with the landscape for a new deal in northern California bleak and other options like San Antonio having their own economic limitations. Given the league's overall desire to be in Los Angeles (and the fact San Antonio is hardly a market where other owners are clamoring for games to be played), cajoling Davis to sell the team would solve a lot of problems in one fell swoop, though obviously that decision only could be made by him.
There are numerous people around the league more or less waiting for the Rams, whose lease in St. Louis also is up after the season, to announce an intent to move by the February deadline to do so. And Commissioner Roger Goodell has made it clear the league views Los Angeles as a two-team town. Of course, getting their first tends to have significant positive ramifications for sponsorships, naming rights, etc. The sense of urgency about the LA market is at a more fevered pitch than it has been for quite some time, and the behind-the-scenes machinations won't subside soon.
Even without a stadium solution, selling the Raiders to someone equipped to get them to LA would ensure the price tag gets where the league wants it to be, and some wonder if at some point the headaches and tribulations of trying to get a new stadium eventually would lead to Davis going that route.
September 21, 2014 9:09 am ET
Would Mark Davis take $2B to sell the Raiders to help the NFL fill its LA market? (USATSI)
With the sale of the Buffalo Bills to the Pegula family set to be voted through in a matter of weeks for $1.4 billion, there is considerable attention being paid by NFL officials to the plight of the Raiders.
They still face a highly uncertain stadium situation with their lease in Oakland expiring after the season and the team no longer interested in going year-to-year there. League sources said the NFL now believes the Raiders could generate $2 billion or more if sold, and, selling the team remains the most likely path for a move to Los Angeles.
The NFL will be very careful about who gets that Los Angeles market, and Raiders owner Mark Davis has limitations in real estate, marketing and overall business expertise. Convincing Davis to take a few billion to sell the team to one of the league's short-list of owners-in-waiting -- a list headlined by Larry Ellison, sources said -- would be one way to fast-track getting to that market.
Otherwise, the Raiders remain in a difficult conundrum with the landscape for a new deal in northern California bleak and other options like San Antonio having their own economic limitations. Given the league's overall desire to be in Los Angeles (and the fact San Antonio is hardly a market where other owners are clamoring for games to be played), cajoling Davis to sell the team would solve a lot of problems in one fell swoop, though obviously that decision only could be made by him.
There are numerous people around the league more or less waiting for the Rams, whose lease in St. Louis also is up after the season, to announce an intent to move by the February deadline to do so. And Commissioner Roger Goodell has made it clear the league views Los Angeles as a two-team town. Of course, getting their first tends to have significant positive ramifications for sponsorships, naming rights, etc. The sense of urgency about the LA market is at a more fevered pitch than it has been for quite some time, and the behind-the-scenes machinations won't subside soon.
Even without a stadium solution, selling the Raiders to someone equipped to get them to LA would ensure the price tag gets where the league wants it to be, and some wonder if at some point the headaches and tribulations of trying to get a new stadium eventually would lead to Davis going that route.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,873
- 94,753
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
NFL exec thinks team could be based in London by 2022
Posted by Darin Gantt on September 26, 2014, 3:41 PM EDT
Reuters
Even though we keep sending them things like a Dolphins-Raiders game, the English for some reason can’t get enough of NFL football.
And spurred on by a good response to the international series that will include three games this season, the league is emboldened in its pursuit of a full-time franchise in London.
Mark Waller, the NFL’s new head of its international division, said he could envision a team based there by 2022.
“When we started [with the series in 2007], I reckoned it’d take 15 years to do it,” Waller told the NFL Network’s Albert Breer. “That was what I expected, and we’re still on course. We’re at the midpoint now.”
That timing is not coincidental with another CBA and a new round of television contracts, which creates a climate ripe for a move.
The league is currently working through the logistical challenges, experimenting with start times, and bringing teams from different time zones to gauge how to proceed if/when it’s a full-time endeavor.
Waller also mentioned two other interesting points as it pertains to expansion of the international market. He specifically mentioned Germany and Brazil as possible future sites of games, with China perhaps more of a long-term goal.
But perhaps most interesting was the possibility of partnering in some fashion with the Barclays Premier League, England’s top soccer league.
That process could be expedited by joint ownership of clubs in each league, since Stan Kroenke owns the Rams and Arsenal) and Joel Glazer owns the Buccaneers and Manchester United). Jaguars owner Shad Khan owns Fulham, a former Premier league team that was relegated to the minor leagues after finishing next to last last season.
