NFL Relocations and League Expansion

[Exe Gesis]

Owners meetings this week in Charlotte for the NFL and the Vegas committee meeting on Thursday.
Will be a lot of swirling rumors and the like this week on us and Las Vegas.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Ronnie Lott spearheading Raiders stadium proposal in Oakland

16 hours ago

by Jesse Reed

As an alternative to moving the Oakland Raiders to Las Vegas, Ronnie Lott and Rodney Peete are the face of a “predominantly African American” group of investors looking to build a new stadium in Oakland, as reported by Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross of the San Francisco Chronicle.

“In recent weeks, ex-49er Lott and Peete, both of whom played briefly for the Raiders, have met with team executives and Oakland officials to brief them on their proposal to be master developers of the 120-acre Coliseum site.”

Also included on this team of investors is Egbert Perry, chairman of the board of Fannie Mae and CEO of real estate and investment firm Integral, as well as two prominent local businessmen.

Raiders owner Mark Davis has made zero headway with the city of Oakland in recent years to get a viable project put together for new digs. He’s pushing hard (apparently) to move to the cash-friendly city of Las Vegas, Nev.

While the Raiders have met with Lott’s group, it remains to be seen if there is any reason for optimism that a deal will get done.

Oakland mayor Libby Schaff isn’t exactly jumping at the chance, based on a comment she made to Matier and Ross: “I will not meet with any developer for this project unless they are brought to me by the Raiders, and I have asked the City Council to do the same,” she said.

Recently Charles Barkley expressed sadness that Oakland is losing teams, and there are many who feel the same way.

There is little doubt other cities have more to offer from an entertainment and monetary standpoint, which is why Las Vegas is being pursued so hotly in absence of a deal to move back to Los Angeles this past winter.

That said, perhaps he’d love to stay in Oakland, despite his recent push.

“If (Davis) could get a deal done in Oakland, he would probably prefer it,’’ one football source said after the talks, who declined to speak for the record. “But there is nothing coming forward, and it looks like such an ominous task.”

Perhaps Lott and his group will finally succeed where others have failed. Raiders fans shouldn’t hold their breaths waiting for it, though.

 

[Chewy316]

Ronnie Lott spearheading Raiders stadium proposal in Oakland

16 hours ago

by Jesse Reed

As an alternative to moving the Oakland Raiders to Las Vegas, Ronnie Lott and Rodney Peete are the face of a “predominantly African American” group of investors looking to build a new stadium in Oakland, as reported by Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross of the San Francisco Chronicle.

“In recent weeks, ex-49er Lott and Peete, both of whom played briefly for the Raiders, have met with team executives and Oakland officials to brief them on their proposal to be master developers of the 120-acre Coliseum site.”

Also included on this team of investors is Egbert Perry, chairman of the board of Fannie Mae and CEO of real estate and investment firm Integral, as well as two prominent local businessmen.

Raiders owner Mark Davis has made zero headway with the city of Oakland in recent years to get a viable project put together for new digs. He’s pushing hard (apparently) to move to the cash-friendly city of Las Vegas, Nev.

While the Raiders have met with Lott’s group, it remains to be seen if there is any reason for optimism that a deal will get done.

Oakland mayor Libby Schaff isn’t exactly jumping at the chance, based on a comment she made to Matier and Ross: “I will not meet with any developer for this project unless they are brought to me by the Raiders, and I have asked the City Council to do the same,” she said.

Recently Charles Barkley expressed sadness that Oakland is losing teams, and there are many who feel the same way.

There is little doubt other cities have more to offer from an entertainment and monetary standpoint, which is why Las Vegas is being pursued so hotly in absence of a deal to move back to Los Angeles this past winter.

That said, perhaps he’d love to stay in Oakland, despite his recent push.

“If (Davis) could get a deal done in Oakland, he would probably prefer it,’’ one football source said after the talks, who declined to speak for the record. “But there is nothing coming forward, and it looks like such an ominous task.”

