Skip to content

NFL putting the squeeze on AEG

proposedStadium220_100711 AP

We’ve been hearing (and thus saying) for years that the NFL won’t return to Los Angeles until there are two viable projects that the league can leverage against each other, in the hopes of securing the best possible deal.

The squeeze has begun.

Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports reports that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell expressed concern last month regarding the proposal made by AEG, which is attempting to build a new NFL stadium in downtown Los Angeles.  Goodell’s doubts came at a September 6 meeting in New York with Los Angeles Councilwoman Jan Perry and political aide Bernard Parks, Jr.

Cole also reports that the competing proposal in the City of Industry, proposed by Ed Roski, could be pulling ahead.

We’ll defer to Cole’s lengthy article for the rest of the details.  Cutting through the verbiage and the sourcing, the reality is that the NFL is being coy with AEG and cozy with Roski in order to get AEG to come to the table with something better.  And as long as Roski is hanging around, the NFL can push for more and more (and more) from AEG.

Along the way, it’ll be important for the NFL to never let its guard down as to the league’s true preferences.  If the league wants to partner with AEG, Roski will realize that he’s being used.  In, AEG will dig in its heels.

The truth could be that the NFL genuinely is willing to explore either option, which sets up perfectly for the NFL and the team(s) that could play in the new venue (Chargers, Vikings, Rams, Raiders, 49ers, Jaguars, or Bills) for the driving of the hardest possible bargain.

Permalink 48 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Buffalo Bills, Jacksonville Jaguars, Minnesota Vikings, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, San Francisco 49ers, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories
48 Responses to “NFL putting the squeeze on AEG”
  1. savannahrose44 says: Oct 7, 2011 7:48 AM

    The 49ers have already been approved for their new stadium at Santa Clara…why would they be a candidate?

  2. sj39 says: Oct 7, 2011 8:08 AM

    Since their move to St. Louis the Rams have sold out all but a handfull of games. Why would they move.

  3. Mr. Hand says: Oct 7, 2011 8:09 AM

    The Jaguars have an ironclad lease with the city of Jacksonville through 2030 and an owner who says (and shows) he’s committed to Jacksonville… Why would they be a candidate?

  4. onthewagonsince90 says: Oct 7, 2011 8:11 AM

    The bills sell out every game but the dolphins and bengals look like a ghost town on sundays, but no mention of them…

  5. stanmackley says: Oct 7, 2011 8:11 AM

    Buffalo Bills going to LA? Not gonna happen.

  6. knucklehead93 says: Oct 7, 2011 8:11 AM

    Great…another article where Packer fans will show what A-Holes they are, as they wish the Vikings to move there.

    Seriously, how could you wish that on any fan??

  7. hooks024 says: Oct 7, 2011 8:26 AM

    The city of la sucks. Nfl proved that in the 90′s. “fans” will care for about 3 years, but as soon as teams start doing poorly, and it’s no longer trendy to follow, they’ll bail, just like before. You’d think the rams and raiders would have figured this out and not want to waste time/risk alienating their passionate, loyal fan bases, but if al davis had proven nothing else in the last decade, it’s that he’s nuttier than squirrel poo, so maybe he’ll give that failed experiment one more try.

  8. max says: Oct 7, 2011 8:41 AM

    I know the Bills are technically a part of this conversation, but I don’t understand how the divisions would be aligned if they were the franchise to move to LA. Obviously, they couldn’t remain a part of the AFC East on account of massive travel/time zone problems and, you know, LA not being in the east an’ all … so what is the proposed solution, in that scenario?

  9. bunjy96 says: Oct 7, 2011 8:45 AM

    I would never go an NFL game that didn’t allow tailgating.

    Maybe they do things different in LA.

  10. clintonportisheadd says: Oct 7, 2011 9:00 AM

    “Goodell’s doubts came at a September 6 meeting in New York with Los Angeles Councilwoman Jan Perry and political aide Bernard Parks, Jr.”

