I’ve been watching and paying attention from afar for quite a long period of time, because I’m a big NFL fan and a resident of Los Angeles and I care deeply about a team locating to Los Angeles. On top of that, while those beliefs were ongoing, I was approached by different people in the league – not league office necessarily but ownership – about the possibility of my getting involved. Part of this was because my tenure at the Walt Disney Company ends in 2018. At one point it was going to be 2016, and people were starting to plan my career post-Disney for me. And so they wondered, knowing that my interest in sports… I worked for ABC sports and Monday Night Football starting in the 1970s, so I go back a long way with sports and with the NFL in particular.
Anyway, they were curious as to whether I’d be interested in helping a team move to L.A. And I did engage in some conversations with one of the principals that’s considering moving, but they didn’t really go that far. Then I was approached – I guess I can do this, Mark? I can talk about the genesis in a little more detail? – I was approached by Jerry Richardson, and he asked whether I’d be interested in helping very specifically the partnership of the Raiders and the Chargers move to L.A., develop a stadium, reposition themselves here. I engaged in conversations with Jerry, and then with both entities. That’s how it came about. I had already had some other conversations.


Never met him. I might have met him when I attended an ownership meeting, but I never had a dialog with him that I would remember.


Here. Summer.


No. I know Stan. I’ve talked with him casually about his desire to move to L.A., but it had nothing to do with my interest.


I don’t want to speak specifically for Dean Spanos or Mark Davis here, but from what I have been told, they have a solid partnership. They’re both committed to the partnership and to one another. It is their goal to move together. They assessed the proposal that was made and determined that it was not in their interest. That’s as much as I know about it. They are committed to one another and are moving together to Carson.


No. When Jerry approached me, he asked for some degree of confidentiality. I didn’t discuss it until much later with the league.


First of all, I’m the chairman and CEO of the Walt Disney Company, so my primary and my major commitment is to this company at this point. But I thought that I had the capacity both in terms of my time and my energy and my interest to try to help these two teams move to L.A., in part because I’m a big L.A. fan, I’ve raised two sons here, they’re 13 and 17 and they’re huge sports fans, and I’ve not been able to take them to NFL games. We go to a lot of NBA games and we go to baseball games. We’re not big hockey fans. We go to college games. But I’ve never been able to take them to NFL games except maybe when we’re in New York, my father-in-law is a season-ticket holder to the Giants.

Also, because of Disney’s presence here, both in Los Angeles County and Orange County, I think it would be great for the community to have an NFL team. It’s high time that we have that. I really was interested in the civic side of this. But I’ve also thought about my life post-Disney and how I would spend my time and my energy. The opportunity to be involved with either an NFL team, or in this case two NFL teams and a stadium project, and using my experience that I’ve obviously gained from Disney over these years to successfully move two teams here, I thought that would be a great next step for me.

I wouldn’t say it’s about ownership, per se. I’m thinking about the community near term, having a real impact on moving these teams, and then longer term I’m thinking about how I’m going to spend my time. I don’t intend to run a company again.


I’ve been engaged with some owners and with Roger. Obviously with Mark and with Dean in the last few weeks, to see if I can have some influence over the outcome. Most of it is talking not really about me as much as the virtues of the project, of Carson, of two teams moving, of the specific stadium they have in mind. So I’ve been selling hard.


I want to be a little careful so I don’t sound too conceited. But when you run the Walt Disney Company, you gain a fair amount of experience in customer-facing businesses, particularly in site-based entertainment. I have a lot of experience in marketing, a lot of experience in selling, particularly tickets to site-based entertainment or movies or whatever. I have tremendous brand experience. What I do a lot for Disney is manage the great brands of this company, whether it’s Disney, ESPN, ABC, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars. And I’m very engaged in technology and its impact on the consumer, either what experience you deliver for them or how market and sell to them. With all that in mind, I bring to the table a tremendous amount of knowledge and direct experience that can easily be applied to this venture. And there’s ample room, even after a stadium project has been conceived, to really start planning and thinking about designing customer experience, how the stadium will be programmed, what the fan will experience from the moment they walk onto the property.

