Skip to content

Iger will attend relocation meeting next week

bob-iger-hed-2012 Getty Images

As the NFL planets align in an effort to drop a team or two into the L.A. solar system, a major figure in the high-stakes game of musical chairs will be at the table.

Disney CEO Robert Iger, whose ESPN subsidiary pays the NFL more than $2 billion per year for Monday Night Football and a wild-card playoff game, will attend next week’s meeting in Houston, according to Daniel Kaplan of SportsBusiness Journal.

Iger has agreed to help the Chargers and Raiders secure approval to share a new stadium in Carson in a deal that gives him the ability to eventually purchase a minority stake in one of the two teams. But the Raiders largely have become a forgotten player in what has become a two-team showdown between the Chargers and Rams, with no one currently having the 24 votes necessary to secure official approval to move.

The fact that Iger will attend doesn’t mean that it will be Chargers and Raiders or neither moving to L.A. Anything can happen next week, and the only thing that anyone should expect at this point is an outcome that would be regarded as unexpected.

At some point before the Houston meeting occurs, we’ll dust off our list of possible outcomes and maybe add a few more. No matter how many possibilities are brainstormed, there’s a chance that the final result will be something no one saw coming.

Permalink 65 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Los Angeles Rams, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, Top Stories
65 Responses to “Iger will attend relocation meeting next week”
  1. lacarious says: Jan 8, 2016 10:43 AM

    its over

  2. rynehawk says: Jan 8, 2016 10:45 AM

    It’s “Eye-Ger” actually….

  3. slvrnblk72 says: Jan 8, 2016 10:47 AM

    Raiders should consider San Antonio.. the Alamo Dome would be a huge home field advantage as that place gets very loud.. but no matter where they end up playing, they need a new stadium as the Mausoleum is a complete dump

  4. therealraider says: Jan 8, 2016 10:51 AM

    This isn’t that complex, Mark Davis is the only owner who has said repeatedly he wants to stay in Oakland. The league needs to solve the Oakland stadium situation then the L.A problem will solve itself.

  5. thegame2love says: Jan 8, 2016 10:53 AM

    Hmm, Disney’s net worth is $179 billion.

  6. beavertonsteve says: Jan 8, 2016 10:56 AM

    This is the same CEO that is currently overseeing ESPN almost single-handedly torpedoing Disney’s stock value.

  7. accipiterq says: Jan 8, 2016 10:57 AM

    As long as people keep voting to pay higher taxes and subsidize these billionaires, then this nonsense will continue. I bet no team ends up in LA this coming season, and we have to hear about this nonsense again next year as well.

  8. SparkyGump says: Jan 8, 2016 11:04 AM

    More drama from the billionaire boys club.

  9. pancaketaco says: Jan 8, 2016 11:05 AM

    If Disney gets in on a NFL team I wonder if they figure a way to have the current team employees train their foreign replacements who are here on an HB-1 visa.

  10. upperdecker19 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:05 AM

    Rams to LA. Split the $550 million relocation fee to the Chargers and Raiders to either build in their current market or move to St Louis.

  11. charger383 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:05 AM

    Disney and Raiders brands seem a little different

  12. scrp2 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:06 AM

    Inglewood always up to no good

  13. araidersfan says: Jan 8, 2016 11:14 AM

    This Raider fan prefers the Silver & Black staying in the Oakland area (even if it means sharing Levis). But honestly I’d be okay with other sites like San Antonio or Portland if need be….provided that it’s NOT Los Angeles. Al Davis’ biggest mistake was moving the Raiders there the first time. I’m doubtful that La-la land can support any team for a sustained period but if Goodell is so hell-bent on having a franchise there, then let Kroenke move his Rams to LA.

  14. gadgetking2010 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:14 AM

    the league has to make sure that all other cities have team friendly stadium deals before settling the LA issue. Once LA is no longer an option the other teams lose their leverage with the taxpayers and fans.

  15. torchsandaardvarks says: Jan 8, 2016 11:22 AM

    So Disney is becoming closer to being The Supreme Galactic Empire.

  16. harrisonhits2 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:23 AM

    Watch the Rams move without league approval and they end up with 3 teams in LA lolz

  17. mogogo1 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:24 AM

    Kroenke is miles ahead of the Chargers and Raiders in terms of having a viable plan AND he’s willing to pay for a it himself. It’s going to be basically impossible for the NFL to deny the Rams without it being a total PR disaster for them. Can you imagine all the articles about how them deciding to fleece the taxpayers rather than let Kroenke pay for most of a stadium himself?

  18. daveshingle says: Jan 8, 2016 11:26 AM

    Is it possible Rams and Chargers go to LA?