    ————–

    Two of the most corrupt folks in LA one might add.-and thats no small feat in the City of Angels!

    Parks is the son of former (as in fired for incompetence former)LA Chief of Police and current councilman Bernard Parks. Believe me-the acorn did not fall far from that tree.

    I am sure Goodell had to take a long shower after dealing with these two.

  11. RomosRibs says: Oct 7, 2011 9:00 AM

    Yo, Mikey….what IS the competing proposal? It would be nice to know. It would also strengthen your post.

  12. tomsd1 says: Oct 7, 2011 9:07 AM

    Do you really think the NFL doesn’t want to be in downtown LA – with the best group in Sports building the stadium?

  13. homelanddefense says: Oct 7, 2011 9:12 AM

    so you have realized that Roski is being used but he hasnt yet. Amazing!

  14. vaporiizz3r says: Oct 7, 2011 9:21 AM

    I know theres probly a reason to this, but why dont they EXPAND and make a new team? ?instead of moving a team thats allready there.

  15. cosanostra71 says: Oct 7, 2011 9:36 AM

    Oh boy another chance for people to show their ignorance and claim that the Rams left LA because of attendance and not stadium issues.

  16. scudbot says: Oct 7, 2011 9:47 AM

    “…Packer fans will show what A-Holes they are, as they wish the Vikings to move there.” I don’t know a single Packers fan who wants the Vikings to move.

  17. robolundgren says: Oct 7, 2011 9:48 AM

    The Jaguars have an ironclad lease with the city of Jacksonville through 2030 and an owner who says (and shows) he’s committed to Jacksonville… Why would they be a candidate?
    ________________________

    Judging by the amount of blackouts, I’d say it’s because the people of Jacksonville aren’t committed.

  18. realitypolice says: Oct 7, 2011 9:52 AM

    sj39 says:
    Oct 7, 2011 8:08 AM
    Since their move to St. Louis the Rams have sold out all but a handfull of games. Why would they move.
    =========================

    Because a sold out game in a brand new stadium in LA with higher ticket prices and about 350 high priced luxury suites would bring in millions more per game than a sold out game in St. Louis.

    Not to mention millions more in advertising income locally and a much higher national profile plus probably millions more in merchandising sales.

    And the NFL wants a team there and will do God only knows what to make it easy for them to move.

    I could go on, but I think you are probably beginning to get the picture.

    This is what fans in all of the cities whose teams are mentioned in relocation talks either don’t realize or can’t accept:

    No matter how great your fans are or how many sell outs you have, there are very few NFL franchises that WOULDN’T make more money in LA.

    And don’t come at me with how NFL franchises have failed in LA before. The business model of the NFL then and now are completely different. With the NFL focused on the affluent fan with luxury suites and high end amenities as opposed to the rat holes the old teams played in, the NFL will succeed in LA.

    One last point about the article: The NFL doesn’t want Ed Roski and his stadium in the middle of nowhere. They want downtown and famous people being shown off in their luxury suites. Any interest the NFL is feigning in the COI site is strictly to put the screws to AEG.

  19. mrfrostyj says: Oct 7, 2011 9:54 AM

    For all those people saying “why is my town on this list”. Look at history. The Cleveland Browns even in their worst years always sold out games, has one of the biggest fan bases in pro sports, was a regular playoff team and even agreed to a new stadium which are all reasons a lot of you are saying your team would NEVER move. Guess what happend to them?

    Bottom line, if the owner of your hometown sports team thinks their financial bottom line would be better somewhere else. You’re screwed. So why would these teams move.

    Jaguars – ghost town on Sundays, your city is considered a failed project.

    Buffalo – Too Small, why do you think you’ve been sharing your franchise with a MUCH bigger city like Toronto in the first place?

    Minnesota – Even the Colts got a real football stadium before the Vikings and the Vikings have been a much better team for longer (Colts only have 10 good years in it’s existance in Indianapolis). How long have they been dragging their feet on that deal?