Obviously at Disney it’s everything from crowd management and parking to other forms of entertainment that’s delivered while people are experiencing the primary entertainment. The brand experience is obviously really applicable here. So my sense of what my role will be is to bring all of that to the table, and to create a direction and a mandate of sorts in a lot of these different areas, but hire a president/CEO to actually execute. So I’m more than an advisor. But I’m as they say a non-executive chair. I don’t have an office, and I don’t have a salary – maybe a dollar a year – but I can direct people in terms of brand positioning, programming the stadium. One thing we’ve talked about, when you think about Disney, our biggest attractions we call E-tickets, and what I’ve talked about here just in terms of the stadium is football needs to be the E-ticket. It needs to be about football, not about how the stadium is going to be programmed when football is not being played. Not about anything else but the football experience and what comes with that. So that’s one for instance. Let’s make football the real focal point. I know that sounds like common sense. But when you develop a stadium of this sort, there’s a lot of attention paid to other uses and how it will be programmed when football is not being played. That’s all great and maybe important, but we need to create a great football experience. I won’t be executing that, but there will be people who will be doing that using my direction.

One thing I’ve talked about for instance, when you talk about Disney our biggest attractions we call E-tickets to give you an example and what I’ve talked about here just in terms of the stadium and the experience itself, football needs to be the E-ticket. This needs to be about football. Not about how the stadium is going to be programmed when football is not being played. Not about anything else other than the football experience and what comes with that obviously. So that’s just sort of one for instance. Let’s make football the real focal point and that sounds like I know that sounds like common sense or an obvious one but when you develop a stadium of this sort there’s a lot of attention paid to other uses and how it will be programmed when football isn’t being played, that’s all great and maybe important but we need to create a great football experience. So that’s just one example. I won’t execute that but there will be people that will be doing that with really using my direction.


You’re asking whether I have good salesman skills? I don’t know. I think managing people is maybe a big part of what I do and I think I can play an important part when you have two partners in giving them both advice and making sure the partnership is operating smoothly and efficiently without tension or rancor. So I really think I bring some value there. But I think they also look to me as someone who has all this experience and in some cases maybe even views more than they do and I think I bring value to the table so they’re more than willing to allow me to engage in this project at a level I think an owner would typically do on their own. I think what’s happened here in terms of my experiences or the initiatives I’ve been responsible for I’m not sure that this is relevant.


Well I think there’s a tremendous amount of support for Carson. You all need 24 votes are needed and I think everyone has concluded that no entity necessarily has that so there’s still some undecideds. What I’m trying to do is articulate not just the vision for the project itself but the values of Carson and the specific value of two teams moving at once as well as they value of project itself and the location. And because I’ve lived in Los Angeles this time around for 15 years. I lived here for almost five years before. So just about 20 years of my adult life and we’re one of the largest employers here, I can speak to other owners who don’t know LA well with great credibility. Not just really with my Disney hat on but as someone who runs a business here and knows the market extremely well, So I love the idea of two teams. I think if the NFL is going to replant their flag on LA soil two is better than one. It gives fans who maybe have not been as engaged with the NFL and having a home team interest a choice. And it also gives LA fans a football game virtually every week during the season. Which I think is a big deal. If you’re going to reignite interest in the sport here or create even more interest I really believe in that. So I talk about that.

I love the Carson location for a variety of reasons. The central location. We shouldn’t as denizens of Los Angeles County ignore Orange County. As a company that has a big business in Orange County for instance Orange County is a big important market and a football market too particular for the Chargers so I think Carson is really well located between to really attract people both from LA County and Orange County and even possibly north San Diego County particularly on a Sunday when traffic is less of an issue.

The access it will provide both ingress and egress from the freeways is fantastic. Pretty much easy on, easy off. I’ve talked a lot of about the customer experience and user interface. We live in a world where customers do not want to tolerate any friction in the product that they’re buying or accessing whether you buy it on line or you go to an event. They don’t want long lines. They don’t want to wait to get into or leave parking structures. They don’t want, they can tolerate some traffic but they want it to be as easy as possible. The Carson project which is something I immediately studied and came to the appreciate which is one of the reasons I’m involved is I truly believe in what they’re doing and I think that it’s a really good strong plan.


My understanding that the clean up work that has been done is excellent and maybe more is coming I’m not one hundred percent sure but no any entity that would be looking to develop something of this scale and this expense on a site would do a tremendous amount of due diligence before committing to something like this and this partnership has done that. So I believe what they found is sound, meaning it’s a fine place to build.


