Kraft: NFL probably 'on board' with Raiders to Vegas

[Hammer of Thor]

We need a thread for potential team names for a Vegas team.

I'll start:

"The Over/Unders"

I think the Raiders is a pretty good name for a Vegas team. It's what happens to my wallet every time I go there.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Times have changed and not for the better. Those were the days when a commissioner named Pete Rozelle did not have to talk about integrity. Maybe the best commissioner of any sport ever. During Rozell's reign, six new expansion teams added, not including the merger with AFL that added ten more teams.

Rozell was in charge three times longer than Goodell so far and only had two teams move...when the Raiders and Chargers move, it will be four under Goodell.

Not that I disagree with your point, but who is the 4th team to have moved under Goodell? Rams, Chargers, Raiders. Are you counting the 49ers? I'd view that as equivalent to the Pats moving from Boston to Foxboro. And Rozelle had 3 - the Colts, Raiders, and Cardinals (right before he retired). Again though, I agree with your overall point.

 

[Bill Lee]

I love the arrogance of NFL owners thinking they can just move teams willy nilly. The Raiders have been in Oakland a long time. They even moved once then changed their minds and realized they had a good thing in Oakland. I am not a fan of the Oakland fan base. It is one of the worst as far as the kind of people. However it is fairly passionate (especially for a west coast fan base). It is not huge but there are smaller teams to move that as less of a staple in their area.

This would not only be bad for football but bad for the owners. If they do it then it will be LA all over again. They will realize after 10 some years they made a mistake when the stadium never gets full and their merchandise sales go down they have made a mistake and will move it back. However how long can you jerk a fan base around before they say screw you and decide to latch on to a more stable team that won't let this crap happen.

You might not like the following article but you probably should read it:

The Chargers' pending move to L.A. exposes the NFL's truth when it comes to fans | FOX Sports

Once the team sells the PSLs and the luxury boxes, the fan base really doesn't matter. The money they get from ticket and merch sales is pocket change.

Personally I think we might get to the point where some teams move every 20-30 years or so to get the big score that a new city with a new stadium can provide.

Stadiums (stadia?) are pretty poor investments. Their economic life isn't very long. For instance the Georgia Dome opened in 1992 and it's replacement is going to be opened in only 26 years. Giants Stadium lasted from 1976 to 2010 so it was 34 years. So, we're talking about investing billions in an asset whose economic life expectancy is 30 or so years. Other issue is you need really huge events to be able to utilize them, and these huge events need to be big earners since there aren't many of them. For instance MSL games aren't a big enough draw, given how few of them use NFL stadiums. I bet the Krafts lose money big time on their MSL team. I think they bought it on speculation hoping that some day pro soccer takes off, and they're probably regretting doing so.

So, in short, billionaires know it works out best for them if they can stick the city with the bill for the stadium.

Every owner is thinking about themselves with this vote. And what this vote says to their local market is "If you don't pay up for a stadium, someone else will". It's nothing more than leverage for getting more handouts from taxpayers.

I fully respect places like San Diego and Oakland that tell a billionaire making obscene profits to take a hike if they expect a handout.

You are spot on with both points.

One reason the NFL was OK with the Chargers leaving SD is because they want to reinforce the idea that the public needs to pay for the stadiums.

Kraft showed everyone a working model that didn't cost the state a dime, and they even got the logisics money back from parking fees. If Davis can't afford to build it himself, then the f*cking league and its incredibly deep pockets should front the money. I mean why wouldn't they, if those stadiums were so lucrative. It would be a sound business investment that they should love to get in on.

I'm with you, but in reality "NFL Inc (tm)" itself doesn't have money to throw around. In essence they skim off a few percent from the TV revenues etc to keep the NFL itself functioning (including Herr Goodell's salary) and all the rest goes to 'the 32'. They'd need approval from the owners at a league meeting to skim off the money needed to fund a stadium.

In this particular case, you're talking about 'the 32' using their own money to provide a windfall to the son of Al Davis and that just ain't gonna happen. Insiders will tell you that they still have vivid if not livid memories of when Al Davis sued the league. It was one of the very few true crises in the NFL's history, since Al went for the jugular and filed an anti-trust suit against the League. He wasn't all that far away from winning, either, and if he had, that would have been the end of the NFL. Seriously.

I'm kind of surprised they're letting him go to Vegas. I thought they'd make him stew in his own juices in OAK. I imagine once the Nevada legislature coughed up $750M for the new stadium they really didn't have of a choice because it'd look terrible to get that much public money then walk away from it. It also has to help that he's gonna have to pay most of that money back to 'the 32' in the form of the relocation fee.

 

[RecoveringCowboy]

Not that I disagree with your point, but who is the 4th team to have moved under Goodell? Rams, Chargers, Raiders. Are you counting the 49ers? I'd view that as equivalent to the Pats moving from Boston to Foxboro. And Rozelle had 3 - the Colts, Raiders, and Cardinals (right before he retired). Again though, I agree with your overall point.