    49ers – The fact the team is playing in a stadium that is old by Baseball’s standards is actually the least of their problems. You’re ownership has no ties to the city of San Francisco and cares about it as much as they care about their teams record. If they could get a stadium built in Youngstown, Ohio….they would, after all they already have offices there and have since the Debartolo days.

    Raiders – Al Davis…enough said

    Chargers – Easy out in the lease agreement. This team would be my pick to end up in LA.

  20. realitypolice says: Oct 7, 2011 9:56 AM

    robolundgren says:
    Oct 7, 2011 9:48 AM
    The Jaguars have an ironclad lease with the city of Jacksonville through 2030 and an owner who says (and shows) he’s committed to Jacksonville… Why would they be a candidate?
    ======================

    As someone whose business involves both commercial real estate and NFL franchises, let me assure you that there ain’t no such thing as an unbreakable lease.

  21. mrfrostyj says: Oct 7, 2011 10:03 AM

    vaporiizz3r says:Oct 7, 2011 9:21 AM

    I know theres probly a reason to this, but why dont they EXPAND and make a new team? ?instead of moving a team thats allready there.

    ———————————————————-
    Because everytime that happens the NFL has to shuffle the divisions and as is they already don’t make any sense (why is Baltimore in the AFC North, Indianapolis in the AFC South and Miami in the AFC East?)

  22. EJ says: Oct 7, 2011 10:04 AM

    Mike, can we squash the Bills to LA talk? If Ralph Wilson god forbid passed away today, Jim Kelly, Tom Golisano and several other Billionares have stated that the Bills would not be leaving Buffalo….period.

    Besides, the Bills practically sell out every game, whether we are winning or losing. Why are we always mentioned for this move when other teams that have stadium sellout issues aren’t? Ex. Bengals, Dolphins.

    LA Bills…H E DOUBLE HOCKEY STICKS NO, LA Raiders…Didn’t work before, LA 49ers…Probably not, LA Rams…See Raiders, LA Vikings…Naaa, LA Chargers…Maybe, LA Jaguars…Sounds about right.

    Go Bills!!!!

  23. Derty Ernie says: Oct 7, 2011 10:13 AM

    Why would anyone not build a venue similar to the packers where they have shopping, parking, and convention/wedding services. The old days of just building a one purpose stadium are over.
    Lambeau Field in in use year round and people from all over travel there for tours, eating etc.

    This is what the Wilfs are trying to do in Minnesota but the pol’s what that stadium in downtown where there would be none of the above.

  24. nyyankeedave says: Oct 7, 2011 10:14 AM

    Take the 49ers and Bills off of this already!! NFL WON’T LET THEM LEAVE!! I’d even argue the same for the Vikings! East coaast media d-bags just want a team in LA-they love visiting that venereal hotbed/excuse of a city!

  25. realitypolice says: Oct 7, 2011 10:29 AM

    EJ says:
    Oct 7, 2011 10:04 AM
    Mike, can we squash the Bills to LA talk? If Ralph Wilson god forbid passed away today, Jim Kelly, Tom Golisano and several other Billionares have stated that the Bills would not be leaving Buffalo….period.
    ======================

    It’s nice of them to say that. Of course, they will have absolutely no say in the matter, but it’s still nice to hear.

    The NFL must approve new owners and the Wilson estate will sell it to whomever the NFL tells them to, or not sell it all.

    As for your statement about the Bills selling out their games, see my previous comment to the Rams fan.

  26. emma333 says: Oct 7, 2011 10:33 AM

    Jaguars, a ghost town on Sundays, failed project-
    Must correct this misperception. There are usually 60,000+ fans there….But because you continue to believe the “perception is reality” model…you continue to repeat it. We don’t deny that there are some problems with attendance, but we don’t have stadium issues like some, so drop us a little lower on the list to move to LA please.

