Oakland is suing the the NFL over the Raiders’ move

Getty Images

The NFL’s most litigious team is getting a taste of its own medicine. Along with every other NFL team.

The City of Oakland has filed a federal lawsuit against the NFL and all 32 teams, including the Raiders.

“The defendants brazenly violated federal antitrust law and the league’s own policies when they boycotted Oakland as a host city,” Oakland City Attorney Barbara J. Parker said in a press release. “The Raiders’ illegal move lines the pockets of NFL owners and sticks Oakland, its residents, taxpayers, and dedicated fans with the bill. The purpose of this lawsuit is to hold the defendants accountable and help to compensate Oakland for the damages the defendants’ unlawful actions have caused and will cause to the people of Oakland.”

The civil complaint, a 49-page document, advances seven different claims against the NFL and its teams.

Much will be said and written about the lawsuit as it unfolds. For now, the most immediate question is whether the lawsuit means that the Raiders will play elsewhere in 2019. Via Michael Gehlken of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, team president Marc Badain declined comment on the question of whether the litigation means that the inevitable Las Vegas team will be leaving Oakland after 2018.

And for good reason. With one home game left this year — a Christmas Eve visit from the Broncos — making it known that there will never be another Raiders game in Oakland could spark the kind of scene not witnessed since the Browns’ final home game in Cleveland.

70 responses to “Oakland is suing the the NFL over the Raiders’ move

  1. As sports leagues, municipalities, and society in general continue to bend over for billionaires under the baseless, evidence-free guise of “growth” and “jobs”, expect much more of these legal incidents.

    No taxpayer subsidies for private, billion-dollar enterprises. Period.

  2. Good luck with that Oakland. I have no love for the Raiders but the stadium lease is up after this season and Oakland chose not to help fund a new stadium where Las Vegas was. The Raiders are within their right to relocate whether you like it or not. Oakland has no case.

  3. just hope the lawsuit includes that the City of Oakland gets to keep the name “Raiders” the same way the Browns, Supersonics, NorthStars, etc… recently have ….by doing it in the courtroom

  4. Problem with your scenario: Vegas announced that there was an unprecedented demand for future season tix via seat licences from the Oakland / Bay Area codes when they were offered. So, many of the same fans you seem to think we ‘revolt’ are waiting for those upcoming day trips to LV to watch their Raiders (Oakland or Las Vegas) in the newest, badest stadium and in the greatest entertainment city in America.

    PFT, you need to back down. The lawsuit is grandstanding and has very little merit, but might get the city a big out-of-court settlement to help them recover just to keep it out of the 20 years of court costs. By the way, it’s OAKLANDs fault we are here. They kowtow to the A’s and left the Raiders out of all discussions the past 10 years. What a joke! Now, it’s the leagues fault they’re moving. BS.

  5. One of the stronger cases against the NFL. Mark Davis is on record insinuating that he told the mayor of Las Vegas that he wouldn’t negotiate with the city of Oakland in good faith.

    Luckily I’m not an attorney for Oakland. I would have a few questions about Mark Davis’ past. It would be a real uncomfortable and long deposition for him.

  6. Let them move. Do not let them take the name. Las Vegas Traitors or whatever new name they want to come up with is fine with me.

  7. “The City of Oakland has filed a federal lawsuit against the NFL and all 32 teams, including the Raiders.”
    ————————————————————————————————————————

    All those poor people in Green Bay. They will never be able to afford the court fees.

  8. Let me get this straight…Raiders left Alameda Stadium (Stadium was in bad condition – little help from the City) and move to LA. Moved back to Oakland (Same bad stadium and practice facility). Now the team is moving to a New Stadium and City. But Oakland is upset because they HAVEN’T DONE ANYTHING for the team in decades.

    Welp…I’m sure tailgates at the Parking Lots of Mandalay Bay, Aria, MGM will be LIT in the future.