I think you got me.

Note the Cardinals moved from Chicago to St. Louis in 1960 and I was not counting it, although it was probably a deal made before Rozelle and executed just as he was commissioner.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I have other name ideas:

Las Vegas "Push"
The Juice
The Teasers

 

[Froob]

NO, I repeat NO state or municipality should EVER give a professional sports team a single dime (beyond the normal logistics money you'd spend on any big building site). EVER.

Kraft showed everyone a working model that didn't cost the state a dime, and they even got the logisics money back from parking fees. If Davis can't afford to build it himself, then the f*cking league and its incredibly deep pockets should front the money. I mean why wouldn't they, if those stadiums were so lucrative. It would be a sound buisiness investment that they should love to get in on.

For decades the criminals at the NFL league offices have practiced legalized extrotion and bribery to get cities to play for stadiums and not ONE ever made finanacial sense and all ended up costing more than the original payment.

I am incredibly proud that the city of Boston and its environs supports 4 great professional teams that play their games in stadia, arenas, and parks that haven't taken a dime out of the city/state coffers to build, upgrade, and maintain.....and they are ALL making money hand over fist.

There should be a criminal investigation of the Nevada Legislature that allowed $750MM to go to this stadium. And don't tell me the money will come from tourist/hotel taxes. That's BS. That's STILL money they could have been spent on infrastructure, education, housing and healthcare, that's going to go to build just an excuse to build luxury boxes and PSL's.

The saddest part of all is that NONE of it is necessary. The NFL makes more than enough money (at least up to now) to self finance a new stadium every 30 years for every franchise in the league. The only reason they take the public money is because they CAN.

Watch Ken inexplicably get life in prison after this post

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Insiders will tell you that they still have vivid if not livid memories of when Al Davis sued the league. It was one of the very few true crises in the NFL's history, since Al went for the jugular and filed an anti-trust suit against the League. He wasn't all that far away from winning, either, and if he had, that would have been the end of the NFL.

He did win (which is how they were able to move to LA in 1982 against the NFL's wishes) and (obviously) that was not the end of the NFL.

From Wikipedia:
When Davis tried to move the team anyway, he was blocked by an injunction. In response, the Raiders not only became an active partner in an antitrust lawsuit filed by the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum (who had recently lost the Los Angeles Rams), but filed an antitrust lawsuit of their own.[15] After the first case was declared a mistrial, in May 1982 a second jury found in favor of Davis and the Los Angeles Coliseum, clearing the way for the move.[16][17][18] With the ruling, the Raiders finally relocated to Los Angeles for the 1982 season to play their home games at the Los Angeles Coliseum.

 

[Fanfrom1960]

I've lost count of how many times I've been there.......it's a fun place in 3-4 day chunks

play some craps, but most of the time just rolling with the scene as well as a few shows

I go with my wife in the middle of the summer.......out at the pool at dawn until about 10am, then it's inside for the rest......rooms are dirt cheap that time of year and it's easy to get decent seats at shows

Not to mention the buffets (Homer Simpson drooling pic).

Yeah, after about 3 days of seeing the one-armed bandits everywhere you go, I'm ready to be ouda there.

 

[Huckleberry1]

For most teams, like the Chargers, I'd agree with you, but I think the Davis family deserves a pass here. They are the least-wealthy family to own an NFL team, with a net worth of ~500 million, and the Raiders represent their only significant asset - they don't even own a majority of the team, though the setup does give them control over it.

The Davis family simply cannot AFFORD to build a stadium without outside money, and the Colosseum is literally falling apart around the team. Since Oakland is uninterested in helping pay for a replacement, and the other owners are likewise uninterested in paying for the new stadium, the Raiders don't have much choice but to move.

Best post in this thread, a pretty compelling argument for relocation.


For the most part I hate the franchises moving and I think the team identification (name, logo, records etc...) should belong to the city and not the team. So far the only move that got that right was the Browns/Ravens) Leave if you must but the history stays with the city/region. Imo the cities of SAN Diego and Oakland should keep the rights to the Chargers and Raiders and both of those franchises should choose new identities.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I'm about 90% sure the Raiders and the NFL will regret this move in 10-15 years.

Oakland is quickly becoming one of the most desirable markets in the country, and it'll only keep trending way.

 

[Bill Lee]

He did win (which is how they were able to move to LA in 1982 against the NFL's wishes) and (obviously) that was not the end of the NFL.

Seems I garbled things. Thanks for the correction. I should have refreshed my memory before posting.

The Wikipedia article says "In 1986, Davis testified on behalf of the United States Football League in their unsuccessful antitrust lawsuit against the NFL. He was the only NFL owner to do so.[120]".

It's my understanding that his part in the USFL lawsuit bothered the other owners far more than the LA move, since:

The USFL sought damages of $567 million, which would have been tripled to $1.7 billion under antitrust law. It hoped to void the NFL's contracts with the three major networks. The USFL proposed two remedies: either force the NFL to negotiate new television contracts with only two networks, or force the NFL to split into two competing 14-team leagues, each limited to a contract with one major network.