  27. joeloj says: Oct 7, 2011 10:46 AM

    The NFL wants the Bills to stay where they are. They are 4-5 people with means who have stated they want to keep the Bills in Buffalo, and perhaps more we don”t know about. The Bills are a storied franchise with a great deal of tradition in the NFL. The Tornonto thing is unnecessary – it’s not even that much more money for the Bills – and the support in WNY/Rochester/Southern Ontario (outside of Toronto) is great. The Bills are not going anywhere and don’t deserve to be a part of this conversation.

  28. contra74 says: Oct 7, 2011 11:39 AM

    scudbot says:
    Oct 7, 2011 9:47 AM
    “…Packer fans will show what A-Holes they are, as they wish the Vikings to move there.” I don’t know a single Packers fan who wants the Vikings to move.
    ———–
    Oh yes you do. Youve been on these boards long enough to know that whenever a Viking story pops up we get some posts saying “see you in LA” and other nonsense. I would never wish that on ANY fanbase so those posts alone show the maturity of the poster.

  29. vadog says: Oct 7, 2011 11:43 AM

    I keep hearing that the NFL won’t let the Vikings leave Minnesota. My answer to that is….dream on.

    Minnesota going to LA is actually perfect for the other owners. The profitable franchises are tired of sharing revenue with the 31st most profitable franchise in the league! If the other owners approve the sale to AEG, Wilf walks away with a nice little profit and probably a share of AEG. The owners get what is likely a more profitable team in LA.

    The NFL and Goodell and just giving lip service to wanting the Vikings in Minnesota, because they don’t want to antagonize a strong fan base. But in reality, I think that they would drop Minnesota in heartbeat for LA.

    The ONLY hope for keeping the Vikings in Minnesota is for the legislature to approve the stadium deal this fall…but, that’s politically unpopular and not going to happen.

  30. bobnelsonjr says: Oct 7, 2011 11:51 AM

    The overwelming favorite to move are the vikings.

    After Sunday there are only 5 more games until the vikings are FREE AGENTS able to sign a stadium agreement anywhere with anyone.

    viking attendance problems, they have not sold out a home game yet. With heavy discounting from some corporate sponsors (50%) they are just managing to avoid blackouts.

    The Minneapolis Tribune ran an article that many tickets are available for $4.00 on Stub Hub for Sunday’s game.

    Why the apathy?
    Poor onfield performance. They haven’t won a 2nd playoff game in decades and have never won a conference trophy.

    Absentee ownership that avoids involvment in the community.

    Poor public relations. frequent player arrests, poor stadium politics, etc.

    The vikings are the clear favorite for the NFC team to move to LA. Now they need an AFC team.

  31. radrntn says: Oct 7, 2011 11:55 AM

    anybody can say and think what they want, but I know one thing Al Davis will sue whoever tries to move there. He has the cashed check from the nfl.

    Then he will sue the nfl again, and will probably create another antitrust lawsuit, which after the supreme courts american needle verdict, he probably has more leverage.

    In my opinion if you want to go to LA either its a sweetheart deal for the raiders, which at the very least should play at least one preseason game in oakland every year, and rotate a regular season game against the chiefs and broncos every other year, or write a check to Al. Which I thinks he feels is about a billion dollars.

  32. theravenlives2 says: Oct 7, 2011 11:56 AM

    Take the 49ers and Bills off of this already!! NFL WON’T LET THEM LEAVE!!

    ===============================
    Haha..I love this logic! Don’t you think the folks in Baltimore thought that in 1984, the folks in Cleveland thought that in 1995, the folks in Houston thought that in 1996, etc… Wake up and smell the coffee, bro. The NFL wants a team – and maybe two – in L.A. in the worst way The question isn’t if, the question is when..and who. In betting on the Jags and/or the Vikings.