  9. Sunday’s outstanding effort against Pittsburgh aside, the Raiders have pretty much been abysmal and unable to get out of their own way for quite some time. In my estimation, the only legitimate reason for Oakland to sue the NFL would be if the Raiders threated to stay.

  10. Ok what am I missing? I thought the lease was up and Oakland was screwing around with new stadium negotiations? How why would Oakland think they could sue?

  11. Anything that makes the owners uncomfortable with I’m fine with.

    “Problem with your scenario: Vegas announced that there was an unprecedented demand for future season tix via seat licences from the Oakland / Bay Area codes when they were offered.”

    Almost all that demand was from ticket agencies who intend to resell them at 3-4x face value to anyone stupid enough to want to go to a game in Vegas

  12. Move the Raiders to London for the 2019 season so maybe the league can finally get the London experiment out of their system

  13. Christopher Donald says:
    Let them move. Do not let them take the name. Las Vegas Traitors or whatever new name they want to come up with is fine with me.
    ==

    I understand that sentiment, and it raises an interesting question:
    If the team moved to Las Vegas, but could no longer wear silver and black or call itself “Raiders,” how many California fans would still make the weekly trek to Las Vegas or buy PSLs or other tickets?
    It seems to me those colors, name and bad-boy image are a huge part of the Raiders’ appeal, and the thing that most helped make them popular nationally, or even outside of Northern California. They took those with them to LA and back.
    Las Vegas is a tourist town. Would say a green-and-silver Vegas Vipers (or whatever) team really be a huge draw once the novelty wears off? I wonder.

  14. People should not speak before knowing what commitments the team or the city did or did not make. We know the lease has an out, but that does not mean the Raiders did not commit privately to remaining in the area, or that the city did not commit to providing a new facility it did not provide.

  15. Going to be sad to see them go but the city knew they wanted a new stadium when they came back. Double edged sword here. Not the Raiders fault the city sat on it for over a decade then tried to come up with realistic plans AFTER a move was decided. But I don’t believe it’s up to a city to come up with money for investing in a stadium unless it serves EVERYONE in that city. Bunch of billionaire cheapskates getting subsidies they don’t deserve or need.

  16. The city of Oakland had at least 15 years to get a stadium deal with the Raiders. They dragged their feet and lost the team to Vegas, just like they are losing the Warriors. The Raiders own their logo and name, if not how did they take it to LA the last time they moved. Citizens of Oakland, you get what you vote for and for years you have been voting in left wing loon nutjobs. Viva Las Vegas Raiders!

  17. Counter suit in 3…2…
    Politicians just trying to save face. With no ridiculous Democratic state taxes the teams dollars will go further. As a Californian I’m glad they escaped the liberal toilet bowl of America.

  18. primemundo says:
    December 11, 2018 at 4:24 pm
    Oakland stills owes stadium debt form 1995! Buck up Raiders/NFL! Don’t stick it to the tax payers.

    ***********************
    Then why hasn’t the city paid off the debt? It’s been 23 years. I don’t like seeing the debt passed onto the taxpayers but that’s the city’s fault for not paying it’s bills and the voters for electing the leaders they chose. This lawsuit is a cash grab by Oakland and you can tell because it doesn’t even attempt to block the move.

  19. What meet2x4 just said! Owners wanted a new stadium, city chose not to, so they’re moving…..again at that…who failed here? Oakland or the Raiders???

  20. harrisonhits2 says:
    December 11, 2018 at 4:21 pm
    Anything that makes the owners uncomfortable with I’m fine with.

    “Problem with your scenario: Vegas announced that there was an unprecedented demand for future season tix via seat licences from the Oakland / Bay Area codes when they were offered.”

    Almost all that demand was from ticket agencies who intend to resell them at 3-4x face value to anyone stupid enough to want to go to a game in Vegas..