Well I think you have to create a great football experience and that experience starts when you step foot on the property. So to give you an idea, and I’m a big believer in Southern California weather too, is the experience you can create outdoors, either outdoors with an outdoor stadium or outdoors with a parking lot can be great. So let’s bring football to the parking lot. So for instance put big screens on the outside of a stadium almost as large movie screens. Imagine pumping in the Red Zone into people who are tailgaiting for instance. They like being outside. You’re not dealing with heavy duty winter weather. So their football experience can start right away. It’s not just a tailgate experience. It’s a football experience. The concept even has football field outside where fans can actually throw footballs on the field or tailgate on the field and kind of feel like they’re already part of the game.

We’ve talked about possibly moving the NFL Network or putting a studio to the property. I think there’s real value to that as well.

So I start with the notion that this is about fans and football, fans of football I should say. I also think as we run our businesses here it needs to be a perfect experience, meaning the staff that’s working has to be very fan friendly and well trained as to respect the property they’re helping us manage for instance. That it’s all about the fan first. It’s not about any sirly behavior at all. It’s about top notch consumer service. That’s really important. That extends to everything from vending sales to food and merchandise to moving people to seats and greeting people to parking attendants etc. So I’m thinking a lot about quality of service that some stadiums offer but not all. It’s really important.

I also think technology can be used in really modern ways. The great thing about building a stadium today is you build a stadium in this century using digital technology and the most advanced technology to provide a fan experience you would not have been able to have done earlier or if you tried to bolt it onto an older stadium it would tougher and more expensive and that’s everything from how tickets are bought. We’re building a theme park in Shanghai right now. The first theme park, we opened Hong Kong in 2005, this is the first one we’re really designing and building this century so what you can do with technology just in terms of tickets, having a paperless experience, making it easy to buy them, making it easier to use a mobile device basically for your access, for instance to buy your food, to order things at your seat etc. So there’s a whole use of technology that will be evident here to simply to make the fan experience better and then of course is enabling people to engage in more with what’s going on on the field, using that technology to deliver scores and highlights and other information to each fan.

So I’m thinking a lot about this in terms of the fan experience, the customer experience is that we provide and doing it in a way that gets people off their couch and has them wanting to go to the stadium.
There’s another side which is the whole social experience of being with others as opposed to being alone when you’re experiencing this. I think there’s still a human instinct to do things as group. People still like going to big movie theaters partially to see, they can watch these movies at home on pretty nice television sets these days. But the big experience is better than the smaller experience and doing with a group particularly when there’s competition, there’s a rooting interest or you’re rooting against interest, that can be part of it too, I think there’s value but it still has to be frictionless.
It has to be really easy


I’ve talked to Mark Davis about it a lot and to Marc Badain in his organization and I’m pleased that they recognize that there’s still some repositioning that needs to be done and that’s really important.
One of the things I really like about the two teams moving at once and the Carson project it gives us the ability to reposition the Oakland brand in a more user friendly way perhaps or more accessible way. I’ve heard pitch the idea of changing the name, changing the logo, I don’t think that’s necessary. I think there’s a lot of brand equity in that name, that logo but I think there’s a need to reposition somewhat and that’s where I think I bring something to the table. I’ve managed brands, particularly in the ten years I’ve been in this job and in some cases some that took some repositioning. I think that can be done.


I think to make them more inclusive. I don’t think you need to alienate what some may consider the core Raiders fan – and there’s some stereotyping out there too by the way. Not every Raiders fan drives a motorcycle and has tattoos.


I think it’s incumbent upon us to make sure it doesn’t scare people away, in how you portray yourself, how you present yourself to the public is one way to do that. And I think with a large new stadium where you have the ability to attract a real diverse fan base, diverse geographically, diverse ethnically and diverse from an age perspective. I think you have a shot at doing that. I’ve looked a little bit at what the fan perception was of the Raiders and how it was when they played here last and what it is up in Oakland. I think there’s some work to be done and some challenges associated with it to but I have a strong sense it can be done and I’m up to the challenge.


I think it’s important the decision be made quickly time me is of the essence. The teams will not be able to re-position themselves in temporary space for next season unless this decision is made soon. And Ive expressed that to league owners and the to the league. Not that they didn’t know it, but I wanted to re-iterate it. I think it’s very important, because if it’s decided these teams are to move, playing here sooner rather than later is vital. And there is not much leeway. If the decision isn’t made soon, neither team will be able to relocate (for ’16) There is a lot that goes into that just by marketing tickets to the fan base and everything that goes into re-positioning a team. Moving a staff, getting people to relocate there’s lives, actually, here. So it has to be done soon.