Perhaps Lott and his group will finally succeed where others have failed. Raiders fans shouldn’t hold their breaths waiting for it, though.

Lott's group is another futile attempt at making something out of nothing. Until the City and the County agree to give the Raiders the full 120 acres of the Coliseum Site, nothing can happen.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Most NFL teams play near a casino
Posted by Michael David Smith on May 27, 2016, 6:10 AM EDT

Getty Images
Amid talk that the Raiders could move to Las Vegas, some around the NFL are concerned about playing in America’s gambling capital. But gambling is so pervasive around America today that most NFL teams play near a casino.

That’s the word from the American Gaming Association, which points out that 80 percent of NFL teams play within a one-hour drive of a casino.

The Rams’ new stadium in Los Angeles is being built right next door to the Hollywood Park Casino, which will make the Rams one of six teams (along with the Steelers, Ravens, Lions, Browns and Saints) that play less than a mile from a casino. Another 13 stadiums are between one and 20 miles from a casino, and seven stadiums are 20 to 40 miles from a casino.

Only six teams — the Cowboys, Texans, Falcons, Panthers, Jaguars and Titans — play more than 40 miles from a casino.

The reality is that if playing near a casino is a problem for the NFL, then the NFL already has a problem. Moving one team to Las Vegas won’t change that.

 

[Chewy316]

This was presented at the recent Nevada Tourism Committee meeting this week.

 

[Exe Gesis]

A11dAtP0w3R here's something for you

http://sonicsgate.org | Winner - "Best Sports Film" - 2010 Webby Awards. A free educational documentary chronicling how after 41 years of playing NBA basketball in Seattle, the SuperSonics were moved to Oklahoma and became the Thunder. This film was created by Sonics fans in order to educate the public.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

A11dAtP0w3R here's something for you

Ive watched it 25+ times, fantastic doco, pretty sure i recommended it to you in the Raiders thread ages ago mate.

Go Warriors, beat that campaigner Clay Bennett is game 7 pls.

 

[Brasher]

That video is sort of awesome.

 

[Exe Gesis]

John Mara changes his tune on Las Vegas
Posted by Mike Florio on May 30, 2016, 1:24 PM EDT

Getty Images
When the NFL’s owners got together in March, Giants co-owner John Mara sent an ominous message regarding a possible move of the Raiders to Las Vegas. In two months’ time, Mara has revised his position. Significantly.

During the annual gathering two months ago, Mara said that “most owners” would view Vegas as a “non-starter.” Last week, Mara offered a more middle-of-the-road assessment of the possibility that the Raiders would secure the 24 votes necessary to approve a Vegas move.

“Until there is actually a presentation with all the pros and cons, I wouldn’t bet one way or the other at this point,” Mara said last week (pun probably not intended), via Jenny Vrentas of TheMMQB.com.

“I’m open-minded,” Mara added. “I would want to hear a presentation about it and the pros and cons, and obviously there are some concerns, but I am not going to rule it out.”

Several others also were polled. Texans owner Bob McNair sounds supportive, which isn’t a surprise given that one of the other alternatives is to shoehorn the Raiders into San Antonio, which is currently Texans and Cowboys turf. Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie is more concerned about the size of the market than the stuff that goes on within it, 49ers CEO Jed York supports the Raiders finding a new stadium anywhere (possibly since that would mean never being forced to share space with the 49ers), and Jets owner Woody Johnson likes the fact that the Nevada taxes are either low or non-existent.

None of those owners, or any others, have suggested that gambling would be a “non-starter.” Instead, it currently appears that the presence of gambling in Las Vegas is actually a non-issue for at least 24 owners, possibly more.

