Relocation Notes: Vegas, Oakland, UNLV

With a Raiders relocation vote coming Monday, both Oakland and Las Vegas have presented their cases. But the perception is Sin City’s plan outflanks Oakland’s. The owners appear to be coming around to the once-laughable notion of an NFL team anchored in Vegas.

“From a gambling standpoint? That’s a joke to even say that’d be a problem,” said one AFC owner, via Albert Breer of TheMMQB.com. “That was an issue decades ago. Now? Sports gambling is going to be legal. We might as well embrace it and become part of the solution, rather than fight it. It’s in everyone’s best interests for it to be above-board.”

An NFC owner was less bullish, saying “[The concern] is not 100 percent put to bed, but it’s relatively put to bed.” Not many owners’ views here are known publicly, but the feeling’s become the Bay Area is in real danger of being a one-team region again. A third team could relocate in a 14-month stretch not necessarily because the owners are on board with Vegas but due to the lack of a what’s seen as a viable plan in Oakland.

One NFC team president told Breer if this situation were “apples to apples,” the Raiders would not be on the verge of moving. Another also didn’t characterize many as being behind a venture into Nevada, but noted there might not be another choice.

“My general sense is no one is opposed to it, but it’s hard to find a lot of people that are really that in favor. It’s not negative, it’s just that most are like, ‘This is perfectly fine.’ … The bottom line is Oakland has no plan,” said an executive for an NFC team, via Breer, before Oakland mayor Libby Schaaf unveiled the city’s last-ditch attempt to keep the team. 

Here’s more from Breer and others on the league’s latest relocation effort.

• This about-face on Vegas does come after the Raiders secured the record $750MM in public money, but this still strikes Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio as strange given where the league was on this issue a few years ago. Florio notes the league as recently as 2013 didn’t want to hold games in Las Vegas, and spokesman Brian McCarthy took a stronger tone regarding the presence of gambling on the NFL in 2009. “If you make it easier for people to gamble then more people will. This would increase the chances for people to question the integrity of the game,” McCarthy said in 2009 during an NFL crusade to keep sports betting out of Delaware. “Those people who are upset will question whether an erroneous officiating call or dropped pass late in the game resulted from an honest mistake or an intentional act by a corrupt player or official.” Florio notes that owners will have a decision to make on this since Raider players will now be living in the nation’s gambling capital, should 23 non-Mark Davis owners vote for the move.
• The Raiders have previously pledged to play in Oakland in 2017-18 if they receive Vegas approval, but that would create a strange set of circumstances. The franchise will have floundered for most of its second Oakland stay only to rebuild into a contender for two lame-duck years. Breer notes the NFL will likely want an escape hatch if this season goes poorly in Oakland. UNLV’s Sam Boyd Stadium would serve as the backup temporary venue, but the 40,000-seat site needs upgrades, per Breer, to become NFL-compliant.
• Some owners may want to delay this vote, but Breer notes that might not make much of a difference at this juncture. Bank of America swooping in after Sheldon Adelson and Goldman Sachs bolted the project illustrated the endeavor’s viability in the eyes of most owners, Breer reports.
• Conversely, Vegas’ economy relying largely on tourists and transplants is a gamble for the Raiders, the San Francisco Chronicle writes. Noting the Raiders’ not-so-recent struggles on the field and a potential economic downturn as reasons Davis could be making a risky bet, the Chronicle believes it’s “outrageous” the owner hasn’t met with the city of Oakland in more than a year.