I am gaining more and more confidence that the league, and the collective league, believes it is time to move a team or teams to L.A. I feel that they now hear the footsteps, to use a football analogy, and that the league believes it’s good for them to do it now. They’ve debated it and considered it for s long time and now it time. By the way, I’m adamant about that. It’s time. Partially because all three teams have spent an incredible amount of time and money in considering this repositioning, so the fairest thing to do is make a decision for the benefit of those teams. Also, home fans have faced a lot of uncertainty too, and in a way it’s fair to them to make a decision. That’s important. So I’m confident the league is going to reach a decision to move an NFL team or team,s to L.A. Whether they get that done on timely enough basis, I don’t know yet. There is some momentum, driven by some owners, which is great. And I believe after meeting with the commissioner last week and talking to him again (yesterday) I think he agrees. My confidence has been raised because of that.


I think there are challenges to moving two teams at once. But I actually think it’s better, some for reasons I cited earlier. First of all, if they decide to move two teams and the team that came second would have a much harder time re-positioning than the first team. So if you’re going to do it, do it all at once. Even though that creates its own set of challenges. Also, I’m a big believer in theatricality, so if you’re going to bring the NFL back to a market this big, this important, then do it big. And two is much bigger than one and I really think it would create such a level of excitement and interest in the NFL in Los Angeles that it would do a world of good not just to the league but the teams.


The great thing about the NFL is you have 32 teams, 16 games a season, sop every game has real meaning. Which is one of the things that’s great about the NFL. It’s not just a commodity. And I think there’s plenty of room, in a market this size, particularly when you realize this market is not just Los Angeles. There’s a broader population base to draw from that’s interested in football. This market can sustain two teams.


There’s a lot of support for the Raiders and Chargers to move together. A lot of support. And I feel really, really..I’m confident their proposal is a solid one in how they position themselves, the stadium, etc..etc. I’m not overly confident, yet. I think it’s premature to be that way. But I’m feeling better about their prospects every day and I’m really heartened by the fact the league seems to be addressing this in on a timely basis./

No surprise, the NFL is lukewarm on St. Louis stadium deal

National Football League Executive Vice President Eric Grubman went on St. Louis radio today to talk about the Rams potential relocation to Los Angeles and, more specifically. his perspective of the St. Louis stadium offer to keep them in Missouri.

To the surprise of no one who has been paying attention, Grubman made it clear the plan has issues.

By no means is this new news. I’ve been writing for more than a month now the NFL has serious misgivings about St. Louis dipping into revenue streams the league considers team property to pay for part of its end of construction cost.

And as Grubman pointed out, while the cost of the stadium has gone up recently the deal has actually worsened from a league perspective.

By NFL math – and this jives with NFL sources I’ve talked to – when Personal Seat Licence fees are included the St. Louis plan is essentially a $310 million public and $690 million private/team split on the. Depending on who you talk to, the team portion might actually be $700 million.

And that is nowhere near the near 50/50 split the Vikings agreed to with Minnesota and Minneapolis leaders for their new stadium.

The Vikings new stadium is considered a litmus test as that is the most recent public/private NFL stadium deal.

Grubman made it clear this doesn’t mean the Rams are a shoe-in to relocate to Los Angeles. That decision is currently in the hands of NFL owners, who could vote in January between the Rams Inglewood stadium plan and the Oakland Raiders and San Diego Chargers Carson plan. The winning bid requires 24 votes.

But he also made it clear the Rams losing out on Los Angeles doesn’t necessarily mean they will sign on to the St. Louis stadium plan.

While NFL owners can block Rams owner Stan Kroenke from moving to L.A. they can’t force him to sign off on a stadium deal he isn’t satisfied.

Again, that is consistent with NFL sources who have told me if Kroenke is denied L.A., he might just return to the Edward Jones Dome on one-year leases and contemplate a different move.

Among the cities sources have told me the Rams might consider in that scenario are Toronto, London and perhaps San Diego and the Bay Area, depending what happens with the Chargers and Raiders.

Again, this doesn’t mean it’s a shoe-in the Rams get the nod to Los Angeles.

But it’s pretty clear St. Louis faces an uphill climb convincing them to sign on to their current plan.

