You can Google and find a couple of interviews with Amy Trask, who was the CEO of the Raiders, gave about relocation and going rogue and some other details.
A little background on her............she was working as the Raiders attorney, and then later CEO, when they moved back to Oakland and was interning there as she was going to school right after they moved to LA. She knows more about this topic than anyone else I have read, including so called reporters who these days are no better than most posters. When Jerry Jones opened his mouth and puked out some serious misinformation some smart reporters got her on the phone and asked good questions. You can look around and find them.
Unfortunately the facts don't make for good conversation and won't drive clicks/readership so her remarks have largely been ignored while Jones (who is a dolt and knows little about the facts) is quoted as gospel.
A couple of things that are going to happen if someone decides to freak with the NFL and Goodell........
If a team just picks up and moves to LA without NFL approval they will get SLAUGHTERED by the the league. First they will have the freak sued out of them because the NFL owns that market and will have an open and shut case for damages from fees they didn't receive. If any owner was dumb enough to do that a first year law student could win the case. And the NFL could, if they so chose to do so, remove that team from scheduling and even revoke the franchise or suspend it.
Another VERY important thing she stressed that wasn't on the books back then that is now is that the NFL can withhold that teams share of revenues, so even if a team decided to go to court and fight a losing battle they would be losing out on millions of dollars every week.
An owner can no longer just walk away from a city like Georgia did and like Modell did and Davis and so on. In fact those owners doing that is what prompted the NFL to make changes in it's rules. If a city is making efforts to build a new stadium, using this case, and can secure funding and demonstrate that there is fan support they can't just leave for greener pastures. Davis (and Trask knows this) scared the crap out of the NFL because his lawyers knew that at the time there was nothing preventing them from moving anywhere they wanted to any time they wanted to do so. And they did twice and they beat the NFL in court. A team could have moved every single year until the new rules were written and the NFL was worried that teams would start migrating and "test" other markets. That would upset the money machine and fans would stop watching in large numbers. So they rewrote the books.
Anyway, long story short. Unless the NFL allows a team to move there nobody is just going to LA, that's a myth that has been perpetuated on the web from people who are hopfull that SK will just pick up and go or people who are misinformed. If it was as easy to do as some would have you think then there would already be two teams in LA. Part of the reason I don't get into these discussions any more is most people don't have any idea about much of the facts. Like the whole "his team will triple in value" shtick that makes me chuckle.
Amy Trask was talking about the fines and relocation guidelines prior to the Raiders moving. The guidelines are virtually the same since 1984 and the penalties are too extreme to stand up. They were also in place during the relocations in the 1990's. The NFL can't own any market, they say they can but they can't. It was even brought up when the 1995 G-4 was passed. There are a few differences but the same issue applies, that the rules are subjective and not objective like the courts and congress have said. Here are the rules that were in place for the Rams back in 1995.
PROCEDURES FOR PROPOSED FRANCHISE RELOCATIONS
Article 8.5 of the NFL Constitution and Bylaws vests in the Commissioner the authority to
"interpret and from time to time establish policy and procedure in respect to the provisions of the Constitution and Bylaws and any enforcement thereof." Set forth below are procedures and policy to apply to League consideration, pursuant to Section 4.3 of the Constitution and Bylaws, of any proposed transfer of a home territory. These provisions were established in December of 1984 and remain in effect.
Section 4.3 requires prior approval by the affirmative vote of three-fourths of the member
clubs of the League (the normal voting margin for League business) before a club may transfer its franchise or playing site to a different city either within or outside its home territory. While the following provisions apply by their terms to a proposed transfer to a different home territory, a transfer of a club's playing site to a different location within its home territory may also raise issues of League-wide significance. Accordingly, the pre-Annual Meeting notification date prescribed in section (A)(1) tjelow also applies to a proposed intra-territory relocation, and the Commissioner may require that some or all of the following procedures be followed with respect to such a move.
A. Notice and Evaluation of the Proposed Transfer
Before any club may transfer its franchise or playing site outside its current home territory, the club must submit a proposal for such transfer to the League on the following basis:
1 . A club proposing a transfer outside its home territory must give written notice of the proposed transfer to the Commissioner no later than 30 days prior to the opening date of the Annual Meeting in the year in which the club proposes to commence play in a new location. Such notice will be accompanied by a "statement of reasons' in support of the proposed transfer that will include the information outlined in Part B below.
