Where are the “no” votes for a Raiders move to Vegas?

Getty Images

No NFL owners have publicly said they’ll oppose a potential move of the Raiders to Las Vegas due to gambling. While that could be part of a broader effort to keep maximum pressure on Oakland by not ruling out any and all alternative destinations, owners who have strong feelings on certain topics have a hard time not expressing them, on or off the record.

As it relates to this specific issue, the current thinking in league circles is that there aren’t and won’t be enough “no” votes to keep the Raiders out of Las Vegas for gambling reasons. Other factors, such as Oakland waking up with a viable offer or Las Vegas not coming up with enough free money to get the deal done, could complicate the situation. Based solely on gambling, however, the ayes apparently will have it — even though it would take only nine nays to kill it.

One source with knowledge of ownership dynamics recently predicted that Giants co-owner John Mara, Bears chairman George McCaskey, and Bengals owner Mike Brown would vote no on a Las Vegas move, due to gambling. It’s also possible that Steelers owner Art Rooney would do the same, despite the fact that Rooney family members without current ownership in the team previously had extensive gambling interests.

Still, folks who are in position to count votes are having a hard time coming up with nine that would oppose Las Vegas based solely on gambling. That’s a far cry from just a few years ago, when the NFL refused to even consider the possibility of playing a preseason game in Sin City.

But with free money for stadiums harder and harder to come by, the league has no choice but to “evolve” on a topic that became full evolved in the American consciousness years ago.

53 responses to “Where are the “no” votes for a Raiders move to Vegas?

  1. They will be approved for LV as long as the NFL doesn’t pull the old “secret ballot” move on them again.

  2. Not sure why the NFL didnt just start two new expansion franchises.

    One in L.A. and one in Vegas. Then no one loses their team. Then one division has 5 teams in each conference.

    This is said with 0 research or knowledge, so if any one can disprove me please feel free to do so.

  3. its happening, Oakland cannot afford to build a new stadium and the Raiders NEED a new stadium. Vegas is a perfect landing spot. Tax the tourists and BOOM! Las Vegas Raiders, Baby!

  4. Gambling is a red herring, no votes are far more likely to come from concerns over market size. The gambling argument is foolish and always has been. Virtually every NFL city has casinos relatively convenient to it so the only gambling argument is the presence of legal sports books. Yes, Nevada is the only state where you can place a legal sports bet but you can do it all over London and gambling does not prevent them playing there. Additionally why should there be a concern over undo influence being exerted by legal sports bettors when illegal betting is far more prevalent and it’s purveyors are much more likely to attempt to influence an outcome? After all, the Mirage isn’t going to try fixing a game.

  5. its happening, Oakland cannot afford to build a new stadium and the Raiders NEED a new stadium. Vegas is a perfect landing spot. Tax the tourists and BOOM! Las Vegas Raiders, Baby!
    ================

    Try and think this out for a second. Would the casinos be on board with a tourist tax? Of course not – they’re in the gaming business, not the sports entertainment business. If the only way this stadium gets financed is through a tax on tourists, it won’t get approved. More than meets the eye on this one.

  6. Once the Raiders move, other leagues will follow. It has to be done to dispel the notion that it affects games. Then it has to be undone if being there does.

  7. Jimmy Haslam would vote for the move, thinking “what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas” means that any losses there wouldn’t count in their record.

  8. Dear Oakland or Vegas,

    We’ll give you the OKC Thunder and our AAA baseball team for the RAIDERS straight up!!!!!

  9. They know Mark Davis will move with or without their approval, so they might as well save face and roll with the punches.

  10. Las Vegas will be approved. And somehow or another, gambling will be a part of it. Call it whatever you want. If fantasy football works for you, so be it. But there will be a team in Vegas and gambling money will be involved. And every owner will not just be aware but will be licking their chops to be involved.
    The only problem that Mara will have is that when the Raiders get the approval, it will clearly indicate that AL Davis still has greater control over the NFL than Mara does, five years after his death.