    _______________________________________________________________________________________

    Wrong! Limit is 4 General Tix and 8 higher end. No way these were ‘agency’ and how many of them operate out of Oakland? These are being sold as “Personal Licenses” — I doubt tix resellers would pay those fees, either. The demand is first to current season tix holders in the Bay Area and then #2 the general public with Bay Area area codes and then #3, to LV area codes. There is huge demand from Casino’s as you would expect, but they are getting different seats to sell, on the visitors side.

  21. Of the three teams that moved Raiders made the most sense, the city was unwilling to support the team in anyway. Really between Oakland and St Louis should be trying to lure the charges as it has shown LA is not a two team town

  22. Oakland should definitely sue to keep the Raider name. Make them become the Las Vegas Gamblers or something. LMAO!!!

  23. Why is it that Raider fans in California have no issue following the team to Vegas and buying season tickets , yet people in San Diego have no desire to follow the Chargers , who stayed instate , only 2 hours away ? San Diego and L.A. hate each other that much?

  24. primemundo says:
    December 11, 2018 at 4:24 pm
    Oakland stills owes stadium debt form 1995! Buck up Raiders/NFL! Don’t stick it to the tax payers.

    ***********************
    Then why hasn’t the city paid off the debt? It’s been 23 years. I don’t like seeing the debt passed onto the taxpayers but that’s the city’s fault for not paying it’s bills and the voters for electing the leaders they chose. This lawsuit is a cash grab by Oakland and you can tell because it doesn’t even attempt to block the move.

    I thought that was the Raiders tab not the city’s. No? Maybe not.

  25. How do these “fans” commenting on here think that the city of Oakland owns the “Raiders” name? They were still the “Raiders” when they played in LA. The franchise that left Cleveland and became the Ravens didn’t want to take the “Browns” name with them. The name the “Raiders” belongs to and is licensed to the NFL and the Davis family.

  26. The team should be the “WESTERN RAIDERS” and play their 8 home games at different venue — Honolulu, HI; Eugene, OR; Las Vegas, NV; Albuquerque, NM; Norman, OK; Boise, ID; Salt Lake City, UT; Laramie, WY.

  27. nelly837 says:
    How do these “fans” commenting on here think that the city of Oakland owns the “Raiders” name?
    ==

    Before you disparage other “fans,” perhaps you should do a little research yourself. And work on your reading comprehension while you’re at it.
    No one said the city of Oakland “owns” the Raiders name, but merely that it is not unprecedented to have courts step in and decree that a name and colors must remain in the original city.
    The franchise that left Cleveland did not become the Ravens because they “didn’t want to take the Browns name with them.” It was a result of legal action by fans and the city of Cleveland, resulting in a compromise in which the NFL agreed to leave the name, colors and memorabilia there.
    The NFL has already allowed Oakland to move without leaving those things. But the city of Oakland is also now suing, which could — not WILL, but COULD result in a similar comprise as that which occurred in Cleveland.

  28. There ought to be a rule against how many times a team can move and screw over the taxpayers. The Raiders are Exhibit A in why cities/ communities should NEVER pay for the lavish workplace stadiums of teams. Welfare for multi billionaires.

  29. As a long time resident of Baltimore I hope that Oakland is able to retain the name “Raiders”. I have nothing against the people of Indianapolis but every time I hear someone say “Indianapolis Colts” I still want to barf.

  30. Can’t believe the NFL would allow their “assets” to play on the dirt infield. Embarassing. Should have made them fix that before allowing the Raiders to go back to Oaktown.

  31. Hits the nail on the head, I believe:
    —–
    clemenza58 says:
    December 11, 2018 at 3:59 pm
    Good luck with that Oakland. I have no love for the Raiders but the stadium lease is up after this season and Oakland chose not to help fund a new stadium where Las Vegas was. The Raiders are within their right to relocate whether you like it or not. Oakland has no case.

