Skip to content

Roger Goodell won’t rule Las Vegas out, or in for that matter

MINNEAPOLIS, MN - JANUARY 10:  NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell looks on prior to the NFC Wild Card Playoff game between the Minnesota Vikings and the Seattle Seahawks at TCFBank Stadium on January 10, 2016 in Minneapolis, Minnesota.  (Photo by Hannah Foslien/Getty Images) Getty Images

Shortly after reports emerged of the Raiders having discussions with officials in Las Vegas, the league issued a set of talking points to all its clubs.

And when commissioner Roger Goodell was asked about the possibility of the Raiders playing in a place where there’s big scary gambling, he didn’t deviate far from his own script.

Appearing this week with his own network’s Rich Eisen, Goodell carefully walked that line when asked about owner Mark Davis meeting with Las Vegas businessmen.

“Ultimately, it’s the ownership’s decision,” Goodell said. “It requires 24 of the 32 owners to approve any relocation to any market. Obviously there are specific issues that would need to be discussed in the context of Las Vegas. But I think it’s way premature at this point to be speculating on that.

“There’s no proposals, there’s nothing firm in any way. So I think this is something that at some point it may come up. But for right now we’re not focused on that.”

It’s a reasonable stall tactic, and a safe position for Goodell to stake out. With the Raiders the equivalent of a restricted free agent (a year away from a possible option to move to Los Angeles if the Chargers for some reason don’t), the thing they need most are options.

And if they want to build a domed stadium on the strip, it creates useful leverage for the Raiders in their ongoing talks with Oakland.

And it’s also more interesting to envision than San Antonio.

Permalink 22 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Los Angeles Rams, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers
22 Responses to “Roger Goodell won’t rule Las Vegas out, or in for that matter”
  1. cajunaise says: Feb 4, 2016 4:33 PM

    ANYTHING is more interesting to envision than San Antonio.

  2. britishteeth says: Feb 4, 2016 4:39 PM

    Spoken like a man that knows gambling, um, I mean, fantasy football, is the reason for the exponential growth of the NFL.

  3. binarymath says: Feb 4, 2016 4:48 PM

    Hate on SA all you want, but it is a MUCH better locale for the NFL.

    Much larger in population than Las Vegas, which already has many things in place to separate the residents from their entertainment dollar. Why would the NFL want to start with a small slice of a pie when they could have a bigger slice of the SA pie?

    Texas is a football-mad state, and people would show up in droves.

    SA fits the profile of a city the NFL could fleece for the cost of a taxpayer-funded stadium. Vegas could tell the NFL to pound sand and fund it themselves – and make the NFL owners believe them.

    A WINNING team in SA might force the owner of another Texas-based NFL franchise to look for a competent GM…

  4. reprob8 says: Feb 4, 2016 4:51 PM

    Vegas is the new city to be used as the extortion “stick” against cities that balk at building a new stadium for the resident billionaire owner.

  5. psubeerman21 says: Feb 4, 2016 4:54 PM

    Of course he has to leave the door open. If he says no, how could the NFL extort the city of Oakland?

  6. weepingjebus says: Feb 4, 2016 5:05 PM

    He makes it so hard to love this sport sometimes. Will the owners ever wake up to how much he’s costing them every year?

  7. deneb1973 says: Feb 4, 2016 6:04 PM

    If I were Mr. Davis I would try to get a deal with Mexico City. His franchise would triple in value and the NFL would become international!

  8. HankTheDog says: Feb 4, 2016 6:04 PM

    Remember when there was a rumor of daily fantasy impropriety and the government immediately jumped in based on no facts whatsoever to investigate? Do you really think NFL owners want to give the government an invitation to crawl up their collective backsides to investigate the league based on someone’s twitter rumor about some Las Vegas player involved in betting on NFL? Highly doubt it!

  9. Iknowitall says: Feb 4, 2016 6:14 PM

    San Antonio should stick with the TYFA teams it already has. Its not a big league city. Although, I will say, some of those TYFA teams in SA are tougher than the Raiders

  10. bobsnygiants says: Feb 4, 2016 6:23 PM

    Commissioner shouldn’t have a say where a team wants to go.

  11. 1nationraidernation says: Feb 4, 2016 7:01 PM

    Las Vegas would be a great city for a team….even if it gets no teams, it would be a great neutral site for hosting both the NFL Superbowl, and Pro Bowl. Really they should have the NFL Combine, and the NFL Draft there as well. I would fly in for all those.