 

[Exe Gesis]

This stance may change in time but will be one of many roadblocks to the "Sin City"

NFL In Las Vegas: Why Athletes’ Problem Gambling Could Be An Issue
BY TIM MARCIN @TIMMARCIN
05/24/16 AT 2:31 PM

Even though it’s not on the official agenda, it’s the question on everybody’s mind at the NFL owners meetings this week: Could there really be a professional football franchise in Las Vegas?

The NFL has long opposed the idea of a Las Vegas franchise, but at the spring owners meetings in Charlotte, North Carolina, the Oakland Raiders’ potential move to Sin City is expected to be a main topic of discussion that’s not on the official schedule, according to Peter King of Sports Illustrated’s MMQB. Gambling has historically been taboo in the NFL, with officials even barring players from being in poker tournaments. There is a high rate of problem gambling among current and former athletes, research suggests, which means putting millionaire NFL players in the center of the wagering world may not be the best idea.

Trepidation about the NFL in Vegas is typically over tying the league — and the public image it cares so deeply about — to sports wagering. And there’s the added temptation of those directly involved in games to affect outcomes to collect on wagers.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Just move already and pick up Johnny Manziel as your backup.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Vegas strip club offers Raiders free lap dances for life if team moves

June 5, 2016
by Steve DelVecchio



The Oakland Raiders are threatening to move their franchise to Las Vegas if they cannot get funding for a new stadium in California, and a Sin City strip club has offered to sweeten the pot if Mark Davis does decide to relocate.

Some representatives for the Sapphire gentlemen’s club told TMZ over the weekend that all Raiders players would be entitled to free lap dances and VIP limo rides for life if the team moves to Vegas.

“Sapphire proposes that if the Raiders do indeed relocate to Las Vegas, all team members will receive free lap dances and limo transportation at the best-voted, world’s largest, and most iconic gentlemen’s club in Las Vegas,” a club rep said.

We don’t know how Davis feels about he proposal, but we’re pretty confident this is a perfect example of why the NFL has been hesitant to allow a team to move to Vegas. Not to mention, there’s the whole gambling link.

Davis is still trying to come up with the funding he’d need to build a stadium in the desert, though a temporary home may have already been scouted out. One recent report indicated that NFL owners may not be opposed to the idea of a Vegas move for the Raiders.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Vincent Bonsignore ‏@DailyNewsVinny 22m22 minutes ago

In talking with people in aftermath of today's Las Vegas meetings, mutual feeling is: Common ground will be found on a #Raiders stadium deal

 

[Exe Gesis]

Vegas using Mark (man we've heard this a lot since Mark has tried to move, haven't we?) to get the NHL team sounds plausible. NFL hasn't even voted on Vegas yet and the 750 number is already drawing a ton of heat in the press.

===

It's true. Imo...it's fairly obvious the NFL owners want to force Mark out of the league, by indirectly closing all relocation doors on him, and force him into a corner where he either sells to a rich owner who can build an Oakland stadium and expand the corporate base there, already one of the top locations in the USA. Or, force him to go share Levi Stadium, an already recently built NFL-approved stadium in Norcal.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Am I the only one who feels Oakland is s**t for the Raiders?
I feel Los Angeles, Las Vegas and San Antonio and heck, even Memphis are better options than Oakland for a franchise.

Being in places like Oakland/St Louis/Detroit etc. aren't the best at the best of times. But so close to a fellow competitor in San Francisco? Disaster waiting to happen.

Heck, I think with the 49ers so well established in San Fran, it'd be a better option for the Raiders to go to Fresno, yes, you read that right, ******* Fresno. That's how lowly I think as Oakland as a location for a proffessional sports team.

 

[LB#16]

Am I the only one who feels Oakland is s**t for the Raiders?
I feel Los Angeles, Las Vegas and San Antonio and heck, even Memphis are better options than Oakland for a franchise.

Being in places like Oakland/St Louis/Detroit etc. aren't the best at the best of times. But so close to a fellow competitor in San Francisco? Disaster waiting to happen.

