A report from Los Angeles radio station 980-AM ‘The Beast’ has kicked off a new round of speculation that the Oakland Raiders are headed back for southern California.
An obliquely-sourced report from Jeanne Zelasko made wild assertions in regard to the finances of owner Mark Davis and his team. Zelasko alluded to a degree of insolvency on Davis’ part, and the need for a helping hand.
Zelasko also reported that other owners, even Jerry Jones — a close personal friend of the Davis family — want to stage a coup d’etat to force Davis out of the league.
The station later aired a statement from AEG spokesperson Michael Roth that refuted Zelasko’s report, even after citing a policy not to comment.
AEG is a sports management and development company that handles the day-to-day operations of O.Co Coliseum and Staples Center, and is working to build a football stadium in Los Angeles by 2016.
The Raiders have not responded to SFBay requests for comment, though it’s hard to blame them, since a new rumor or report seemingly hits the airwaves every week.
The idea of an NFL team heading back to Los Angeles is not a new concept. The Raiders are often involved in such conversations, especially since they’ve done it before.
But at least one big, convincing reason indicates a Davis-owned Raiders team would not return to southern California.
The Oakland Raiders moved to Los Angeles basically overnight in 1982 under a promise that they would receive a new stadium. According to reports from that time, and as told in the 2007 book ‘Tom Flores’ Tales from the Sidelines,’ a regime of politicians reneged on the promise.
Former owner Al Davis was a fiercely loyal man, and didn’t forgive betrayal. Mark Davis seems to have a similar temperament, and surely hasn’t forgotten the times when his father felt it necessary to sue the NFL in lieu of failed development plans.
Of all the reasons — financial, slapping the Oakland fan base in the face again — this is the largest of them all to support the Raiders not moving to Los Angeles.
That’s not to say the area wont be getting a football team in the future. The Rams, the Buccaneers, even the Chargers, could make the move. That’s also not to say the Raiders aren’t going to move.
Most recently, San Antonio has been named a potential destination. Portland has also been floated, the most logical of places.
And while Portland may not appear to have a large base of fans, the NBA’s Trailblazers ranked fifth in attendance last season, over the Warriors, Spurs, Clippers and even the Lakers.
If any city is a threat to Oakland when it comes to a Raiders move, the smaller Oregon municipality has the best case.
And Los Angeles seems to have the weakest.
So don’t believe the hoopla. At least not this round.
Follow @SFBay and @LeskiwSFBay on Twitter and at SFBay.ca for full coverage of the Oakland Raiders.
Last modified December 7, 2014 9:30 am
This website uses cookies.
View Comments
Oregon does NOT have a better shot at an NFL team than San Antonio does, LoL..
I listened to the Jean Zelasko Fred Roggin interview. Of course AEG is going to deny any statements in regards to the NFL to LA issue as it's probably not allowed. Zelasko is risking her career by making such comments, and whoever informed her that AEG is looking to hire a PR guy for such a potential announcement in FEB tells me it may have some truth to it.
Your skull rings hollow. Raiders are coming back home to LA. They already created a home here in 1984 when they won the Super Bowl. {{-_-}}
There's likely no way the Chargers will allow the Raiders to return to Southern California. Can Spanos get the votes to keep the Rams out of Los Angeles? Probably not. The Raiders? Yeah, I think he'll have the support of 8 other owners.
The Chargers have no clout. And not enough fans in LA to fill a stadium.
The other owners have no problem with the Raiders in LA, especially with all the money in it. {{-_-}}
I don't think there's any chance the NFL and whoever represents Los Angeles will let the Raiders back there without a change in ownership. Just IMO based off what I read/see on the web, I'd think there's a better chance of the SA Raiders than the LA Raiders at this point. I'd hate to see the Oakland fan base get slapped in the face again by a move....once is one time too many......but when I look at all the political, financial and historical issues facing the Raiders in Oakland and even LA...and I'm not even factoring in the A's need for a stadium at this point....San Antonio could end being the last man standing in this? Decent stadium to move to, political and financial climate to get a new stadium done in the near future, might not be Mark Davis' first choice, but it might be his most viable alternative? Portland would be a great Plan B to Oakland on a few levels, but I haven't heard anything material come out of there.
There are more fans in LA's "armpit" than in SA and Oregon put together. Give me a break
(I'm actually wearing my Los Angeles Raiders t shirt I bought in 1985 as I type this): Los Angeles is by and far the best market for the Raiders to be in commercially, that's no doubt. What I was saying is that IF Mark Davis wants to retain majority control of the team AND have a new stadium.....it won't be in Los Angeles. I just think that San Antonio, when all is said and done, may be the only option Mark has in from of him where he keeps his team and gets a stadium.
I agree with your assessment on the situation. While Davis would make more money in Los Angeles, he'd also have to give up a part of his franchise and his expenses would go up dramatically. In San Antonio he'd get everything you mentioned and then some. People have to keep in mind that he's also going to owe a lot of money when his mother dies due to his inheritance.
The financial and political climate is better here and taxes are extremely lower.
If Davis picks LA over all of the above, it's ONLY because he wants to be loved by a huge city and live the rock star lifestyle that LA provides.
His best financial option is in Texas.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2014/12/raiders-now-view-san-antonio-as-a-viable-nfl.html
Check out this article as well: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2014/12/12/mark-davis-reggie-mckenzie-oakland-la-stadium-situations-tiny-bit-jim-harbaugh/#more-25598
There's even an interview with Tim Brown and he talks about San Antonio as a "dark horse" candidate and how there are offer was the best one out of the 3 alternatives.
Out of the tonnes of articles/speculation that have been posted on this subject over the last while, the common denominators/things I believe to be true still are:
- Oakland is Mark Davis' "emotional" first choice - I genuinely believe that, anyone who didn't feel that away about Oakland would have withdrew from that situation a long time ago.
- if Mark Davis could unilaterally chose to put the Raiders in Los Angeles....he would do it.
- The Los Angeles Raiders are not happening unless Mark sells.
- San Antonio has the best offer and business scenario/set up for Mark Davis to retain ownership and get a new stadium.....and the Raiders know that. Under most circumstances (see points 1 and 2) moving to SA is a no brainer.
- and the best part....you wouldn't even need to do any realigning, San Antonio fits nicely into the AFC West....or at least as logically as Dallas in the NFC East. : )
While most of the media seem to write-off SA as leverage/being used/non starter, I still disagree with that. A few weeks ago, a Raiders beat writer dismissed it as a sham, then a week later upgraded it to never a serious consideration....then earlier this week upgraded further to 0% chance in 2015, but 2016 who knows?
If I'm San Antonio, I accept with dignity that I'm the best option, but not the first choice. I keep quiet media wise, keep in contact with the Raiders, the NFL and most of all, be ready on a moment's notice if Mark Davis calls and says it's on.
No respect to either Oakland or Los Angeles, I've been a Raiders fan in both cities, but to be quite honest, this has been an (ongoing) saga since the early 1980s......and when I look at the numerous and layers of issues and entities involved in getting a new stadium both California cities.....I just genuinely don't see it happening. Like, as much as Mark wants to stay in California, even he's gonna throw his arms up in the air soon and take the path of least resistance.
It's gonna be interesting.
Oh please! Portland? Really? PORTLAND? LOL! Yeah, and I've got a share of AEG I want to sell you! LMAO!
So because some politicians from 30 years ago broke a deal with his dad, Mark Davis won't share a stadium with Kroenke's Rams or take an AEG stadium in return for a percentage of the team??? When did SFBay start using 12 year old logic in it's reporting? Nana Nana Boo Boo stick your head in DooDoo LOL.