  19. lscottman3 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:31 AM

    if i was this guy i would be ashamed i had anything to do with BSPN

  20. celticsforever says: Jan 8, 2016 11:32 AM

    The Iger Sanction.

  21. psubeerman21 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:34 AM

    Vger wants to know why the creator will not respond

  22. icallbs81 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:35 AM

    Let the bribes of rich men BEGIN!

  23. trueraiderfan says: Jan 8, 2016 11:37 AM

    We haven’t seen the final decision yet but the Iger involvement is complete BS. This is a lobbyist telling the politicians he pays that they better vote on this “bill” they way he wants “or else”. Have we as NFL fans, drank the kool-aide so much that we blindly give to this billion dollar corporation? Your city and team may not be involved this time, just give it time, these greedy bastards won’t stop until this league is as popular as US Ladies Table Tennis.

  24. simon94022 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:40 AM

    Iger is an impressive guy, but he doesn’t bring financial clout, nor does he bring Disney. The plan is for managing the Carson stadium to become Iger’s full time job after he retires from Disney.

    Nice, but I don’t see how or why he would swing any undecided votes toward the Chargers and Raiders.

  25. arcross12042004scorp15 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:44 AM

    I still don’t get the two teams to LA. Chargers, Rams and Raiders have all been located in LA and left LA because of a lack fan support.

  26. simon94022 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:50 AM

    At some point, NFL owners need to deal with two realities:

    1) There is way too much bad blood between Kroenke and St. Louis for the Rams to play another season there. If Kroenke does not get league approval for LA — and assuming he decides not to go rogue and move anyway — he will immediately start the process of moving to Toronto, San Diego, London, Portland, etc. The 1-2 lame duck seasons in St. Louis would be ugly enough to make Jerry Springer blush.

    2) If the league puts 2 teams in LA and one of them isn’t the Rams, a substantial block of the LA/Orange County public is going to react with disappointment and apathy toward the new “Los Angeles Chargers”. Just glance at the op-eds and comments at the LA Times. Does the NFL really want to return to Los Angeles with a whimper?

    Rams to Los Angeles. With or without the Chargers. Inglewood or Carson does not matter. But the solution has to include the Los Angeles Rams.

  27. Silver and Black attack says: Jan 8, 2016 11:54 AM

    Chargers can’t move to LA without another team. Spanos hates Stan that’s why he’s partnered with Oakland. Saying the Raiders are a forgotten player in this is laughable. If the Raiders are a forgotten player, then the Chargers are screwed. The NFL knows the Raiders, not the Chargers or Rams will have the best chance to fill the new stadium and generate the best TV ratings.

  28. mongo3401 says: Jan 8, 2016 11:55 AM

    We belongs in SD and the Raiders belong in Oakland I believe the Rams will move to LA and the 550 Mil relocation fee will be given to Oakland for a new football stadium. Let the As build their own ballpark. Oakland has the land but Davis does not have the money. Game. Set. Match. Spanis isn’t going to have to get over himself in this Carson crap hole. The EPA cleanup of the site could go to a Billion dollars. Even the City of Carson is not sure what is hurried there but they do know it’s very bad.

  29. mlenenski says: Jan 8, 2016 11:56 AM

    Honestly… Two teams in LA is just dumb.

  30. Dark Chocolate says: Jan 8, 2016 11:56 AM

    Have the Rams and Chargers move in together in Inglewood, use a portion of the relocation fees to help finance a new stadium in Oakland for the Raiders.

  31. osiris33 (bandwagon since 1976) says: Jan 8, 2016 11:59 AM

    All you see is Rams and Raiders fans here. The Chargers have no fan base. Let them move somewhere else.

  32. thisonesforpat says: Jan 8, 2016 12:01 PM

    #1: I’ve heard the back room rumor/flavor is Iger ends up “buying” the Raiders, and
    #2: and more important, is MRS. IGER attending? You DO remember Willow Bay, right?

  33. competitivecompetitioncompeter says: Jan 8, 2016 12:10 PM

    Good thing the CEO of a major american film and entertainment conglomerate doesn’t have a day job and is able to volunteer for charity events like this.

  34. saintdatazz says: Jan 8, 2016 12:13 PM

    Hey let’s put all the teams in California!!! Especially since their stadiums and teams always sell out. Isn’t that why teams left LA in the first place, too much attendance!!!!! LA is a joke for a NFL team, they had a couple chances and nothing took hold, it is a soccer and basketball city.

  35. whodatnhollywood says: Jan 8, 2016 12:18 PM

    Disneyland is not the “happiest place on earth,” it’s THE MOST EXPENSIVE PLACE ON EARTH! For a 3-year-old child, it costs $93 to enter that park! And all of the rides are NEVER working at the same time!

