[BuiltRamTough]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp ... story.html
L.A.-area venues showing little interest in being temporary NFL hosts - LA Times

The NFL might be the country's No. 1 sport, but Los Angeles-area venues aren't scrambling to position themselves as temporary homes if one or more of the league's teams relocate.

With a key date approaching Wednesday, only the Coliseum has publicly expressed interest in hosting a team. When it contacted five area venues in June, the NFL asked that proposal requests be submitted by Aug. 5.

As the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders pursue a shared stadium concept in Carson and the St. Louis Rams focus on a plan in Inglewood, the NFL has had various difficulties lining up potential temporary venues.

"We've really just begun," said Eric Grubman, the NFL senior vice president who is the league's point man on the L.A. market. "Aug. 5 was a date that helped us know what venues might be available in a traditional sense and I think that has sorted itself out. … Other, more complex opportunities could very well present themselves as the picture becomes clearer."

Two stadiums have already publicly pulled out of the competition.

On Monday, Anschutz Entertainment Group confirmed to The Times that it will not submit a bid to host a team at the 27,000-seat StubHub Center.

That comes on the heels of the Rose Bowl Operating Co. surprising the league last month by opting not to respond to the NFL's request. Despite years of previous efforts to lure a franchise, then spending the money and time on the necessary entitlements to position the stadium as a temporary site, the RBOC voted unanimously to pursue an annual music festival.

"The position of the board remains the same," RBOC President and Pasadena City Councilman Victor Gordo said Monday. "The RBOC is focused on bringing a world-class music and arts festival to Pasadena."

The NFL's request for proposals noted that the league's initial review of submissions would be completed by Wednesday, with the expectation of finalizing any agreements in the fall.

The two other options aren't as straightforward.

An individual with knowledge of the situation said that the area's two baseball stadiums are continuing a dialogue with the NFL but won't participate in the traditional proposal request process.

One reason for that could be scheduling issues, as early-season NFL games in August and September would be problematic with baseball schedules. How many years a stadium would be needed as a temporary venue might be an issue, as well.

An Angels spokesman said Monday that nothing had changed for the organization since last month when it said that being the temporary host of an NFL team would be "very difficult" because of scheduling conflicts.

A Dodgers spokesman declined to comment.

Grubman isn't concerned by the response to the NFL requests.

"In any event," he said, "I think this works itself out by the end of this year."

[OldSchool]

Grubman isn't concerned by the response to the NFL requests.

"In any event," he said, "I think this works itself out by the end of this year."

USC is all too happy to host the Rams and that's the only team you need to worry about LA/NFL

[Hacksaw]

If only one venue is available then viola we have a coup.

[Elvis]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-la- ... story.html

Coliseum's temporary availability is another twist in NFL-to-L.A. story



The NFL is having a hard time lining up more than one temporary site in case two teams were to relocate to Los Angeles. The Coliseum is the only venue willing to house a team while a stadium was being built and has made it clear it wants one pro team.

While this is a headache for the league, it's not a game changer. Some might surmise that, because there's only one such vacancy, it has to mean the St. Louis Rams are the franchise that will be given the green light to move.

But as anyone who has followed this saga for 20 years knows, it's risky to apply logic to any of this process. Illogical twists and turns have been the defining characteristic of the L.A. story.

In June, the NFL sent requests for proposals to five area venues — the Coliseum, Rose Bowl, StubHub Center, Angel Stadium and Dodger Stadium.

The Rose Bowl and StubHub Center declined to respond to the league. USC, which operates the Coliseum, has a contract that says the stadium can host only one NFL team, and it is willing to do so. The two ballparks have not given a definitive answer, publicly at least, but each has scheduling issues with the football/baseball overlap in August and September.

The league sees this more as an inconvenience than something that would dictate the outcome of who would eventually move. The tail — in this case the availability of temporary venues — will not wag the dog here.

The new NFL football stadium proposed by the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders would be built on a 168-acre site at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of the 405 Freeway and Del Amo Boulevard.

It has caused the NFL to consider some unorthodox possibilities if two teams were to simultaneously relocate, such as the Raiders relocating but continuing to play their games in Oakland while a new stadium were being built in Carson, or playing in San Antonio, or perhaps spending a month in London until a baseball stadium were to become available.

All of this underscores a basic truth: The L.A. puzzle isn't checkers, it's three-dimensional chess.