  33. dannymac17 says: Oct 7, 2011 11:59 AM

    LA Chargers

  34. whoknowsnothing says: Oct 7, 2011 12:00 PM

    Roski has the best plan out there. AEG should just partner up with him and build something that would make even make Cowboys staduim look like it was built 20 years ago.

    Chargers or Jag’s will find a new home.

  35. waxedagain says: Oct 7, 2011 12:01 PM

    A completely nonsense article by Jason Cole with absolutely no specifics to back his claim that the NFL is unhappy with the AEG proposal. There is a reason he writes for Yahoo! Sports.

  36. theravenlives2 says: Oct 7, 2011 12:02 PM

    The Bills are a storied franchise with a great deal of tradition in the NFL.

    ===============================

    So were the Baltimore Colts, the original Cleveland Browns, the original Oakland Raiders, and the Houston Oilers. That sure as hell didn’t stop them from moving. It’s not about fan support, folks…its about a stadium that can make money with sky boxes and corporate seats.

  37. Mr. Wright 212 says: Oct 7, 2011 3:00 PM

    Gotta have SOMEPLACE for the Vikes to play in 2013 SMH. Get the place built, guys!

  38. returntoexcellence says: Oct 7, 2011 3:13 PM

    I live in L.A. The only good thing about the Chargers moving to L.A. would be a Raider home game here once a year. The Chargers will find even less support in L.A. than in San Diego.

  39. willowvike says: Oct 7, 2011 3:26 PM

    The overwelming favorite to move are the vikings. After Sunday there are only 5 more games until the vikings are FREE AGENTS able to sign a stadium agreement anywhere with anyone. viking attendance problems, they have not sold out a home game yet. With heavy discounting from some corporate sponsors (50%) they are just managing to avoid blackouts. The Minneapolis Tribune ran an article that many tickets are available for $4.00 on Stub Hub for Sunday’s game. Why the apathy? Poor onfield performance. They haven’t won a 2nd playoff game in decades and have never won a conference trophy. Absentee ownership that avoids involvment in the community. Poor public relations. frequent player arrests, poor stadium politics, etc. The vikings are the clear favorite for the NFC team to move to LA. Now they need an AFC team.
    ________________

    Prime example of someone who reads a newspaper article and thinks they are experts on the situation. There are $4 tickets on stubhub bc its ONE ticket. How much would you pay to go to a game by yourself? Poor on field performance? If that was a reason to lose your team the lions should have left in 2000. Yeah ticket prices are cheap cuz the team is having a bad year… But people are still going. They’ve been to the nfc championship 3 times since 98. They haven’t won a 2nd playoff game bc they’ve had byes in most of the years they’ve made the playoffs which to me is the same as a 1st round win. Go eat some cheese.

  40. keeponhating says: Oct 7, 2011 4:11 PM

    The Vikings have never won a conference trophy? Then how the Hell did they play the Raiders in the superbowl? And I know they’ve played in more than one. just dont feel like looking it up.

  41. cusoman says: Oct 7, 2011 4:33 PM

    scudbot says:
    Oct 7, 2011 9:47 AM
    “…Packer fans will show what A-Holes they are, as they wish the Vikings to move there.” I don’t know a single Packers fan who wants the Vikings to move.

    ————-

    You must be new here. You might not know them in real life, but there enough on these comments to prove that there’s probably a good deal of them out there. If you’re not talking like your team is part of the Aryan race or something with how superior the Packers are at EVERYTHING, then you’re putting down other teams. It’s a hallmark of your fan-base and you need to realize that.

  42. nationalmediacansuckit says: Oct 7, 2011 5:49 PM

    mrfrostyj says:
    Oct 7, 2011 9:54 AM
    For all those people saying “why is my town on this list”. Look at history. The Cleveland Browns even in their worst years always sold out games, has one of the biggest fan bases in pro sports, was a regular playoff team and even agreed to a new stadium which are all reasons a lot of you are saying your team would NEVER move. Guess what happend to them?

