NFL Owners Approve 31-1; Raiders to Vegas

[Mike FF Today 607]

Miami was the only team to cast a "no" vote.

[cmh6476 748]

Bwahahahaha

[lesjroza 70]

Young men in the position of NFL players are prone to be distracted in most major cities but this should be a new paradigm.

 

I think it will be very interesting to watch how early 20 yr olds with great disposable income and lots of time on their hands living and working in a "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" atmosphere fare in decision making. I wouldn't be surprised if it results in a Black Sox type scandal for the NFL in the 1st decade of existence there. The Raiders might have to become the most careful team about character of rostered players. Nevada just passed legalization of MJ for recreational purposes to add fuel to the fire...lol

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

The owners of prostitution "businesses" are doing cartwheels. The just gained over 500 wealthy new opportunities.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Young men in the position of NFL players are prone to be distracted in most major cities but this should be a new paradigm.

 

I think it will be very interesting to watch how early 20 yr olds with great disposable income and lots of time on their hands living and working in a "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" atmosphere fare in decision making. I wouldn't be surprised if it results in a Black Sox type scandal for the NFL in the 1st decade of existence there. The Raiders might have to become the most careful team about character of rostered players. Nevada just passed legalization of MJ for recreational purposes to add fuel to the fire...lol

Yeah I wouldn't want to have to deal with that. Although I don't believe MJ being legal or illegal has any impact on how and when it's used by NFL players.

[lesjroza 70]

Also going to be hard for the Raiders to have a strong home field, easy pickings for "fans of teams that travel well" given the small market which is set up for mass travel. I could see full on convention packages for Steelers fans, etc.

 

They may not even want to build any type of acoustical effect into the new stadium or at least make the ability to change one easily a consideration in architecture.

[worm 34]

Can you imagine LV hosting a Super Bowl?

[lesjroza 70]

Can you imagine LV hosting a Super Bowl?

 

 

I know what you mean because there will be added elements but they have kind of been doing it already for years

[Marshall 98]

BOOOOO!!

[Mike FF Today 607]

Can you imagine LV hosting a Super Bowl?

 

Ohh, that will happen ASAP. I think 2022 is the earliest Super Bowl without a destination. It may be stretch to get the SB there in 2022, but it will happen as the owners feel comfortable with the stadium situation.

[Marshall 98]

Devious little bugger.

 

'Mark Davis registered LasVegasRaiders.com on December 25, 1998.'

 

https://twitter.com/FootballExpert/status/846402096324788225

[weepaws 2,450]

So now those of us that live in Nevada need to pay taxes for the rich folk to build themselves a new stadium.

 

Yeah that's nice.

 

I was praying they would move to Iowa.

[giraldi02 470]

So now those of us that live in Nevada need to pay taxes for the rich folk to build themselves a new stadium.

 

Yeah that's nice.

 

I was praying they would move to Iowa.

Isn't the tax revenue for the stadium solely based on the hotel tax increase?

[Marshall 98]

Damn, this hurts.

 

Initial, energizing anger is becoming smothered by feelings of loss and emptiness, mourning the death of cherished tradition and shared experiences. It's hard to describe, but as one fan commented: '22 years, mostly heart ache, but we always won in the parking lot. Football was family. Now it's money. Go Oakland A's.'

 

Ray Ratto has some (surprisingly poignant, for him) thoughts on today:

http://www.csnbayarea.com/raiders/raiders-fans-got-remarkably-little-bang-their-bucks-or-their-hearts

[weepaws 2,450]

I don't know if it's based solely on hotel tax increase.

 

But even if that's the case, let's see these rich people spend their own cash to build a stadium that is a benefit to them.

 

It truly doesn't do anything for the folks that live here.

[Marshall 98]

I don't know if it's based solely on hotel tax increase.

 

But even if that's the case, let's see these rich people spend their own cash to build a stadium that is a benefit to them.

 

It truly doesn't do anything for the folks that live here.

 

From my understanding, the local taxpayers are going to be on the hook for the additional 500+ million required infrastructure 'improvements' (roads, etc.) apart from the stadium itself. The hotel tax will not be covering that.

[lesjroza 70]

I don't know if it's based solely on hotel tax increase.

 

But even if that's the case, let's see these rich people spend their own cash to build a stadium that is a benefit to them.

 

It truly doesn't do anything for the folks that live here.

 

Might add some Sunday, and occasional Monday-Thursday night traffic for you in certain areas

[Marshall 98]

Well, that escalated quickly.