Heck, I think with the 49ers so well established in San Fran, it'd be a better option for the Raiders to go to Fresno, yes, you read that right, ******* Fresno. That's how lowly I think as Oakland as a location for a proffessional sports team.

Could potentially have the city of Oakland losing multiple teams in the next few years with the Warriors moving to San Francisco. I think I heard something about the Athletics moving to San Jose.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Raiders will relocate.
The city wouldnt be able to give the Raiders what they need.

Just bring on the 2030s and Ford Field being run down and we see what options are open for the Lions then.
And then the 2040s/50s and the Browns and Bills future looking grim.

One other thing I wonder. Could we ever the the day where the Jets (and I guess maybe Giants) think about moving into NY State, say Queens (Shea Stadium's spot?..........dont ask me what the replacement stadiums name is)

 

[Chewy316]

Am I the only one who feels Oakland is s**t for the Raiders?
I feel Los Angeles, Las Vegas and San Antonio and heck, even Memphis are better options than Oakland for a franchise.

Being in places like Oakland/St Louis/Detroit etc. aren't the best at the best of times. But so close to a fellow competitor in San Francisco? Disaster waiting to happen.

Heck, I think with the 49ers so well established in San Fran, it'd be a better option for the Raiders to go to Fresno, yes, you read that right, ******* Fresno. That's how lowly I think as Oakland as a location for a proffessional sports team.

Oakland has a massive stigma about it. Simply put, if you've been to a Raiders game in Oakland, you'll realise that there is more than enough support for the team in the Bay Area. The problem is that the Oakland City Council and the County of Alameda are so inept that a dysfunctional Gillard government would look amazing by comparison.

San Francisco has become almost impossible to live in, because the housing prices are quite literally through the roof. It's why Oakland has become quite a spot for people wanting to be in the central hub of the Bay Area, at an affordable price. That being said, Oakland's housing prices aren't cheap either.

The stigma of Oakland comes from the fact that the Coliseum and Oracle Arena are right in the heart of East Oakland, i.e. gangster central, 'The Town.' I've been at the Coliseum site on non-event days, and I've legitimately been shitting myself hoping I can get a cab asap to gtfo there. The place is so run down and dangerous that unless it's gameday, I want no part of being there. The actual City of Oakland however, is fine, and the Oakland Hills have some of the most expensive real estate in the entire Bay Area.

You're misinformed to think of the 49ers as a competitor. Sure, they are in close proximity to one another, but if you speak to any Bay Area native, you'll know that there is the Peninsula (i.e. SF), and then you've got the East Bay. Very different cultures. Lastly, the Bay Area is big enough population wise to support 2 football teams. It's one of the bigger markets in the USA, and it's a fast growing market. It's why it's such a shame that the Oakland government are too pathetic to put a decent stadium proposal to keep the Raiders in Oakland, because the way it's going, the Raiders will be out of there within 5 years. The place is burning and no one is bringing any water to save it.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Final four stadium sites for Raiders up for debate

By MATT YOUMANS
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Mark Davis has been searching for a new home for several years, and the owner of the Oakland Raiders has said he’s ready to settle in Las Vegas.

But exactly where the NFL team might secure real estate is the question no one can answer right now.

“In my opinion, they have got to pick a primary site and a fallback site,” Steve Sisolak, Clark County Commission chairman and member of the Southern Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee, said last week.

The side picking the site is the private partnership that comprises the Raiders, casino operator Las Vegas Sands Corp. and Majestic Realty. While the tourism infrastructure committee works on a financing plan for the $1.4 billion, 65,000-seat domed stadium, the search for the right piece of property is intensifying.

Las Vegas Mayor Carolyn Goodman, stressing the need to find a suitable stadium site soon, provided her best impersonation of a real estate agent at last week’s SNTIC meeting: “Location, location, location.”

There are actually four locations under consideration, with three on or near the Strip and the other just north of downtown. The Raiders are not touting a favorite yet. Davis said he’s “site agnostic,” and team president Marc Badain said he’s “open-minded” during the scouting process.