    Be careful of what you ask for Raiders and Chargers fans! While Iger took a Disney pay cut from $46.5 million to a pathetic welfare check of only $45 million dollars last year, you can expect HUGE ticket prices if that dude is involved. I can imagine: $150 to park, and nosebleed tickets with the pigeons costing around $350. Again, BE CAREFUL of what you ask for!

    How can the NFL go wrong with a man willing to build his OWN stadium and not fleece the people? Bring the Rams back here to LA. The Raiders should remain in Oakland and the Chargers in SD. Plus, if they have enough to pay a relocation fee, then they should use that same money to add to the budget of building stadiums in their own cities.

  36. ebdug says: Jan 8, 2016 12:20 PM

    When the NFL and Disney get together, Mickey Mouse can’t be far behind.

  37. alonestartexan says: Jan 8, 2016 12:31 PM

    Chargers/Rams in Inglewood, NFL allows Raiders to relocate to South Texas.

  38. godfther81 says: Jan 8, 2016 12:33 PM

    The last time a Disney CEO was involved with a professional sports team the results were spectacular.

  39. radrntn says: Jan 8, 2016 12:36 PM

    isn’t it funny how the Raiders are the ones out, because they don’t cry out to the media, and use the media .

    Bottom line , nobody is going to LA without the Raiders getting compensated. I hope the Rams, and their Bozo leader get it on one condition. He helps pay for a new stadium in Oakland, If not go ahead and go to LA, and the Raiders will see you in court.

    NFL can think that if I pay for a house in LA, and do not live in it, that then I know longer own it. Common sense tells me if I pay for something, I own it. Once again the Raiders will use the exact statement the commissioner stated while he was under oath and on the stand”The raiders have paid for the rights to Los Angeles”

    That is if Mark Davis is anything like his old man.

  40. mzeidler1 says: Jan 8, 2016 12:42 PM

    1.) Chargers/Raiders/Carson resolve the stadium problem for both Spanos/Davis and leaves the Rams the odd team out of this mix.

    2.) Owner majority/NFL Negotiated team swap giving Shad Khan the StL Rams which he tried to buy in 2010 and has St. Louis roots. Kroenke then gets out of StL and becomes owner of the Jags which might appeal to him given they are already the defacto London team and he already owns the Arsenal there.

    3.) Switch the Raiders to the NFC West and the Rams to the AFC West which would fit a little better with geographic rivals.

    4.) Bob Iger runs the biggest media/entertainment company on earth that is second to none when it comes to putting on a production.

    5.) Stan Kroenke builds Wal-Mart stores and married well.

    Seems like a no brainer to me!

  41. mongo3401 says: Jan 8, 2016 12:42 PM

    Of all the teams. Raiders deserve most to stay in Oakland. It would be a sin of all sins to see the San Antonio Raiders. Or. The St Louis Raiders. LMAO. No, it’s the Oakland Raiders. They belong to that town. They deserve to be in that town and it ends there. I think Mark Davis bought into the snake oil salesmanship hype on this Carson bs due to be can’t do anything else. Spanks is like the ugly girlfriend that got jilted by her date ( Kroenke) many years ago and is just seeking revenge now.

    If the NFL and media cannot see thistles they are blind. San Diego needs the Chargers like a hole in the head. Spanis has been putting out a what product for years. Believe me, if the Chargers leave or stay, it’s not changing the economic values of LaJoya or Coronado. LOL nresidents could care less

  42. kane337 says: Jan 8, 2016 12:50 PM

    “arcross12042004scorp15 says:
    Jan 8, 2016 11:44 AM
    I still don’t get the two teams to LA. Chargers, Rams and Raiders have all been located in LA and left LA because of a lack fan support.”

    ———————-
    Wrong. They teams left because the cities of Los Angeles and Anaheim would not fork up money for their new stadiums.

  43. cmj0121 says: Jan 8, 2016 1:06 PM

    GIVE US THE LOS ANGELES RAIDERS.

  44. manbunequalsstreetcred says: Jan 8, 2016 1:12 PM

    What Simon90422 fails to get is if the Rams move to LA, the problem is Enos is still the owner. Does the NFL want an absentee owner with a .326 winning percentage in LA. He would destroy the market.

    Chargers & Raiders may not have the history in LA but I don’t view that as a negative. They want to make it work. Enos just wants your $$$.

    Then he usually sues you after the fact

  45. simon94022 says: Jan 8, 2016 1:22 PM

    I still don’t get the two teams to LA. Chargers, Rams and Raiders have all been located in LA and left LA because of a lack fan support.