Raiders: Putting “news” up in Oakland in perspective

A little bit of old news got turned into new news today when it was reported the National Football League is in talks with the city of Oakland about coming on as a developer on the land on which the Raiders hope – or hoped – to use a portion of to build a new stadium.

According to NFL Executive Vice President Eric Grubman, while the NFL remains in contact with Bay Area leaders and is always available to assist, nothing new, significant or viable is currently being discussed.

Which makes today’s report a new twist on what has been the case for while: Yes, the NFL would prefer the Raiders and/or league have development rights to that land rather than a third-party developer, which Bay Area leaders have advocated in recent attempts to secure a stadium plan for the Raiders.

But no, there is no new movement to make that happen.

Why is the development rights to the land so important to the NFL?

The NFL has always been negative about the addition of third party real estate developers because developers try to leverage their control into a piece of a team, or an overreach into football revenues, or they want to borrow against it.

The way the NFL sees things, if the rights to that land is actually worth something, then the team is in the best position to use it to bring about a stadium project.

Relative to today’s news that the NFL is in talks to come on as the developer – which is inaccurate – the NFL is available and ready to help that cause if the Raiders ask.

Of course, for that to happen Bay Area leaders have to first express an interest in selling the land to the Raiders and/or NFL.

That hasn’t happened yet.

And keep in mind, this approach applies to Los Angeles and London and any other market where there is excess land beyond stadium envelope.

Or where construction of a new stadium could unlock that value.

NFL owners deliver a mandate: Declare an L.A. winner in time for 2016

DALLAS – Like some many others who have nervously and frustratingly and sometimes angrily rode the NFL back to Los Angeles roller coaster the last 11 months, the wife of a high-ranking league executive put her foot down recently.

With talk of the league delaying the vote to decide the St. Louis Rams and Oakland Raiders and San Diego Chargers Los Angeles relocation bids – perhaps even punting on 2016 all together and re-doing the madness again next year – she finally said enough is enough.

Out of protest, she went out and bought an expensive new coat.

“Something needs to happen soon,” her husband grumbled. “Or I might go broke.”

Multiply that angst by 21 million or so and you have the collective anxiety of greater Los Angeles, which has lived through the ups and downs and twists and turns and anger and disappointment of the NFL’s quest to return to Los Angeles for 20 years.

Over which, teenagers have grown into middle-aged adults, newborns into college seniors, and teenage girls who swooned over the Backstreet Boys into moms accompanying their daughters to Justin Bieber concerts.

It’s been two long decades of frustration for Los Angeles.

But the end game is finally, thankfully within eyesight.

“We have a time line,” announced New York Giants co-owner Steve Tisch upon emerging from a long-day of owners meetings Wednesday in Dallas, the thrust of which was untying the knot locking the Rams and the Raiders and Chargers together.

A time line, yes. But more importantly a mandate.

The owners will gather again in Houston in January to once again discuss Los Angeles. But it is clear they will be tasked with doing so much more than just talk.

The six-member Los Angeles owners committee is urging the full 32-ownership group to end this matter once and for all.

Hopefully in Houston.

“I don’t think there is an answer today, but I think the only answer is it’s not going to get delayed,” said San Francisco 49ers owner Jed York. “We are going to be in a meeting for 48 hours to figure (this) out.”

By hook or by crook, this matter will be resolved soon and Los Angeles will have a new team.

And probably two.

“The momentum is, we will have a decision on one, two teams in L.A.” York said.

It could arrive in one of a handful of manners.

Either the 32 owners get locked in a room in Houston with orders to come up with the necessary 24 votes to approve either Carson or Inglewood.

Or maybe Rams, Raiders and Chargers owners Stan Kroenke, Mark Davis and Dean Spanos get locked in a room until they can agree on a solution they can all live with.

Kroenke took the first step toward compromise by telling owners he is willing to bring either the Chargers or Raiders on as equity partners in Inglewood. But while his 50/50 partnership proposal was met with some enthusiasm from fellow owners, Davis and Spanos remain steadfast in their alliance.

Of course, that could all change if their 29 colleagues indicate the direction they are leaning is not to their liking. If so, the door to compromise could burst open.

“There could be some negotiations, that’s happened before,” said Giants co-owner John Mara.

The point being, one way or another the NFL wants to decide soon who will be playing football in Los Angeles in 2016.