“We have goals that mirror one another,” Waller said. “They’re big in the UK and want to be bigger in the U.S., and we’re big in the U.S. and want to be bigger in the UK.”
The piles of money those two powerhouse leagues create in a year are vast, and the fact there’s talk of working together creates a world of possibilities.
Posted by Darin Gantt on September 26, 2014, 3:41 PM EDT
Even though we keep sending them things like a Dolphins-Raiders game, the English for some reason can’t get enough of NFL football.
And spurred on by a good response to the international series that will include three games this season, the league is emboldened in its pursuit of a full-time franchise in London.
Mark Waller, the NFL’s new head of its international division, said he could envision a team based there by 2022.
“When we started [with the series in 2007], I reckoned it’d take 15 years to do it,” Waller told the NFL Network’s Albert Breer. “That was what I expected, and we’re still on course. We’re at the midpoint now.”
That timing is not coincidental with another CBA and a new round of television contracts, which creates a climate ripe for a move.
The league is currently working through the logistical challenges, experimenting with start times, and bringing teams from different time zones to gauge how to proceed if/when it’s a full-time endeavor.
Waller also mentioned two other interesting points as it pertains to expansion of the international market. He specifically mentioned Germany and Brazil as possible future sites of games, with China perhaps more of a long-term goal.
But perhaps most interesting was the possibility of partnering in some fashion with the Barclays Premier League, England’s top soccer league.
That process could be expedited by joint ownership of clubs in each league, since Stan Kroenke owns the Rams and Arsenal) and Joel Glazer owns the Buccaneers and Manchester United). Jaguars owner Shad Khan owns Fulham, a former Premier league team that was relegated to the minor leagues after finishing next to last last season.
“We have goals that mirror one another,” Waller said. “They’re big in the UK and want to be bigger in the U.S., and we’re big in the U.S. and want to be bigger in the UK.”
The piles of money those two powerhouse leagues create in a year are vast, and the fact there’s talk of working together creates a world of possibilities.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,873
- 94,753
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
AEG asks for 6-month extension to woo NFL team to Los Angeles
An artist's rendering of the Farmers Field football stadium proposed for downtown Los Angeles. Sports and entertainment company AEG says it needs more time to reach a deal with the NFL. (AEG)
By Roger Vincent, David Zahniser, Sam Farmer contact the reporters
BusinessAEGPro FootballLos Angeles HotelsNFLEric GarcettiPublic Officials
AEG asks for more time in wooing NFL team to Los Angeles
L.A. City Council must decide whether to give up on football stadium downtown
With the clock running out on its proposal to build a pro football stadium in downtown Los Angeles, Anschutz Entertainment Group has appealed to the city for extra time to land a team and work on an alternative development in case the effort fails.
Citing progress in negotiations with the National Football League, AEG asked Monday for six more months to bring an NFL franchise to Los Angeles and start building Farmers Field stadium.
The fate of the request will depend in part on whether city officials believe AEG really is close to luring a team to town. For months they have been studying ways of financing an expansion of the aging Los Angeles Convention Center without the revenue that a new stadium would generate.
Under a 2012 agreement with the city, AEG has until Oct. 17 to sign a team. It promised to build Farmers Field, construct a $287-million wing for the Convention Center and demolish the obsolete West Hall.
The discussions are very preliminary, but we are encouraged enough by recent progress that we share AEG's view that continued conversations would be worthwhile. - Eric Grubman, an NFL executive vice president
Although AEG insisted it remained committed to wooing a football team, the announcement Monday suggested the company was seriously considering the possibility of expanding the Convention Center complex without a stadium. Under either scenario, if it gets the extension, AEG would still be a driving force in developing the area around its multibillion-dollar Staples Center and L.A. Live complex.
To sweeten its request for an extension, AEG has offered to begin planning a convention hotel with 750 or more rooms. City officials had already asked architects to propose upgrades for the Convention Center and identify a spot for a 1,000-room hotel, which would make the facility more competitive with other convention venues.
"We are not asking for more time lightly," AEG Chief Executive Dan Beckerman said in a letter to Mayor Eric Garcetti and City Council members, "as we understand from your feedback that there are important objectives and principles underlying the project that need to be advanced without undue delay."
AEG did not offer details on its negotiations with the NFL but said any decisions on team relocations would happen during the next six months.
Eric Grubman, an NFL executive vice president, said the league was guardedly optimistic about its discussions with AEG and supported the company's request for an extension of its agreement with the city.