2. The Commissioner will, with the assistance of appropriate League committees, evaluate the proposed transfer and report to the membership; if possible, he will do so within 20 days of his receipt of the club's notice and accompanying "statement of reasons." The Commissioner may also convene a special committee to perform fact finding or other functions with respect to any such proposed transfer.
3. Following the Commissioner's report on the proposed transfer, the transfer will be presented to the membership for action in accordance with the Constitution and Bylaws, either at a Special Meeting of the League held for that purpose or at the Annual Meeting.
B. "Statement of Reasons" for the Proposed Transfer
Any club proposing a transfer outside its home territory must, in its accompanying "statement of reasons," furnish information to the Commissioner essential to consideration of whether such a move is justified and whether it is in the League's interest.
In this connection, the club proposing to transfer must present in writing its views to why its recent financial experience would support a relocation of the club. Such information would include a comparison of the club's home revenues with League averages and medians; past and projected ticket sales and other stadium revenues at both the existing and proposed locations; and operating profits or losses during the most recent four seasons. The club should also comment on any other factors it regards as relevant to the League's consideration of the proposed transfer, including but not limited to operations of other professional or college sports in the existing and proposed home territories, and the effects of the proposed transfer on NFL scheduling patterns, travel requirements, current divisional alignments, traditional rivalries. League-wide television patterns and interests, the quality of stadium facilities, and fan and public perceptions of the NFL and its member clubs.
To permit such a review, at least the following information will accompany the "statement of reasons" for the proposed transfer:
1 . A copy of the club's existing stadium lease and any other agreements relating to the club's use of its current stadium (e.g., concession agreements, box suite agreements, scoreboard advertising agreements) or to a stadium authority's or municipality's provision of related facilities (e.g., practice facilities).
2. Audited financial statements for the club for the fiscal years covering the preceding four seasons.
3. An assessment of the suitability of the club's existing stadium, costs of and prospects for making any desired improvements to the stadium, and the status of efforts to negotiate such improvements with the stadium authority.
4. A description and financial analysis of the projected lease and operating terms available to the club in its proposed new location.
5. A description and financial analysis of the stadium lease and operating terms available to the club in its existing home territory, on a basis that permits comparison with the projected arrangements in the proposed new location.
6. A budget projection, using accepted League charts of account, showing a projected profit and loss statement for the fiscal years covering the first three seasons in the proposed new location.
C. Factors to be Considered in Evaluating the Proposed Transfer
While the League has analyzed many factors in making expansion and team-move decisions in the past, the Commissioner will also give consideration to the factors listed below, among others, in reporting to the membership on any proposed transfer outside a home territory. Such factors were contained in a bill reported by a Senate committee in 1 984; they essentially restate matters that the League has considered vital in connection with team location decisions in the past. Accordingly, any club proposing to transfer should, in its submission to the Commissioner's office, present the club's position as to the bearing of these factors on its proposed transfer, stating specifically why such a move is regarded as justified on these standards:
1 . The adequacy of the stadium in which the team played its home games in the previous season, and the willingness of the stadium or arena authority to remedy any deficiencies in such facility;
2. The extent to which fan loyalty to and support for the team has been demonstrated during the team's tenure in the existing community;
3. The extent to which the team, directly or indirectly, received public financial support by means of any publicly financed playing facility, special tax treatment and any other form of public financial support;
4. The degree to which the ownership or management of the team has contributed
to any circumstance which might otherwise demonstrate the need for such re-
location;
5. Whether the team has incurred net operating losses, exclusive of depreciation
and amortization, sufficient to threaten the continued financial viability of the
team;
6. The degree to which the team has engaged in good faith negotiations with appropriate persons concerning terms and conditions under which the team would continue to play its games in such community or elsewhere within its current home territory;
7. Whether any other team in the League is located in the community in which the team is currently located;
8. Whether the team proposes to relocate to a community in which no other team in the League is located; and
9. Whether the stadium authority, if public, is not opposed to such relocation.
Any club proposing to transfer will have a full opportunity to state its position to the membership and to make its case for the proposed transfer. In order to fully assess a proposed transfer in light of the variety of League interests involved, and to fairly resolve the interests of all parties, it is essential that the membership be fully apprised of the relevant facts with respect to any proposed transfer. The procedures and policies outlined above are directed to that end.