“All of them have positives,” Badain said, “and all of them have negatives.”

It sounds like a politician’s cliche, but it’s the truth. There is no best bet or perfect location.

“If we get the financing in place, maybe we can do the site selection later,” Sisolak said.

The latest funding proposal for the stadium calls for a $500 million contribution from the Raiders, $400 million from the Sands and Majestic developers and $500 million from the public through hotel room taxes.

Craig Cavileer, Majestic’s executive vice president, is probably more deeply entrenched in the property search than anyone. He was the point man on a UNLV stadium project that fell through three years ago.

“The project deserves to be at the best location, and there’s a lot of factors,” Cavileer said. “If we can be walking distance to the hotel rooms, in proximity to the monorail, close to the airport and be part of the Strip brand, that’s very important.”

Andy Abboud, Las Vegas Sands’ senior vice president of government relations and community development, said eight to 12 sites have been examined. But these appear to be the final four:

TROPICANA AVENUE

Pros: Close to UNLV campus; land transaction would be simple.

Cons: Possible opposition from FAA because of proximity to McCarran International Airport.

The early leader was the 42-acre site owned by UNLV along Tropicana Avenue east of Koval Lane.

It rubs elbows with the college campus, which makes it seem an ideal spot for the Raiders and Rebels, who would share the stadium.

“We should not dismiss that property. It’s a great piece of property,” Cavileer said. “It needs to be a piece of property that we can afford to develop both on-site and off-site, and frankly the acquisition cost is attractive with UNLV as a potential partner. It has a lot of reasons why it’s a good site.”

It has a major potential negative. Across the street are McCarran International Airport runways, and the stadium could interfere with flight traffic. That’s an issue that will be addressed with the Federal Aviation Administration.

“The Trop-42 site, the problem with that is the FAA could just rule that out,” Sisolak said. “We’ve also got to start looking at infrastructure costs on these things related to sites. You got to get freeway access; you got to have I-15 access. When you start building flyovers, that’s expensive. You’re talking tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars.”

Sisolak said he was given an estimated cost of $200 million to construct ramps at I-15 and Tropicana to alleviate traffic problems, but Cavileer dismissed that estimate as too high. Majestic and Sands have vowed to cover additional infrastructure costs related to the project, if those costs are reasonable.

“If it’s too big of a number,” Sisolak said, “we’re going to have to reassess the whole thing.”

Cavileer said he will work with UNLV President Len Jessup, a member of the SNTIC, and the FAA to explore the viability of the Trop-42 site.

“There are certainly challenges on that site. I don’t maybe have the same level of doubt that others might,” Cavileer said. “But they are legitimate and they need to be addressed.”

FORMER RIVIERA HOTEL SITE

Pros: Large land mass for stadium, parking.

Cons: Land was previously earmarked for Las Vegas Convention Center expansion.

A large plot on the Strip where the Riviera hotel-casino was recently imploded also intrigues the private partners, but the land is owned by the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, which is planning a convention center expansion project also being considered by the SNTIC. LVCVA President and CEO Rossi Ralenkotter said last week he will consider the site for a stadium.

“We like the Riviera site,” Cavileer said. “Rossi said he’s open-minded, and all I can do is take him at his word at this point.”

ROCK IN RIO FESTIVAL GROUNDS

Pros: Close to I-15.

Cons: Ingress/egress improvements needed to avoid traffic snarls; land could cost as much as $200 million.

The Rock in Rio festival grounds at Las Vegas Boulevard and Sahara Avenue is owned by MGM Resorts International. The site is close to the I-15, but it likely would require large infrastructure costs to prevent a traffic nightmare in the area. And the land would come at a price.

“If you start looking at $100 million or $200 million for site acquisition costs, that could change the entire prospect,” Sisolak said.

