Zennie62 on YouTube

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Roger Goodell Mutes NFL Las Vegas Oakland Raiders Talk At SB51 Press Conference #SB51

Roger Goodell Mutes NFL Las Vegas Oakland Raiders Talk At SB51 Press Conference #SB51 Video

Roger Goodell Mutes NFL Las Vegas Oakland Raiders Talk At SB51 Press Conference #SB51 Roger Goodell did not say Las Vegas was “viable” for the Oakland Raiders, contrary to NFL Network reports. (Media's using that term like crack) In his Wednesday “State of The NFL” Press Conference, the NFL Commissioner said that “we hadn’t made a determination about Las Vegas as an NFL market.” In fact, here's the full transcript of what Commissioner Goodell said related to the Oakland Raiders and Las Vegas on Wednesday: Q The Raiders started the approval process to move to Las Vegas, though the latest news seems to put that situation in peril.  Is the NFL confident that Las Vegas remains a viable location for the Raiders? And after decades of avoiding or opposing gambling, do the owners and league officials believe that legalized gambling and the NFL can coexist? A “In your first question, we hadn’t made a determination about Las Vegas as an NFL market  That’s part of the relocation process. The Raiders submitted an application.  It’s one that we’re considering carefully, but there is a great deal of work to be done and there are several elements of that. Financing of the stadium is just one.  Obviously, the stadium project itself, the depth of the market, all of those are things that we’ve studied over the last several months, but that will increase in intensity over the next month or so as we move forward in that process. A second, as it relates to whether gambling can coexist with the NFL. In fact, it does. It’s happening today. It’s sponsored by governments, It exists throughout our world. What we have always said is we need to make sure that there’s a fine line between team-sports gambling and the NFL. We want to protect the integrity of our game, and that’s the line we will always do.” Q For the past 20 years, I've asked the question, ‘When will Los Angeles be getting an NFL team?’ And now, I'm tempted to ask, ‘When will Los Angeles stop getting NFL teams?’ Just following on Barry’s question, though, you detailed the process in the coming weeks about evaluating the Las Vegas market.  Are you confident that you can complete that evaluation in time for the vote in the March meetings, and I’d also ask, if Las Vegas were to fall through, could San Diego be the viable option for the Raiders? A “Well, a couple things. One, we are confident that our process is thorough, that it will examine all of the issues that need to be examined to make the best possible decision from the ownership. If for some reason, we can’t complete that by March, we’ll deal with that, but the ultimate objective here is to the make the right decision. I’ve said it many times before, relocations are painful, and you want to be intelligent, you want to be thorough and you want to make sure that we do it with a great deal of sensitivity.  We want to make sure that we’re doing what’s in the best, long-term interest of the NFL. So, we will see on timing, but we have been working on this over the last couple months, analyzing this, but we have now more information, and we’ll have to get more information to go forward. The second part of your question, just so I’m clear? (Reporter: San Diego.) San Diego.  Listen, and I’ve made this clear before, we were disappointed to have to leave San Diego. We couldn’t get a stadium done.  As you know, we had a referendum just last November that did not pass by the voters, and I think for any team to relocate to San Diego at this point in time, we’re going to have to find a solution to that stadium problem, one that we couldn’t do after probably 15 years of effort.  That doesn’t mean it can’t happen in the future. In fact, there is a history of markets that get these projects done once a team leaves. That’s unfortunate, because I think it’s a painful way to do it, but this is something that we obviously would work toward, but we’re moving forward at this point.” Q You recently said on a national radio show that if the Raiders move was approved by owners, you would not compromise any of the League’s values.  Were you referencing gambling and would you or the ownership be opposed to a casino having partial or full ownership either in a team or a stadium? A “We’ve always said we are going to maintain the integrity of our game by making sure there is a separation between sports, gambling and the NFL.  That is something we think is imperative for us.  We want our fans to know the game they are seeing unfold on the field does not have any undue influence.  We recognize gambling occurs out in marketplaces.  I said that in the first answer.  But this is something from our standpoint we have rules that are in place.  The Raiders have not asked for us to compromise those rules as it relates to our policies.  We will continue to have that separation going forward.  I don’t see an ownership position in a team from a casino.  That is not something consistent with our policies.  Not likely a stadium either.”


Visit the new Zennie62.com

Google Analytics Alternative