  32. dynastypolice says:
    December 11, 2018 at 4:16 pm
    Oakland is the sewer of CA, Warriors, Raiders gone and A’s are next ….who’d want to ever be in that godforsaken hole???
    – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    LOL- yep, Piedmont, Montclair, Rockridge, Broadway Terrace, Skyline Blvd all areas of Oakland that are complete sewers that you can’t touch for under a million, or maybe you would be interested in the one that just sold for over 20 million in Oakland. …heck even with the hood areas , the median selling price in Oakland is $720,000 …in the meantime that ever desirable Foxboro area has medain price of $400K , meaning the majority of people there couldn’t even come close to ever possibly living in a sewer.

  33. Of course they’re upset. The Raiders just beat the Pittsburgh Steelers and the people that run The City of Oakland are trying to save their jobs. They ran the Raiders out of town, now they’re playing Donald Trump tricks to try to fool the public. Well, here’s what Trump would say to the Mayor and the City Attorney; YOU’RE FIRED!!!

  34. Oakland is a trash can. How many of those “he grew up in the ghetto of Oakland, overcame diversity to become a football player” stories refer to the Piedmont? Those expensive ‘burbs were built with Lawrence Livermore money, only after they couldn’t afford to live in Sausalito/San Francisco.

  35. Oakland does have the advantage that, unlike both St. Louis and San Diego, they did not give their team contractual permission to relocate.

    That said, everything I heard said they put no serious effort forward whatsoever towards keeping the team there, and makes one glaring error right off the bat in treating the Relocation Guidelines as if they were binding or a contract with Oakland.

    Oakland loses and they know it. They’re just angling for a settlement and trying to convince people who don’t know better that they tried to keep the team there. Not much better than the joke St. Louis lawsuit.

  36. Very stupid to sue. No chance of winning. The Raiders tried for at least 15 years for a new stadium. The city should have put in more effort and resources to keep the Raiders in Oakland. They should play at Sam Boyd Stadium or Reno for 1 season to get used to their new state, Nevada.

    Libby Schaaf is the dumbest mayor of all time.

  37. tonyzendejas says:
    December 11, 2018 at 3:53 pm
    As sports leagues, municipalities, and society in general continue to bend over for billionaires under the baseless, evidence-free guise of “growth” and “jobs”, expect much more of these legal incidents.

    No taxpayer subsidies for private, billion-dollar enterprises. Period.

    ————————————-
    I kind of agree with you. And as such I cant feel that bad for Oakland as I feel like they inflicted their own wounds letting themselves get fleeced like that. And I think the only fix is for municipalities to stop letting themselves get fleeced.

  38. They should play at Sam Boyd Stadium or Reno for 1 season to get used to their new state, Nevada.

    ___________________________________________________________________________

    Not sure what the rules about player health are, but the NFL would have to allow every home game to start at 8pm at Sam Boyd’s dump of a stadium, or during August, September and early October the temperature can be in the 120’s on the field. San Antonio or Portland would be a better one-year choice.

  39. radrntn says:
    December 11, 2018 at 4:00 pm

    just hope the lawsuit includes that the City of Oakland gets to keep the name “Raiders” the same way the Browns, Supersonics, NorthStars, etc… recently have ….by doing it in the courtroom
    —————

    Won’t happen. The team has already been in L.A.

    Meanwhile 95 percent of Raiders fans don’t live in Oakland.

    They could sell out every game in the following cities.

    L.A.
    San Diego
    Phoenix
    SF
    Portland
    Las Vegas
    San Antonio
    Dallas
    Houston

    and I bet quite a few more.

    Raider Nation isn’t a lie.

    No, I’m not a Raiders fan. But it’s quite easy to know the above is true.

    While the city is fiscally correct they shouldn’t be forced to pay for a stadium, I don’t see how they can possibly win a battle in court.

    This also could cost them the revenue (and the fans of Oakland) for 1-3 seasons as the stadium in Las Vegas isn’t even close to being ready.

  40. All these responses and not one mention of the city’s successful suit against the Warriors? Hey pro teams! Pay your bills! Especially you Raiders, you ruined that ball park with your hideous Mt. Davis.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.