Cavileer, who has heard the traffic complaints over and over, said, “There is going to be traffic everywhere. The Sahara site is interesting but it’s getting far north. It doesn’t have the walking distance proximity that several of the others do.”

CASHMAN FIELD

Pros: Available soon with 51s expected to move.

Cons: Far from the Strip and airport; not easily accessible from I-15.

Cashman Field, home of the Las Vegas 51s Triple-A baseball team, also has been proposed. The 51s are planning a move to a new stadium in Summerlin in the near future.

“It is less attractive,” Cavileer said. “It’s not Strip proximate, it’s further away from the airport, it’s further away from direct access to the I-15. I don’t think we should dismiss it entirely, but I would not put it up there with one of the most attractive alternatives.”

Sisolak was more blunt, saying, “I can’t see that happening.”

In addition to the final four, there are open spaces further from the Strip between I-15 and South Las Vegas Boulevard that Cavileer called “sort of in the second tier of interest.”

With the next SNTIC meetings scheduled for July 11 and July 28, everyone involved is searching for more clarity on the potential stadium location.

“We’re much further along in looking at sites than people realize,” Abboud said. “We want to be somewhere along the resort corridor along the Las Vegas Strip. I think we can get that resolved by the end of July. We may go forward after July with two potential sites and determine the best one.”

Hurry up, but be patient, is Cavileer’s attitude.

“It won’t be done at the end of July, and it won’t be done by the end of August. It’s a process you have to go through in real estate development,” Cavileer said.

“I think right now we should be in the process of eliminating sites that aren’t viable as opposed to saying how many are viable. We have enough to look at, so let’s start cutting those up.”

The Review-Journal is owned by the family of Las Vegas Sands Chairman and CEO Sheldon Adelson.

 

[Chewy316]

Could potentially have the city of Oakland losing multiple teams in the next few years with the Warriors moving to San Francisco. I think I heard something about the Athletics moving to San Jose.

The A's won't move. Once the Raiders move, the Coliseum city site will only have one tenant, so the A's will have the entire property to themselves to develop a new ball park there.

 

[Exe Gesis]

U.S. blocking attempts to trademark Raiders name in other cities

If you're thinking about trying to trademark the Raiders name attached to any city they could possibly relocate to, you'd probably be better off not wasting your time.

According to the San Antonio Express-News, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office shot down three different applications to trademark the name "San Antonio Raiders." Additionally, the Trademark Office rejected six attempts to trademark "Las Vegas Raiders" and eight more to trademark "San Diego Chargers."

The Raiders are, of course, in the process of trying to move to Las Vegas. But back in January, there was speculation that they could end up in a place like San Antonio or San Diego after they were denied relocation to Los Angeles and the Chargers were given the option to move to L.A. with the Rams. A patent and trademark lawyer in San Antonio told the Express-News that he wasn't surprised the applications were denied since such instances are usually just people trying to make a quick buck off the team.

One of the people who applied to trademark the San Antonio Raiders name admitted as much.

Hector Garza, 25, a student in Mercedes, said he and his uncle tried to trademark “San Antonio Raiders” in hopes of making “a buck like everyone else.” Their effort to register the name for “entertainment services — namely football exhibitions rendered live in stadia and through the media” was denied last month.

“We were already planning how we were going to deal and what are negotiation process was going to be like, how much we would settle for,” he said laughing. “Box seats and maybe about $2 mil each and we’ll give you the name. We had it all planned out.”

Meanwhile, a California man named Lane Blue applied for San Antonio and Las Vegas Raiders trademarks in the hopes of preventing the team from moving at all, saying, "It's something I had to do."

“I’m possibly thinking of maybe protesting it," Blue said. "Ultimately, I really want them to remain in Oakland. I’ve been possibly thinking of doing a GoFundMe (account) … and maybe seeing if we could put together a (legal) team like the O.J. Simpson team to fight it.”