"The discussions are very preliminary, but we are encouraged enough by recent progress that we share AEG's view that continued conversations would be worthwhile," he said in a statement. "An extension could well provide the time necessary for us and AEG to determine whether the downtown site can be considered by our membership during our next off-season period."
Garcetti, City Council President Herb Wesson and Councilman Curren Price, whose district includes the area, said they would support granting the extension.
“We are not asking for more time lightly,” AEG Chief Executive Dan Beckerman said in a letter to Los Angeles officials, in requesting a six-month extension in wooing an NFL team to the city. (Brian van der Brug, Los Angeles Times)
Former Walt Disney Co. Chairman and Chief Executive Michael Eisner, who has advised Garcetti on the Convention Center and the NFL, said: "The financial impact of getting this done for the city is enormous. So patience is difficult, but warranted.
"I think the city would not give AEG an extension if they didn't see progress being made — substantial progress being made," he said. "AEG … has moved the ball a little further down the field, let's say."
AEG, a giant international sports and music entertainment firm founded by Denver billionaire Philip Anschutz, owns the Los Angeles Kings hockey team and the L.A. Galaxy soccer team.
Its bid for an NFL team seemed promising two years ago in the flurry of enthusiasm over the proposed stadium, which included a multimillion-dollar commitment from Farmers Insurance for naming rights to the venue.
But by last spring, with negotiations between AEG and team owners apparently stalled, city officials announced they were preparing to give up on a stadium and take back control of developing the Convention Center site.
Many NFL insiders now consider a downtown stadium a long shot. What's more likely is a stadium development in Inglewood, where St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke has purchased 60 acres near the Forum.
Real estate developers often ask for extensions from the city, but AEG's request faces widespread skepticism about the possibility of a football deal. Many city officials also feel they must quickly improve the Convention Center to help lure more convention business to Los Angeles.
The city had launched a design competition and narrowed it to three firms. It had been planning to award $200,000 to each finalist after AEG's Oct. 17 deadline expired.
Now AEG says it would spend $600,000 on alternative design plans and reimburse the city up to $150,000 for costs connected to evaluating the competing plans.
AEG also promised to push for development of a hotel with at least 750 rooms on Olympic Boulevard next to a new Marriott hotel complex and across the street from the Ritz-Carlton and J.W. Marriott hotels at L.A. Live.
"We, as the developer and the land owner, think we're uniquely situated to move forward a project expeditiously and successfully," said Ted Fikre, chief legal and development officer at AEG.
L.A.'s Convention Center has long been a drag on the city's budget, though AEG says it has turned around the performance since taking over management in December. More than $48 million in city hotel taxes help cover the yearly debt payments on the center's South Hall, which opened in 1993.
Robert "Bud" Ovrom, executive director of the city's Convention and Tourism Development Department, would not specifically discuss AEG's latest request. But he noted that the city already struggled to book conventions because of uncertainty about the facility's future.
"We're anxious to see a decision made one way or the other," he said. "From a marketing point of view, we need to get on with it."
The NFL, meanwhile, said it was not ruling out other potential stadium sites in the Los Angeles area.
The nation's second-largest media market has been without an NFL franchise since the Raiders and Rams left after the 1994 season. In the 20 years since, more than a dozen stadium proposals have come and gone.
Rumblings of a return to L.A. have grown louder in recent months, with three franchises — the Oakland Raiders, San Diego Chargers and Rams — on year-to-year stadium leases for the first time, unhappy with their outdated venues and mulling relocation.
Both Garcetti and Wesson said they were willing to give AEG extra time to land a team.
"We've now brought negotiations between L.A. and the NFL further along than ever before, and combined with AEG's experience transforming downtown with Staples Center, I support continuing the momentum with them," Garcetti said in a statement.
Price said the city needed to keep all its options open when dealing with the Convention Center project. "I support an extension for AEG at this time because it would help Los Angeles make a better case for landing a team, ultimately allowing our city to score the 'touchdown' — with or without a team," he said.
An artist's rendering of the Farmers Field football stadium proposed for downtown Los Angeles. Sports and entertainment company AEG says it needs more time to reach a deal with the NFL. (AEG)
By Roger Vincent, David Zahniser, Sam Farmer contact the reporters
BusinessAEGPro FootballLos Angeles HotelsNFLEric GarcettiPublic Officials
AEG asks for more time in wooing NFL team to Los Angeles
L.A. City Council must decide whether to give up on football stadium downtown
With the clock running out on its proposal to build a pro football stadium in downtown Los Angeles, Anschutz Entertainment Group has appealed to the city for extra time to land a team and work on an alternative development in case the effort fails.