    Get serious. There are almost 17 million people in the greater LA region. No team has ever left LA for lack of fan support. They left for the same reason most sports teams relocate: lack of a first class revenue-generating stadium.

  46. simon94022 says: Jan 8, 2016 1:28 PM

    #1: I’ve heard the back room rumor/flavor is Iger ends up “buying” the Raiders

    Iger reportedly has a net worth around $100 million. Unspeakably rich by regular people standards, but in the world of NFL owners that is pocket change.

  47. simon94022 says: Jan 8, 2016 1:31 PM

    Honestly… Two teams in LA is just dumb.

    Why LA has two teams in baseball, basketball and hockey. And all of them are among the most successful franchises in their sport financially, regardless of how they perform on the field/court/ice.

    Why would NFL franchises be any less successful?

  48. tmaczoozoo says: Jan 8, 2016 1:34 PM

    The Los Angeles Little Mermaids.

  49. sdcharger123 says: Jan 8, 2016 1:35 PM

    Spanos is obviously going to sell the team to Iger and whatever partners he has if/when they move to LA.

  50. silverhat78 says: Jan 8, 2016 1:38 PM

    Everything is so corporate and business now. It sucks, lets just play some football.

  51. daramsman says: Jan 8, 2016 1:38 PM

    As soon as the Jeff Fisher and the Rams put together 3 seasons of 7-9 or 6-10 records, there will be an 80,000 seat paper weight sitting in Inglewood. And all the so called profootball fans in LA will be back at the beach on Sunday roller blading and lifting ridiculous amounts of weights on Venice beach.

  52. tamboafl says: Jan 8, 2016 1:48 PM

    Nobody is talking about the Carson stadium site anymore. A state official says that the site ( which was a toxic dump decades ago ), is safe to build on, but still needs a series of extraction wells to remove methane and other gases.

    I once lived in a city that decided to build a park on top of a former landfill, not even toxic just your regular every day dump. Well, the grass would keep dying, and parts of the park begin to sink.

    I assume that Spanos, Iger, the NFL or somebody have done their “due diligence” before they sink ( pund intended ) 1.7 billion at this site.

  53. criticaldsj says: Jan 8, 2016 2:11 PM

    If you don’t understand how having two teams in the Los Angeles television market, one for each contract, makes sense, there isn’t a whole lot people can do for you other than hope you don’t end up playing in traffic.

    As for who it should be, and what the result will be, the reality of the situation is:

    1) Stan Kroneke has a shovel ready project for an NFL stadium that can hold two teams in Inglewood that he can finance without help from either the league or the residents of California. The Carson group has neither.

    2) The Raiders most likely do not have enough capital to pay a relocation fee to Los Angeles to the league. The Rams and Chargers do. On top of that, owners have long memories and if you think the league isn’t pissed about what Al pulled moving the Raiders in the first place, you’re kidding yourself.

    This leads to a very simple and unhappy conclusion that both the Chargers and Rams end up sharing the Inglewood stadium, with the Carson stadium project falling by the wayside. No one changes divisions, no one changes conferences, both can pay the other owners a relocation fee, and the value of the media contracts for both conferences increases because LA has a home team.

    This solution leaves the Raiders in play for other potential markets, either St. Louis if they do actually build a stadium, or San Antonio, which was mentioned above and that I think would be a great fit, or a good brand to relocate internationally, in a pinch.

  54. FlintBeastwood says: Jan 8, 2016 2:19 PM

    “beavertonsteve says:
    Jan 8, 2016 10:56 AM
    This is the same CEO that is currently overseeing ESPN almost single-handedly torpedoing Disney’s stock value.”

    Maybe you havent seen it but there is a movie called star wars…oh and marvel.

  55. rainbowblizack says: Jan 8, 2016 2:32 PM

    Iger will push this over the goalline. He WILL oversee the stadium construction during his final 2 years as CEO of Disney, he just won’t buy into a team until he’s retired from Disney. Iger is a master of branding and negotiating. This is exactly what the chargers and raiders need. What does Kroenke have up his sleeve next week? Nothing. Carson is in the drivers seat.

  56. justanotherfan101 says: Jan 8, 2016 2:44 PM

    There are over 700,000 millionaires in California. About 400,000 of these millionaires live in the Greater Los Angeles Area. Bel Air, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Brentwood, Pacific Palisades, and a lot of other expensive neighborhoods are within 15 miles of the proposed new stadium in Inglewood. Kroenke plans to build to a stadium where the rich will spend big bucks not only on tickets but on Personal Seat Licenses (PSL)s. If the Rams move back to LA, the average fan may find it financially difficult to attend the game in person. But at least he will be able to attend a few games and say LA Rams again.