Author
Jeremy Warnemuende @JSWarno

 

[Exe Gesis]

Las Vegas stadium could cost as much as $2.1 billion

Mike Florio 1 day ago

Before the Raiders can move from Oakland to Las Vegas, a location for a stadium in Nevada must be selected. Via Paul Gutierrez of ESPN.com, the universe of potential sites currently sits at nine.

Gutierrez explains that, a special meeting on Monday, the Southern Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee discussed the possible locations for a stadium. But here’s what the headline arguably should have been: The estimated cost of a stadium in Las Vegas has skyrocketed from $1.4 billion to up to $2.1 billion.

The increase comes from the potential costs of acquiring land, along with a proposal to give the stadium a retractable roof.

The Commission, which originally was scheduled to end its work later this month, will be asking for a two-month extension before making a recommendation to Governor Brian Sandoval.

The flirtation phase of the Raiders-to-Vegas movement had the public contribution at $750 million. Sandoval and other politicians want to knock that number down by $200 million. There’s a chance that, in the end, the numbers simply won’t add up.

Which means that Las Vegas may not be an option for the Raiders. Which means that, unless something works out in Oakland, the Raiders may need another long-term solution.

Los Angeles becomes an obvious fallback, if the Chargers don’t exercise their right to join the Rams at Kroenkeworld before January 2017. Still, it’s hard to imagine the Rams truly embracing a return by the Raiders to L.A., given the belief that the Raiders could instantly eclipse the Rams as the No. 1 team in the market.

 

[LB#16]

Las Vegas stadium could cost as much as $2.1 billion

Mike Florio 1 day ago

Before the Raiders can move from Oakland to Las Vegas, a location for a stadium in Nevada must be selected. Via Paul Gutierrez of ESPN.com, the universe of potential sites currently sits at nine.

Gutierrez explains that, a special meeting on Monday, the Southern Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee discussed the possible locations for a stadium. But here’s what the headline arguably should have been: The estimated cost of a stadium in Las Vegas has skyrocketed from $1.4 billion to up to $2.1 billion.

The increase comes from the potential costs of acquiring land, along with a proposal to give the stadium a retractable roof.

The Commission, which originally was scheduled to end its work later this month, will be asking for a two-month extension before making a recommendation to Governor Brian Sandoval.

The flirtation phase of the Raiders-to-Vegas movement had the public contribution at $750 million. Sandoval and other politicians want to knock that number down by $200 million. There’s a chance that, in the end, the numbers simply won’t add up.

Which means that Las Vegas may not be an option for the Raiders. Which means that, unless something works out in Oakland, the Raiders may need another long-term solution.

Los Angeles becomes an obvious fallback, if the Chargers don’t exercise their right to join the Rams at Kroenkeworld before January 2017. Still, it’s hard to imagine the Rams truly embracing a return by the Raiders to L.A., given the belief that the Raiders could instantly eclipse the Rams as the No. 1 team in the market.

$2.1B construction cost for a massive 8-10 games a year. Should need Chargers to join the party for that cost.

 

[Exe Gesis]

$2.1B construction cost for a massive 8-10 games a year. Should need Chargers to join the party for that cost.

Its a joke

 

[Chewy316]

$2.1B construction cost for a massive 8-10 games a year. Should need Chargers to join the party for that cost.

Its a joke

The increase in the cost has gone from 1.4 to 1.7-2.1. The reason there is a range in the estimated cost is due to the land cost associated with building the stadium. Initially they expected not to have to pay for land costs, as the original proposed site was owned by UNLV. That however is now looking unlikely. I don't see anyone berating Stan Kroenke though when his Inglewood site when from costing 1.8 billion to 2.66 billion.

Another important note: this proposed Vegas stadium is not just for the Raiders. It will also be the stadium for the UNLV Rebels football team, along with concerts, motocross events etc. The Sands Corp expect the stadium to have anywhere between 45-65 'event days' per year. So when you look at that in perspective with the cost, it's far from 'a joke.'