    Jaguars – ghost town on Sundays, your city is considered a failed project.
    ————————————————

    Whoa…. pump you brakes Nostradamus. Breathe slowly and count to 10. Just b/c Cleveland supports their team pretty well doesn’t make them “one of the biggest fan bases in pro sports”. By the way Jax is not a failed project. The team is still here. But last time I checked Modell “failed” to keep the Browns in Cleveland and move that “project” to Baltimore.

    As far as the Jaguars being a “ghost town on Sundays” as you say. Obviously you live on every word from this site. So typically gulible. Jax is nothing of the sort. They are avg over 62,000 per game, but you wouldn’t know this b/c this site doesn’t print all the facts. Check it out number don’t lie. http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance

    In the future instead of perfecting your Ms. Cleo(call me now) act, go to google and get the facts. It’s all a finger tip away. Nice try though.

  43. pack13queens0 says: Oct 8, 2011 1:09 AM

    Here are some good reasons why the Vikings are the perfect candidate. The only time they can sell out a home game that doesn’t involve the Packers is when there’s a corporate buyout. That also includes playoff games. They play in the NFL’s smallest Stadium also with the NFL’s lowest ticket prices and still have issues selling out. A majority of NFL fans in Minnesota are Packer fans so why not give the territory back to them? That way their great fans in Western Wisconsin don’t need to spend $350 on Sunday Ticket. Minnesota is not a football state, Vikings have no fan following, Gophers are the biggest joke in the NCAA & the High School football in the state is also a joke. Wisconsin’s worst teams would have a field day against Eden Prairie & Wayzata.

  44. frostbelt says: Oct 8, 2011 11:57 AM

    Bills leave? I don’t think so…

    I’ve been to MANY football games in different cities. Buffalo is different. Buffalo is the Bills.

  45. cusoman says: Oct 8, 2011 2:27 PM

    pack13queens0 says:
    Oct 8, 2011 1:09 AM
    Here are some good reasons why the Vikings are the perfect candidate. The only time they can sell out a home game that doesn’t involve the Packers is when there’s a corporate buyout. That also includes playoff games. They play in the NFL’s smallest Stadium also with the NFL’s lowest ticket prices and still have issues selling out. A majority of NFL fans in Minnesota are Packer fans so why not give the territory back to them? That way their great fans in Western Wisconsin don’t need to spend $350 on Sunday Ticket. Minnesota is not a football state, Vikings have no fan following, Gophers are the biggest joke in the NCAA & the High School football in the state is also a joke. Wisconsin’s worst teams would have a field day against Eden Prairie & Wayzata.

    ——————-

    There’s that high and mighty attitude I was talking about, thanks for proving me and the other Vikings fans right. News flash buddy, not so long ago both the Packers AND the Badgers were big jokes in the NFL and NCAA. Your teams’ current state of victories will not last forever, and MN’s current state of droughts will not last forever either. Wishing another team to move or dissolve is the absolute most despicable thing any fan of any sport can say.

  46. knucklehead93 says: Oct 8, 2011 3:07 PM

    Packer fans really need to stop wishing the Vikings to leave. It’s getting old.

  47. locutus says: Oct 8, 2011 7:44 PM

    realitypolice says: Oct 7, 2011 9:52 AM

    sj39 says:
    Oct 7, 2011 8:08 AM
    Since their move to St. Louis the Rams have sold out all but a handfull of games. Why would they move.
    =========================

    Because a sold out game in a brand new stadium in LA with higher ticket prices and about 350 high priced luxury suites would bring in millions more per game than a sold out game in St. Louis.

    If the Rams weren’t selling out with only a mediocre fan base, then maybe, that would be a reason. To uproot a franchise simply out of sheer gluttony and greed would be the end of the NFL. That type of greed did wonders for MLB and the NBA.

  48. stanmackley says: Oct 9, 2011 8:43 AM

    What a great thread this is. Nice and normal, good conversation.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!