  57. stew48 says: Jan 8, 2016 2:49 PM

    I am retired and old.(very) Have been an NFL fan since the ’40s. One of my amusements is to read PFT and the responders. Can’t tell you how many I’ve read, but if you are a fan of the NFL, not just a team, then read what criticaldsj above has written and think (I know, that is tough) about what he says. He is far ahead of the curve, as “they” say.

  58. BIG RED says: Jan 8, 2016 3:39 PM

    Except he’s wrong about several things, including the fact that the Raiders can easily pay the relocation fee back over many years.

  59. borbinski says: Jan 8, 2016 3:39 PM

    As much as the NFL wants to tout the Fan in Attendance experience, the question, do they really care about the personal experience we have with the team we buy tickets to watch. in Oakland, i think there are about 100,000 different people that attend a game per season, 42,000 season ticket holders plus single gamers (10,000 single game tickets x 8 home games x .5 50% return)
    Peanuts numbers to the Raider nation watching on TV.
    For the 100,000 its a personal experience, family and game day, others not as much – but many want the oakland name.
    To the NFL, the 100,000 with personal experience want that to continue but we know its about one thing for the owners – MONEY.

  60. cmj0121 says: Jan 8, 2016 3:47 PM

    criticaldsj says:
    Jan 8, 2016 2:11 PM
    If you don’t understand how having two teams in the Los Angeles television market, one for each contract, makes sense, there isn’t a whole lot people can do for you other than hope you don’t end up playing in traffic.

    As for who it should be, and what the result will be, the reality of the situation is:

    1) Stan Kroneke has a shovel ready project for an NFL stadium that can hold two teams in Inglewood that he can finance without help from either the league or the residents of California. The Carson group has neither.

    2) The Raiders most likely do not have enough capital to pay a relocation fee to Los Angeles to the league. The Rams and Chargers do. On top of that, owners have long memories and if you think the league isn’t pissed about what Al pulled moving the Raiders in the first place, you’re kidding yourself.

    This leads to a very simple and unhappy conclusion that both the Chargers and Rams end up sharing the Inglewood stadium, with the Carson stadium project falling by the wayside. No one changes divisions, no one changes conferences, both can pay the other owners a relocation fee, and the value of the media contracts for both conferences increases because LA has a home team.

    This solution leaves the Raiders in play for other potential markets, either St. Louis if they do actually build a stadium, or San Antonio, which was mentioned above and that I think would be a great fit, or a good brand to relocate internationally, in a pinch.
    **********

    And if NFL owners choose to pass on your wisdom (as you clearly present yourself as a person with impeccible credibility, business acumen and awe-inspiring know-how), and they decide to move forward with Iger’s partnership: will you come back here and be spoon fed your crow by us guttersnipes?

  61. pantherpro says: Jan 8, 2016 4:19 PM

    Raider trash anybody?

  62. justanotherfan101 says: Jan 8, 2016 4:31 PM

    criticaldsj and cmj1021
    I agree with you, up to a certain point. There’s no telling how the vote will go on relocation of these 3 teams, however, I believe there certainly may be some animosity by the league directed toward the Raiders. I doubt very seriously Davis wants to move the team to St. Louis or San Antonio, especially since there is a purported $550 million relocation fee. Why pay $550 million to relocate unless you stay close to your fan base and you have a shiny new $1.4 billion plus stadium awaiting you. I live in Southern California north of the LA area. There are a lot of Raiders and Rams fans here. I know of Raiders fans that drive 500 hundred miles or more to attend games in Oakland. I don’t think the Raiders or Rams will have a problem with attendance if they move back to the LA area.

  63. spiffybiff says: Jan 8, 2016 5:20 PM

    I would love the raiders to move to Texas but they are California’s team. The chargers are the ones who should move to San Antonio. Btw St. Louis will never get another team again after the Rams leave. Too blue collar, too baseball, too many people leaving the Midwest

  64. Michael says: Jan 8, 2016 5:57 PM

    @silverhat78: “Everything is so corporate and business now. It sucks, lets just play some football”

    But where?

  65. DesertEagle76 says: Jan 8, 2016 6:37 PM

    I already know the end result.

    The Rams would get approval for now since the Coliseum is the only interim stadium available, then both San Diego and Oakland would have more time to finalize long term plans until The Inglewood Wonderland opens in 2018 or 2019.

    I am guessing Spanos would rather take a payoff than become a second class tenant in Inglewood. I bet that payoff would mostly cover the San Diego taxpayer’s portion of the new stadium.

Leave a Reply

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