  11. Here is another angle: Jerry jones and bob McNair are two of the more powerful owners in the league. Neither is likely to want a team in San Antonio. Paul Allen probably doesn’t want a team in Portland. Now that Los Angeles has a team again, there are fewer and fewer places that could support a team. Unless Saint Louis wants to try to regroup and get a team, all other potential locations are way too close to a city that already has a team or is smaller than Vegas.

  12. Bottom line: None of these crusty old billionaires are going to do very much to help the son of Al. Mark Davis is not a member of the billionaires club and will suffer for not being “one of us” and there is no love for the Silver and Black.

  13. They don’t have to vote yet. You guys can have all the fun you want playing house with the idea of Vegas, but it aint happening.

    Where is the realization that there is a reason this has never and will never fly for a pro sports team. Grow up fan ladies.

  14. I hope Vegas doesn’t give these scumbag billionaires one stinking penny.

    No welfare for the massively rich. They can easily afford to pay for their own buildings

  15. bitw44 says:
    May 31, 2016 10:14 AM
    Not sure why the NFL didnt just start two new expansion franchises.

    One in L.A. and one in Vegas. Then no one loses their team. Then one division has 5 teams in each conference.

    This is said with 0 research or knowledge, so if any one can disprove me please feel free to do so.

    ————–

    Expansion franchises? They are having trouble fielding 32 competitive teams as it is. The last thing they need to do is water down the competition even more. If anything, they should consider reducing the number of teams and raising the level of competition.

  16. Vegas is a small low income community, you cannot support an NFL team relying on tourist especially an awful team like the Raiders have been for more than a decade.
    Sure it would be a novelty to be in LV for a couple of years but once the honeymoon is over the Raiders will be looking to move again as always.
    The grass always looks greener until it turns brown.

  17. At one time the only team that might seriously object to the Raiders in Las Vegas would be the Chargers as there are a significant number of Chargers fans in the city – probably more than in LA. However if the Raiders move to Las Vegas they drop out of consideration for Los Angeles, and now the Chargers have a clear path to move to LA if they don’t get the new stadium in San Diego.

  18. 2016StockMarketCrash – What a load of rubbish. Yeah the Raiders havent been good in a decade, they’re on the up though. Many sites/pundits have the Raiders to be a playoff team this year. The Raiders are out of salary cap hell, have a great young QB and lots of young talent around the team.

    They’re a million miles better than the Aaron Brooks/JaMarcus Russell teams.

    The Raiders dont want to move. But the city of Oakland wont help with a new stadium (most cities do help). Their Raiders stadium is terrible, Davis wants to stay but the City of Oakland arent making that easy. Dont blame Davis here if he moves

  19. When Las Vegas approves a plan to fund the new indoor stadium, enough owners will be on board to allow the Raiders to move. But they haven’t approved stadium funding yet.

  20. I for one am sick and tired of the constant whining of sports teams and their extortion of taxpayers to fund their playpens.

    Enough, already!

    Owners: Just go!

  21. Any owner who votes “no” on the Raiders move to Las Vegas just doesn’t like money.

  22. Would there be any home field advantage here The entire city is from elsewhere in the country. Those that attend will all be rooting for the away team.

  23. 2016StockMarketCrash says:
    May 31, 2016 11:06 AM
    Vegas is a small low income community, you cannot support an NFL team relying on tourist especially an awful team like the Raiders have been for more than a decade.
    Sure it would be a novelty to be in LV for a couple of years but once the honeymoon is over the Raiders will be looking to move again as always.
    The grass always looks greener until it turns brown.
    ——————————————————————————–
    Low income- try New Orleans
    Small city- you should look at Green Bay and Buffalo
    Awful for a decade- what about Cleveland and a dozen other teams that still exist? Some have been horrible for two decades. Others have never won a SB.
    If you rented a house and the homeowner didn’t fix anything you’d move to. AKA The Coliseum.
    The saying is that the grass is always greener on the othe side of the fence, but just as hard to cut.
    The Raider did move to LA once. It was for 12 years. How many other teams have moved since 1994?

  24. doggeatdogg says:
    May 31, 2016 10:36 AM
    Once the Raiders move, other leagues will follow. It has to be done to dispel the notion that it affects games. Then it has to be undone if being there does.
    ————————–

    The NHL is a few weeks away from a likely announcement beating them to it with an expansion franchise.