There's another complicating aspect to this. Next week, NFL owners will meet in Chicago to discuss the L.A. situation and hear from backers of the competing Inglewood and Carson proposals, and from City of San Diego officials. For a lot of these owners, L.A. is not top of mind. They don't lose sleep about the "California dilemma," or follow each incremental development in the push to bring pro football back to the nation's second-largest market. They only pay attention to it when they get occasional updates at meetings.

These are the people who ultimately will decide if a team gets to move. A team needs at least 24 of 32 votes for approval. So the message those owners are receiving — that L.A. won't jump through hoops to get an NFL team the way other cities might — could color their decision and enthusiasm about the market.

NFL Executive Vice President Eric Grubman, who is overseeing the L.A. process, said he's not concerned about the current status of temporary venues, and that the situation will work itself out by the end of the year.

"If Eric does not have two viable options, then, yes, it will send a signal [to owners]," said Marc Ganis, a sports business consultant who has worked closely with the NFL for years. "But if Eric is able to devise two viable options, then it will just be considered part of the process.

"But if they have to contort too much, if they say, 'We've got to consider playing in Oakland or San Diego even though it's dead man walking,' those are the kind of considerations that would get people to say, 'Wait a minute, is there really a market in L.A.? Do they really want the NFL there?' It would just cause them to think about it."

Now, even with the snubs from the Rose Bowl and StubHub Center, the NFL is continuing to move forward.

For the time being, it's just another day in L.A.

[email protected]

[BuiltRamTough]

If one team plays in their "home" market while a stadium is being built in LA and one team plays in LA, doesn't that defeat the purpose of equal market share from the get go? It would be like a 1st and 2nd team in. Something the Chargers supposedly don't want. Carson supposedly is going to take 3 years to complete so OAK or SD would play a month in London or stay in their "home" market while a another team gets a head start in LA?

That's the complete opposite of what it supposed to happen. 2 teams file for relocation, both get approved. One team team doesn't relocate even though it applied for relocation and got approved. One team doesn't play in the city it got approved to relocate too for 3 years?
Huh?

[Hacksaw]

If another venue doesn't open up it could make things a bit more cumbersome.

I dunno, I can't see the whole Charaid r but I do have a terminal case of Rams homeritis so, , , .

[Elvis]

There's some talk that the Raiders could go to San Antonio for a couple years.

Amost everything related to Carson is preposterous.

OTOH, Stan Kroenke moving his team into his stadium is amazingly straight forward...

[BuiltRamTough]

Yup, there's talk about SD and OAK playing in other cities and venues and even staying put while a stadium is being built in LA. But what about the Rams? No one says they'll stay in STL while Inglewood is being built or they'll move to London or San Antonio. It seems like Sam Farmer and Vincent forget to mention where the Rams would play. Or maybe they didn't forget, maybe the Rams will play in LA in 2016 no matter what and if there's only 1 temporary venue available it will be awarded to the Rams.

Sam Farmer keeps saying it's the Rams in. Let's face it Sam always has the scoop first and breaks the story first. Vincent for the last couple of months keeps saying and hinting that the Rams will push hard for relocation.

I get it that it's hard to trust these reporters but who else covers the story liken Sam and Vincent. They keep quoting Eric Grubman so obviously he's feeding them this stuff.

And Fred Rogging that covers this story like crazy, the guy has everyone on radio that's involved in this story basically. Only people he can't get on radio is the owners lol. And he even says the Rams and he says the Chargers and Rams might happen. But he screams loudly, literally Inglewood everyday for the past 7 months.

These dudes could be wrong but 3 of the guys that cover the story like no one else in LA say the Rams. And no not a guy in SD that writes a report with agenda that headlines Spanos has the votes to block Stan and no not Randy Karraker in STL talking weird things. And not mark Gaines in OAK talking weird things.

I can't trust these dudes but I could put my faith in the LA guys that actually live here and know people here and cover the story.

[Elvis]

[BuiltRamTough]

https://twitter.com/tmckernan/status/628936904537456640

It's funny a lot of media guys are saying this now. Fred Roggin has been saying this literally since March when the Carson project was announced. I don't care about Fred he's just a media guy to me but a lot of the things he's saying comes truth regarding the NFL to LA.

I never paid attention to him before this NFL to LA thing so idk how credible he is with other stories and such but he's been correct so far. Will see what happens but this NFL to LA thing is getting more and more juicy.