 

"...I hope that following today's vote, I can count on the support of the NFL and the NFL team owners for my efforts to legalize and regulate sports betting." ~ Rep. Frank Pallone

 

https://twitter.com/TylerRickyTynes/status/846492841492828160

[polecatt 399]

I don't care much one way or the other. I kind of think the Raiders should be in Oakland but hey, times change.

I think for the most part it will just be another team in another city. I believe the talk of players getting in much more trouble and all that is over blown.

You can't tell me that Las Vegas is any more risky for players that tend to find shady situations than Baltimore, Charlotte, Atlanta, Chicago, or any NFL city in the USA for that matter other than maybe Green Bay.

They are moving from Oakland, not exactly a trouble free city.

Trouble doesn't find players, players find trouble 99% of the time.

It's there in all the NFL cities and it's also avoidable in all NFL cities.

[weepaws 2,450]

i agree that any one can find trouble in any city.

 

But I do think that Vegas is a place where trouble can find you just as much as you can find it.

 

It's going to be an interesting situation.

[R8RMick 242]

Also going to be hard for the Raiders to have a strong home field, easy pickings for "fans of teams that travel well" given the small market which is set up for mass travel. I could see full on convention packages for Steelers fans, etc.

 

They may not even want to build any type of acoustical effect into the new stadium or at least make the ability to change one easily a consideration in architecture.

Not really. This places the team closer to LA and SoCal, where many season ticket holders already reside. Interstate 15 is a straight shot up from the Inland Empire, a literal hotbed of Raider fandom. I AM concerned about the hotels grabbing up seats, but if the local Vegas crowd can step up in any way I think it will improve our homefield advantage on game day.

 

I was in Houston for the playoff game. That crib is sweet, basically a huge fieldhouse with the levels literally stacked upon each other. With the roof closed it was one loud mother. Oakland Alameda, with all its craziness, was NEVER half as loud. I contemplated what a Raider crowd would sound like with such a stadium. We're going to find out.

[polecatt 399]

i agree that any one can find trouble in any city.

 

But I do think that Vegas is a place where trouble can find you just as much as you can find it.

 

It's going to be an interesting situation.

I think that's definitely true for regular people.

NFL players though are going to stand out more in many cities than they will in Vegas. Vegas has lots of very rich people, much richer than NFL players coming from all over the world.

The scam artists aren't nearly as star struck in Vegas, but they are more experienced.

I think the main thing I would worry about in Vegas would be stuff like gambling in the casinos.

I don't know if the NFL allows gambling in casinos, kind of doubt it.

I could see players blowing a lot of money and getting in some kind of trouble like that. Financial or otherwise.

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

 

Ohh, that will happen ASAP. I think 2022 is the earliest Super Bowl without a destination. It may be stretch to get the SB there in 2022, but it will happen as the owners feel comfortable with the stadium situation.

 

Not necessarily. Legislation will have to happen first. If I remember correctly, games held in Vegas, and surrounding areas are not allowed to be bet on in Vegas. They won't announce a Super Bowl out there until that exception is legally cleared up.

[Kopy 489]

Enough about sin city.

Tell me more about this Tight End situation. Is Clive Walford still a hold with potential? Or does the Cook signing show a lack of faith in the kid.

Still upside, or nothing to see here?

[giraldi02 470]

 

Not necessarily. Legislation will have to happen first. If I remember correctly, games held in Vegas, and surrounding areas are not allowed to be bet on in Vegas. They won't announce a Super Bowl out there until that exception is legally cleared up.

This hasn't been the case for a while. Believe it was 2001 that you could start betting on UNLV games. This deal wouldn't have been approved IMHO if they didn't allow betting on those games.

[lesjroza 70]

This offer was back in June, some of the Raider playahs got be excited about the move.

 

"Sapphire proposes that if the Raiders do indeed relocate to Las Vegas, all team members will receive free lap dances and limo transportation at the best-voted, world’s largest, and most iconic gentlemen’s club in Las Vegas."

 

http://www.tmz.com/2016/06/05/oakland-raiders-vegas-sapphire-strip-club/

 

The offer is free lap dances for life..........and the club is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 dys a year

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

This hasn't been the case for a while. Believe it was 2001 that you could start betting on UNLV games. This deal wouldn't have been approved IMHO if they didn't allow betting on those games.

 

Yes, they made a special amendment for UNLV, but that's all there is. That exception doesn't apply globally. I heard Sal Paolantonio talking about that this morning on ESPN Radio.