  25. bearflagfan says:
    May 31, 2016 11:17 AM
    At one time the only team that might seriously object to the Raiders in Las Vegas would be the Chargers as there are a significant number of Chargers fans in the city – probably more than in LA. However if the Raiders move to Las Vegas they drop out of consideration for Los Angeles, and now the Chargers have a clear path to move to LA if they don’t get the new stadium in San Diego.
    **************************************************
    Buddy, there are no Charger fans in Las Vegas, San Diego, or anywhere else.

  26. I hope it happens. The Oakland fans have proven over and over they will support them, but the liberal cesspool of a city government there has proven they wont build a stadium and take money away from their slush funds

  27. “They don’t have to vote yet. You guys can have all the fun you want playing house with the idea of Vegas, but it aint happening.”
    ________

    With the Rams there were plenty of owners against it initially who virtually all gave thumbs up when it came to a vote. Vegas isn’t even seeing the initial opposition. They’re as good as in Vegas already.

  28. bitw44 says:
    May 31, 2016 10:14 AM

    Not sure why the NFL didnt just start two new expansion franchises.

    One in L.A. and one in Vegas. Then no one loses their team. Then one division has 5 teams in each conference.
    ___________________________________

    Owners need to be sure the NFL pie will grow by at least 1/32 for every team they add. It’s unlikely that a new team will mean ESPN would pay more for Monday Night Football, or NBC would pay for more Sundays, or any network would pay more for the Super Bowl, etc. Therefore the only reason the NFL would have for giving up any of it’s shared money would be for a franchise fee north of $1 Billion. Then there’s the risk of watering down the talent and harming the appearance of the league in general (there already aren’t 32 quality QB’s in the league). Throw that in with the fact that most of the owners aren’t willing to pay for their own stadiums and will need an abundance of potential NFL cities to fight against each other and you can see why they aren’t eager to expand.

  29. The league doesn’t have to evolve on this, they would love for sports gambling to become legal (see the love affair with DK and FanDuel, Premier League, etc.). Till now the PR risk outweighed the naked embrace of punters, but as public sentiment shifts the league’s moral opposition will be shown to be the paper tiger it always was.

  30. May 31, 2016 11:06 AM – 2016StockMarketCrash says:
    Vegas is a small low income community, you cannot support an NFL team relying on tourist …

    True. Other small market teams have a regional reach; Vegas is surrounded by sparsely populated desert for 100+ miles in each direction.

  31. Is there enough trash to support Raiders in Vegas? I guess they can fly in from Oakland and LA and merge with the lowlifes living in Vegas?

  32. sactogary says:
    May 31, 2016 1:12 PM

    May 31, 2016 11:06 AM – 2016StockMarketCrash says:
    Vegas is a small low income community, you cannot support an NFL team relying on tourist …

    True. Other small market teams have a regional reach; Vegas is surrounded by sparsely populated desert for 100+ miles in each direction.

    Really wish some would research before posting gibberish. CLARK COUNTY (Las Vegas Metro Area) includes, City of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, Mesquite, Boulder City, and unincorporated Clark County has a population of over 2 MIL.

  33. Don’t forget, before he died, Al Davis sold 20% stake in the Raiders to a group of hedge fund guys with very big assets. Mark has control, but he has some smart, connected guys in the room with him too.

  34. May 31, 2016 2:03 PM – MDRaider says: Really wish some would research before posting gibberish. CLARK COUNTY (Las Vegas Metro Area) includes, City of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, Mesquite, Boulder City, and unincorporated Clark County has a population of over 2 MIL.

    And outside that 2 million, maybe another 150,000 scattered through the surrounding deserts. Compare that to Green Bay, which draws from all of Wisconsin (population 5.7 million). The main population centers are within a three hour drive. Saints territory covers Louisiana, Mississippi and much of Alabama (pop. at least 9 million).

  35. A few years ago there were a lot of different owners in the league. Ralph Wilson Jr. voted against almost all team relocations if I remember right. His replacement, the Pegula family seem a lot more accommodating to the NFL.