Citing progress in negotiations with the National Football League, AEG asked Monday for six more months to bring an NFL franchise to Los Angeles and start building Farmers Field stadium.
The fate of the request will depend in part on whether city officials believe AEG really is close to luring a team to town. For months they have been studying ways of financing an expansion of the aging Los Angeles Convention Center without the revenue that a new stadium would generate.
Under a 2012 agreement with the city, AEG has until Oct. 17 to sign a team. It promised to build Farmers Field, construct a $287-million wing for the Convention Center and demolish the obsolete West Hall.
The discussions are very preliminary, but we are encouraged enough by recent progress that we share AEG's view that continued conversations would be worthwhile. - Eric Grubman, an NFL executive vice president
Although AEG insisted it remained committed to wooing a football team, the announcement Monday suggested the company was seriously considering the possibility of expanding the Convention Center complex without a stadium. Under either scenario, if it gets the extension, AEG would still be a driving force in developing the area around its multibillion-dollar Staples Center and L.A. Live complex.
To sweeten its request for an extension, AEG has offered to begin planning a convention hotel with 750 or more rooms. City officials had already asked architects to propose upgrades for the Convention Center and identify a spot for a 1,000-room hotel, which would make the facility more competitive with other convention venues.
"We are not asking for more time lightly," AEG Chief Executive Dan Beckerman said in a letter to Mayor Eric Garcetti and City Council members, "as we understand from your feedback that there are important objectives and principles underlying the project that need to be advanced without undue delay."
AEG did not offer details on its negotiations with the NFL but said any decisions on team relocations would happen during the next six months.
Eric Grubman, an NFL executive vice president, said the league was guardedly optimistic about its discussions with AEG and supported the company's request for an extension of its agreement with the city.
"The discussions are very preliminary, but we are encouraged enough by recent progress that we share AEG's view that continued conversations would be worthwhile," he said in a statement. "An extension could well provide the time necessary for us and AEG to determine whether the downtown site can be considered by our membership during our next off-season period."
Garcetti, City Council President Herb Wesson and Councilman Curren Price, whose district includes the area, said they would support granting the extension.
“We are not asking for more time lightly,” AEG Chief Executive Dan Beckerman said in a letter to Los Angeles officials, in requesting a six-month extension in wooing an NFL team to the city. (Brian van der Brug, Los Angeles Times)
Former Walt Disney Co. Chairman and Chief Executive Michael Eisner, who has advised Garcetti on the Convention Center and the NFL, said: "The financial impact of getting this done for the city is enormous. So patience is difficult, but warranted.
"I think the city would not give AEG an extension if they didn't see progress being made — substantial progress being made," he said. "AEG … has moved the ball a little further down the field, let's say."
AEG, a giant international sports and music entertainment firm founded by Denver billionaire Philip Anschutz, owns the Los Angeles Kings hockey team and the L.A. Galaxy soccer team.
Its bid for an NFL team seemed promising two years ago in the flurry of enthusiasm over the proposed stadium, which included a multimillion-dollar commitment from Farmers Insurance for naming rights to the venue.
But by last spring, with negotiations between AEG and team owners apparently stalled, city officials announced they were preparing to give up on a stadium and take back control of developing the Convention Center site.
Many NFL insiders now consider a downtown stadium a long shot. What's more likely is a stadium development in Inglewood, where St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke has purchased 60 acres near the Forum.
Real estate developers often ask for extensions from the city, but AEG's request faces widespread skepticism about the possibility of a football deal. Many city officials also feel they must quickly improve the Convention Center to help lure more convention business to Los Angeles.
The city had launched a design competition and narrowed it to three firms. It had been planning to award $200,000 to each finalist after AEG's Oct. 17 deadline expired.
Now AEG says it would spend $600,000 on alternative design plans and reimburse the city up to $150,000 for costs connected to evaluating the competing plans.
AEG also promised to push for development of a hotel with at least 750 rooms on Olympic Boulevard next to a new Marriott hotel complex and across the street from the Ritz-Carlton and J.W. Marriott hotels at L.A. Live.
"We, as the developer and the land owner, think we're uniquely situated to move forward a project expeditiously and successfully," said Ted Fikre, chief legal and development officer at AEG.