[giraldi02 470]

 

Yes, they made a special amendment for UNLV, but that's all there is. That exception doesn't apply globally. I heard Sal Paolantonio talking about that this morning on ESPN Radio.

If the Raiders made the Super Bowl, that means Vegas wouldn't be allowed to host any bets on the event. I guarantee you, it won't happen.

[weepaws 2,450]

I don't see upside to Walford.

 

Cook was sign to push him I'm sure, but he's going to also still some playing time.

 

I'm not very impressed with Walford at this time.

[polecatt 399]

Agree about Walford.

He's nothing special at this point until he shows that he is.

Platoon TE at best right now.

[R8RMick 242]

Agree about Walford.

He's nothing special at this point until he shows that he is.

Platoon TE at best right now.

His ATV accident really set him back last year. McKenzie thinks he'll take that next step in 2017. If the team we're giving up on him they would've drafted a TE (the position is deep this year) instead of bringing in a vet.

[weepaws 2,450]

They haven't drafted yet.

 

So they still might.

 

I think Cook was sign to push him, but I also think he will with out any question take away some of Wlford work load.

[R8RMick 242]

They haven't drafted yet.

 

So they still might.

 

I think Cook was sign to push him, but I also think he will with out any question take away some of Wlford work load.

I'll bet you a case of beer they don't draft a TE before Round 7, you call it. I don't always drink beer, but when I do it's Dos Equis Lager.

[weepaws 2,450]

Nope I don't drink any alcohol.

 

I don't think they will either since they sign Cook.

 

I think Cook will give Walford a very good run for the starting postion.

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

If the Raiders made the Super Bowl, that means Vegas wouldn't be allowed to host any bets on the event. I guarantee you, it won't happen.

 

Whether the Raiders made it or not is irrelevant. It's a matter of where the game is being played, not who is playing. So, if the Super Bowl is in Vegas and it's the Bears vs Jaguars, you still can't bet on the game... as the laws/rules currently stand. An amendment has to happen first. Note, I'm not saying that the rules/laws won't be changed by then, but currently, that's where we are.

[weepaws 2,450]

I can't see the Raiders moving to Vegas, and Vegas losing out on football bets.

 

It will be corrected I'm sure.

[giraldi02 470]

 

Whether the Raiders made it or not is irrelevant. It's a matter of where the game is being played, not who is playing. So, if the Super Bowl is in Vegas and it's the Bears vs Jaguars, you still can't bet on the game... as the laws/rules currently stand. An amendment has to happen first. Note, I'm not saying that the rules/laws won't be changed by then, but currently, that's where we are.

It only would pertain to the Nevada team itself dude.

 

Las Vegas has boxing and MMA all the time. You can bet on those all the time.

 

I went to Vegas for the Pac-12 tournament. I bet on many of the games. UNLV isn't a team there. The venue is irrelevant.

 

The removal of a team or an event from the books is solely predicated on where the teams themselves call home. That would be only pertain to games where a Nevada team was playing. Your hypothetical of Bears vs. Jaguars is incorrect.

 

 

 

[weepaws 2,450]

Wait one second here, Bears VS Jags in a Super Bowl?

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

It only would pertain to the Nevada team itself dude.

 

Las Vegas has boxing and MMA all the time. You can bet on those all the time.

 

I went to Vegas for the Pac-12 tournament. I bet on many of the games. UNLV isn't a team there. The venue is irrelevant.

 

The removal of a team or an event from the books is solely predicated on where the teams themselves call home. That would be only pertain to games where a Nevada team was playing. Your hypothetical of Bears vs. Jaguars is incorrect.

 

 

 

 

Well, since you apparently have the facts, you should write Sal Paolantonio an email and let him know he's wrong. As I said in my first post, he's the one who said it, I'm just stating here.

[giraldi02 470]

 

Well, since you apparently have the facts, you should write Sal Paolantonio an email and let him know he's wrong. As I said in my first post, he's the one who said it, I'm just stating here.

I listened to the Mike and Mike interview he had. He never says the Super Bowl won't be able to be bet on.

 

And my guess is anything he would state elsewhere would be in reference to the hypothetical that David Purdum from ESPN alluded to where the Super Bowl would not be allowed to be gambled on.

 

Purdum's hypothetical only pertained to games where the Raiders played in. Home, away, and the Super Bowl.

 

It's a Raiders issue. The Nevada Gaming Commission would flat out deny any request for the NFL to shut down SB betting for non-Nevada teams