    Ill catch a lot of flack for saying this, but I actually wish the Pegulas and other owners were a little more like Wilson. Wilson was around before the NFL existed and in reality was key in creating it. Over the decades he was very good at sniffing out league BS and voicing his dissent. He was the only guy to vote against the CBA that led to the lockout a few years later. He also knew how devastating it could be to a city to be used as a bargaining chip because Buffalo was exactly that for years. New owners just fall in line with the league as they make repeated bad decisions.

  36. And outside that 2 million, maybe another 150,000 scattered through the surrounding deserts. Compare that to Green Bay, which draws from all of Wisconsin (population 5.7 million). The main population centers are within a three hour drive. Saints territory covers Louisiana, Mississippi and much of Alabama (pop. at least 9 million).

    ——————————————————————-

    Ive always been down on the idea of the term “small market”. There are teams in small towns/cities, sure. But what is the population they draw from. For example, Buffalo is a city of around 1 million people depending on what numbers you use. But where they are, they are also pulling from the Toronto metro, rochester metro and Syracuse metro areas. This gives the Bills a market reach in excess of 8.5 million plus the surrounding rural areas. Certainly no NYC but one heck of a population to pull from. In all, its probably close to the COMBINED populations of Minnesota and Wisconson, home to two teams who are rarely criticized for market size.

  37. Kroenke and the Rams have more to lose if the Raiders move to Vegas. If the Chargers stay in SD, then Kroenke misses out on the rent the Raiders bring. If SD jumps to LA in January 2017, then the Raiders move to SD. Rams lose again.

  38. Market size isn’t everything in a league that has a salary cap, revenue sharing, and huge TV contracts. That said, when Baltimore and Las Vegas both had CFL teams in the mid-90s (the CFL Colts and LV Posse), the CFL Colts drew 30,000 a game for two straight years while the Posse folded after one season. If Vegas really wanted football bad, it could have shown it. Proved Baltimore could support an NFL team. I would worry that Vegas will be another Jacksonville, with lots of tarped-off seats and poor attendance.

  39. bobcrs says:
    May 31, 2016 11:40 AM

    Would there be any home field advantage here The entire city is from elsewhere in the country. Those that attend will all be rooting for the away team.
    ————————-
    Bingo.. It would be worse than L.A.

  40. Chris6523 says:
    Here is another angle: Jerry jones and bob McNair are two of the more powerful owners in the league. Neither is likely to want a team in San Antonio. Paul Allen probably doesn’t want a team in Portland. Now that Los Angeles has a team again, there are fewer and fewer places that could support a team. Unless Saint Louis wants to try to regroup and get a team, all other potential locations are way too close to a city that already has a team or is smaller than Vegas.

    sactogary says:
    And outside that 2 million, maybe another 150,000 scattered through the surrounding deserts. Compare that to Green Bay, which draws from all of Wisconsin (population 5.7 million). The main population centers are within a three hour drive. Saints territory covers Louisiana, Mississippi and much of Alabama (pop. at least 9 million).
    =====================================

    All great points and all true sactogary. But let’s take the case of Pittsburgh. Population (incorporated municipality): 311,000 give or take. SMSA maybe 2.5 million??? Three thriving sports franchises. And while not a low income community itself, the surrounding area never fully recovered from loosing big steel.

    And as for Chris6523:
    There are still geographic possibilities outside of what you’ve cited. Oklahoma City proved to be a landing spot for a successful NBA franchise. It manages to support far more games than an NFL schedule (with admittedly fewer seats to fill). What about carving off a piece of what the Saints or the Falcons claim now? Jackson Miss. anyone?

    I think the expansion route is the way to go. As to dilution of competition? Fewer teams doesn’t necessarily equate to fewer incompetent/stupid owners.

  41. Yea so I heard the Rams brass talking about they dont want anybody as tenant. The Raiders wont get a deal in Vegas. That money should be soent on gambling not the NFL. Plus Vegas has seen some problems with bikers over the years they dont want yhe Raider Image either.
    I think we end up tensnts while we work on a new Stadium with a huge lot fir da Raiders.LA by default believe it.

Leave a Reply

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