L.A.'s Convention Center has long been a drag on the city's budget, though AEG says it has turned around the performance since taking over management in December. More than $48 million in city hotel taxes help cover the yearly debt payments on the center's South Hall, which opened in 1993.
Robert "Bud" Ovrom, executive director of the city's Convention and Tourism Development Department, would not specifically discuss AEG's latest request. But he noted that the city already struggled to book conventions because of uncertainty about the facility's future.
"We're anxious to see a decision made one way or the other," he said. "From a marketing point of view, we need to get on with it."
The NFL, meanwhile, said it was not ruling out other potential stadium sites in the Los Angeles area.
The nation's second-largest media market has been without an NFL franchise since the Raiders and Rams left after the 1994 season. In the 20 years since, more than a dozen stadium proposals have come and gone.
Rumblings of a return to L.A. have grown louder in recent months, with three franchises — the Oakland Raiders, San Diego Chargers and Rams — on year-to-year stadium leases for the first time, unhappy with their outdated venues and mulling relocation.
Both Garcetti and Wesson said they were willing to give AEG extra time to land a team.
"We've now brought negotiations between L.A. and the NFL further along than ever before, and combined with AEG's experience transforming downtown with Staples Center, I support continuing the momentum with them," Garcetti said in a statement.
Price said the city needed to keep all its options open when dealing with the Convention Center project. "I support an extension for AEG at this time because it would help Los Angeles make a better case for landing a team, ultimately allowing our city to score the 'touchdown' — with or without a team," he said.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,873
- 94,753
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
NFL believes it’s 12-24 months away from a return to L.A.
Posted by Mike Florio on October 5, 2014, 5:44 PM EDT
Getty Images
The Bills won’t be moving to Los Angeles. But someone will. Fairly soon.
As the 20th anniversary of the NFL’s departure from Los Angeles, the NFL seems closer than ever to returning. Per a league source, the current plan is that the NFL will send one or two teams back to Los Angeles within the next 12 to 24 months.
The timeline would include a team announcing its intention to move in the 2015 or 2016 offseason, with arrangements to play at the Rose Bowl or the L.A. Coliseum pending the construction of a new stadium. Possible sites for a venue in L.A. include the AEG project at L.A. Live in downtown, the land purchased recently by Rams owner Stan Kroenke at Hollywood Park, Chavez Ravine, and a couple of locations that have not yet been publicly disclosed. Ed Roski’s shovel-ready site at City of Industry is not regarded as a viable destination.
Currently, the universe of teams that may relocate consists of three: the Rams, Raiders, and Chargers. The Raiders’ current lease expires after the 2014 season. The Rams can exit without penalty after each season. The Chargers can leave by paying a relocation fee that shrinks every year.
All three teams previously played in Los Angeles. The Rams and Raiders left after the 1994 season. The Chargers played there in 1960, before moving to San Diego the next year.
Posted by Mike Florio on October 5, 2014, 5:44 PM EDT
The Bills won’t be moving to Los Angeles. But someone will. Fairly soon.
As the 20th anniversary of the NFL’s departure from Los Angeles, the NFL seems closer than ever to returning. Per a league source, the current plan is that the NFL will send one or two teams back to Los Angeles within the next 12 to 24 months.
The timeline would include a team announcing its intention to move in the 2015 or 2016 offseason, with arrangements to play at the Rose Bowl or the L.A. Coliseum pending the construction of a new stadium. Possible sites for a venue in L.A. include the AEG project at L.A. Live in downtown, the land purchased recently by Rams owner Stan Kroenke at Hollywood Park, Chavez Ravine, and a couple of locations that have not yet been publicly disclosed. Ed Roski’s shovel-ready site at City of Industry is not regarded as a viable destination.
Currently, the universe of teams that may relocate consists of three: the Rams, Raiders, and Chargers. The Raiders’ current lease expires after the 2014 season. The Rams can exit without penalty after each season. The Chargers can leave by paying a relocation fee that shrinks every year.
All three teams previously played in Los Angeles. The Rams and Raiders left after the 1994 season. The Chargers played there in 1960, before moving to San Diego the next year.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,873
- 94,753
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
A Raider fan with ties to front office people says it's all but confirmed that....1) Raiders stadium in Oakland is a done deal and 2) Rams are leaving for Los Angeles soon.
larkis
Win it for Him
Can we lock this thread please?