    As far as the gambling issue that seemed to be a point of concerns on past blogs, I think Amy Trask brought up a valid point. London has more legal gambling (well nothing is illegal, so it all goes) than Las Vegas, without any accountabilty.

    So gambling is not a concern. I think the other NFL owners fear somebody like Sheldon Adelson who has deep pockets, and heavily connected.

  12. charger383 says: Feb 4, 2016 7:06 PM

    Las Vegas Raiders sounds good

  13. raiderapologist says: Feb 4, 2016 7:20 PM

    psubeerman21 says:
    Feb 4, 2016 4:54 PM

    Of course he has to leave the door open. If he says no, how could the NFL extort the city of Oakland?
    Oakland has made it clear that they have no money to spend on a stadium. Davis is worth maybe 500 million. Jerrah and that bozo in Houston aren’t going to let Davis relocate to San Antonio. Davis will either have to rent space from the Niners or find somebody who will build him a stadium. Vegas would be great. I can make that drive in 9 hours.

  14. albyroyale says: Feb 4, 2016 7:36 PM

    I’m from Oakland and the Raider will always be my team regardless of where they play, but the City of Oakland is not in the financial position to get a stadium built. No going to happen,…at least for the foreseeable future.
    San Antonio makes a lot more sense the people give it credit for. The population is nearly the same as the East Bay, there’s plenty of passion for football throughout Texas, no state tax, plenty of land and a City that has already embraced silver & black (Spurs). I’d rather see them end up owning San Antonio than sharing LA.

  15. mdintino1420 says: Feb 4, 2016 8:07 PM

    It is very strange that the Raiders have not completed a one year extension for their current stadium. You would think this would have been quick and easy. It could very well be that Mark Davis is planning to move. Talking to Libby Schaaf is like talking to a wall. Las Vegas and San Antonio are markets of growth. Oakland is not. Geographically, it would be better if they moved to Las Vegas. It would remain a true AFC West.

    If you do leave Mark, leave the Raider name and colors at the door. Change the name to the Outlaws or Rattlers.

  16. raidernation37 says: Feb 4, 2016 8:50 PM

    They key player in this whole Vegas thing isn’t the league, its Sheldon Adelson. He can buy and sell the nfl and all of the owners combined. If Mark Davis gets him on board with this idea its going to happen and the league wont say a thing

  17. warrensip says: Feb 4, 2016 9:32 PM

    San Antonio sounds nice. Las Vegas sounds awesome.

  18. mdintino1420 says: Feb 4, 2016 9:49 PM

    Mark Davis did not visit San Antonio and Las Vegas for vacation purposes. He went to these cities to talk business, a new home for his team. Please announce where the Raiders are moving and end this thing. Las Vegas would be better than San Antonio, but both would work.

    If you choose, San Antonio, change your team’s name to Gunslingers or Outlaws

    If you move to Las Vegas, change the team’s name to Rattlers, Dragons, or Aces. Gamblers would be too corny and obvious.

    The Raider name and colors stay in Oakland. Leave it at the door.

  19. silverandblackaholic says: Feb 5, 2016 12:14 PM

    STAY in OAKLAND! Although Sin City sounds exciting, The Raiders belong in Oakland…

  20. gzup83 says: Feb 5, 2016 12:38 PM

    mdintino1420 says:
    Feb 4, 2016 9:49 PM
    The Raider name and colors stay in Oakland. Leave it at the door


  21. orcahawk says: Feb 5, 2016 2:25 PM

    EXPANSION !!! 32 – >40. Wont happen but fun to think about:

    NFC N Vancouver BC
    NFC E St Louis MO
    NFC S Mexico City MX
    NFC W San Antonio TX

    AFC N Anchorage AK
    AFC E London UK
    AFC S Las Vegas NV
    AFC W Portland OR

  22. mdintino1420 says: Feb 5, 2016 10:34 PM

    Here is a list of cities that should be considered for expansion. I will assume that no more teams will move

    San Antonio
    Las Vegas
    Portland, OR
    St. Louis
    Birmingham, AL

    Forget about London. WAY TOO FAR AWAY! When teams play in England now, they need a bye week afterward to recover from the timezone differences.

Leave a Reply

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