“That is the expectation,” Tisch said.

And that was driven home over two days of meetings in the Lone Star state in which the merits of the Rams Inglewood stadium proposal were weighed against the Raiders and Chargers joint stadium effort in Carson.

Yes, there is also consideration to the home markets. Although only St. Louis is on target to deliver an actionable stadium plan to potentially block the Rams from Los Angeles.

But even if St. Louis delivers a plan, there is still no guarantee the Rams Los Angeles bid will be denied or that the Rams will even remain in St. Louis.

In fact, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell essentially said the Rams Los Angeles interests are separate from their St. Louis interests. Even if the Rams are blocked from L.A., there is no guarantee they’ll agree to the St. Louis stadium plan.

“At that point, (Kroenke) has to make a determination,” Goodell said. “If they don’t get the 24 votes to move, the ownership doesn’t have the right to move. Then it’s up to the owner about what to do make the decision in the local market. Nobody can force him to sign a stadium deal.”

The reality is, in many ways this is all about Los Angeles. And it’s clear Kroenke, Davis and Spanos are focused solely on the City of Angels.

That remained abundantly clear over two days of meetings in Dallas.

According to sources either in the meetings or with direct knowledge of what went on, the emotions ranged from intense to frustrated to angry as allies of both projects expressed their support for their preferred outcome.
“Passionate, balances, focused,” is how one person described it. “Both sides got aired.”

But while the benefits of Inglewood and Carson were discussed, so to was the need for compromise among the three owners to negotiate an outcome in which all three can emerge satisfied.

And in the process, help their colleagues avoid a prolonged stalemate or the possibility of a contested vote in which one or two of Kroenke, Davis and Spanos are delivered devastatingly bad news for the long-range objectives of their franchises.

The winning bid requires 24 votes from the 32 owners, and while both sides are confident they have the nine necessary votes to block, neither is confident they have the 24 to win outright.

Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay confirmed as much afterward when he said neither side has the necessary support to win. That means the owners sitting in the middle might hold the key, And according to sources, some of them are pushing for a negotiated outcome.

“Most of the independents want compromise,” a source said.

Maybe it will come to that. Or maybe owners will be swayed enough by the St. Louis stadium proposal they deny the Rams Los Angeles. Or maybe they will lock themselves in a room in Houston and not come out until they have a decision.

One way or another, it looks like Los Angeles will finally have an NFL team soon.

With NFL eying a January resolution on L.A., pressure mounting on St. Louis

As the St. Louis Rams plot their course to Los Angeles – and express a willingness to the NFL to bring on an equity partner among the Oakland Raiders and Chargers – efforts continue in Missouri to approve a stadium plan intended to keep the Rams in St. Louis.

While league sources expressed concerns with the term sheet St. Louis presented the NFL last month, there have been some improvements made recently that make the deal more attractive. According to sources, St. Louis is now offering the entire $158 million naming rights fee to the team – as opposed to financing $75 million to help pay part of the it’s $390 million portion of the $1 billion stadium.

However, it’s unclear at this point how the city proposes to fund the remaining amount.

And while that could be a positive development, the league is equally interested in St. Louis making the deal official.

Until that happens, the NFL literally has nothing to really consider as it relates to St. Louis.

“Until its certain, there’s no deal. So you really can’t consider it until its certain,” said Houston Texans owner Bob McNair, a member of the NFL’s six-member Los Angeles owners committee. “So it’s in their best interest to firm it up.”

The problem is, there is a timing issue to deal with. The stadium plan is being held up in the St. Louis Board of Aldermen’s Ways & Means committee, which has yet to schedule a vote on the city’s end of the financing package. If a vote doesn’t happen by Friday, the bill won’t be discussed and voted on by the entire board until January 8th as the Aldermen the board goes on winter break.

With the NFL eying another Los Angeles owners meeting in mid January and a possible vote soon after, McNair stressed St. Louis could hurt themselves by putting its vote off until January.

“Yeah, that’s not going to help them,” McNair said.

And McNair was adamant he wants Los Angeles relocation dealt with sooner rather than later. The league is mulling the Rams Inglewood stadium proposal and the Oakland Raiders and San Diego Chargers Carson project.

“That’s what we’re moving towards,” McNair said. “We need to bring it to an end.We want to get something done in January. We need to move ahead. The clubs need to know what’s happening. They need to be able to make their plans.”