Ref: United States Football League - Wikipedia

I think my original point stands: there's several owners who still hold a grudge against the Davis family.

Here's one cite: Animosity regarding Al Davis still influences owners

 

[patfanken]

The thing about Vegas is that there is no region. There is the city and then desert for miles and miles. It's not like New England and many other places with towns and smaller cities stretching out over the countryside. If the people of Vegas and those on holiday don't fill the stadium, they will have to recruit the jackrabbits.

No one has supported Bob Kraft despite his deflategate blunders more than I have. And although I still recognize all the GREAT things he's done with this franchise over the years (including this tax free/non-PSL stadium) if he is supporting this move to Vegas, he's once again on the wrong side of the issue, and he SHOULD know better.

Not only CAN the league build whatever it needs on its own dime, it is in its OWN best interests to do so. The continued extortion/bribery scheme it's running might be good for the short term, but it will kill them in the long term and help kill this move to Vegas and build a stadium in Oakland.

Say what you want about Mark Cuban, He is right. This currupt version of this league is trying to sustain an unsustainable business model, so they are constantly and desperately seeking new suckers/customers while alienating large markets along the way. Meanwhile, former rabid fans like myself have become parochial part timers and will soon die off, leaving the NFL to scrounge for new suckers who would rather play Madden than watch the extraordinarily expensive product we are being offered now.

If Bob wants something more than leave a mall and a paper company to leave to his sons, he should start looking toward the long haul

 

[mgteich]

That you all for this thread. The idea that Las Vegas won't sell out 16 games a year is really funny. The idea that the Raiders would need to fill the stands with local fans to succeed is also very funny.

The open question is a simple one: will the team make money in Las Vegas? I think that it will.

Municipalities are free to support stadiums or not. I agree that in most cases that spending millions of public money is a poor idea. It m might be instructive to see who actually pays the taxes necessary to subsidize the stadium in Las Vegas. Will it be the entertainment and gambling industries directly, their employees, or perhaps visitors?

Will people come to Vegas to see their team play? Will others come to Vegas to see an NFL football game.

Las Vegas has decided that having a stadium will be a net plus for their economy. I tend to agree.

 

[farn]

Oakland fans support will drop drastically. The LA experience is on their minds. Sure, the die hards will support the team, but that won't fill a stadium.

Vegas is full of transplants, so expecting to build a local fan base will be tough.

Regards,
Chris

True. The NHL has tried using transplants to fill seats in the southern US while Quebec City was a better option after all. But, like the NFL, the NHL is going to Vegas to chase the $... but like most, will return with empty pockets & embarassment soon enough.

 

[Jlaff]

I have to agree with meteich in a way. Everything in Vegas is about tourism and getting people to Vegas. That's one of the only cities I can see potentially benefiting financially from tourism a stadium/team might bring. I can see people being more apt to fly to Vegas if their team is playing. Will be interesting to see if it turns out to be a worthwhile investment, I think we'll have an idea based on the ratio of away team fans in the stadium.

Also agree that it's shameful how these teams hold cities hostage, and freely abandon fans who have supported them for decades. I actually think it's great to see the NFL alienating more and more fans every year. Should speed up its downfall. And love seeing them fail so hard in LA.

 

[Jlaff]

I also need to ask, why is it the Packers can get by for years in that tiny old stadium? I've never understood why a new stadium always seems to be an absolute necessity, and some how translates into a guarantee of way more money. What am I not getting?

 

[Fanfrom1960]

I also need to ask, why is it the Packers can get by for years in that tiny old stadium? I've never understood why a new stadium always seems to be an absolute necessity, and some how translates into a guarantee of way more money. What am I not getting?

They have been adding seats at Lambeau Field since the 60s and it's capacity is now listed as 80,375.

 

[Wheelssps]

It might be an issue of cash flow timing, but I don't fully understand how Las Vegas putting up 750 million is a huge help to the raiders since they have to pay 650 million of that back to the 32 in a relocation fee. Is this move really over 100 million?

 

[PittPatriot]

I've never been to Vegas but it would be extremely enticing to go out there for a Pats game

Independent of the NFL, Vegas deserves at minimum a 3 day trip...I am still amazed at the bright lights, architectural wonders, world class shows, and great cuisine. Oh yes, and there is gambling too.

 

[Bill Lee]

I also need to ask, why is it the Packers can get by for years in that tiny old stadium? I've never understood why a new stadium always seems to be an absolute necessity, and some how translates into a guarantee of way more money. What am I not getting?

The Packers are publicly owned. They aren't after the last penny on the dollar. And, as mentioned above, Lombardi Field has gotten several updates over the years, including one that tacked on many luxury boxes, so it's hardly deficient.

If we want to wonder about things, why did Krafty Bob feel the need to bump long time season ticket holders and build that dreadful lounge in the south end of the stadium? Total d!ckead NYJFL 1%er move, IMHO.