Does Davis Own L.A.? League Says It’s a Joke

No rush to get that nose ring in order to look like every other Raider fan, and the way the NFL sees it, you can drop the kickstand on that Harley too, because the team will not be coming to Los Angeles.

“I’d say there’s a chance the Raiders could come back to L.A.,” said Frank Rothman, the NFL’s lead attorney for more than the last decade. “About the same chance of me getting pregnant.”

Raider owner Al Davis is still telling friends he’s coming to Los Angeles, still expecting help from Clipper owner Donald Sterling, and recently he went to NFL officials asking the league to buy out the 12 remaining years on his lease in Oakland to clear his move back here.

“He did ask for it, yes, he did ask for it,” Rothman said. “And he got quite a reception from the appropriate people.”

Al Davis got giggles, which became belly laughs when everyone realized he was serious, and then he got indignation.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if Al really thought in his mind that the NFL would put $190 million of its own money into saving him,” said Rothman, whose practice is based in Los Angeles. “I’m going to let you take me out and hang me in the public square at The Times building if it turns out we pay any money to Oakland to buy them out of their lease. Never, never, never.

“Ask yourself, why is Davis doing poorly up there? I have a strong feeling they hate him as much up there as we hate him down here. He’s not a very lovable guy.”

He doesn’t always dress in all black; sometimes he wears all white--down to his shoes.

“He makes noises like he wants to come back to L.A. and all his problems will go away and we’ll be lovers forever,” Rothman said. “Yeah, the motorcyclists, hooligans and rowdies will be there, but I wouldn’t take my kids to a Raider game. The atmosphere at a USC game is just wonderful, but I would never take my wife to a Raiders’ game.”

Although not having the Rothmans in attendance might leave the Raiders two tickets shy of a sellout, that probably won’t keep Davis from making a move on Los Angeles. It’s too enticing with all its corporate riches and entertainment connections, and Davis’ situation in Oakland is in ruins.

The NFL might not pay off his lease, but what if Davis wins his legal action against Oakland, voiding his lease and freeing his team to move to Los Angeles?

“From what I know about that, I don’t think that’s going to happen,” Rothman said. “If he figures a way to bail himself out, and he gets out of his lease, and then he wants to come to L.A., he’s got to file an application just like anybody else and then the owners will vote on it. But, God willing, by that time I hope there’s a team in L.A.”

Correction, say the Raiders. It’s not God willing, it’s up to Al.

“There is no way the NFL can do anything in Los Angeles without making peace with Al,” said Joseph Alioto, who represents the Raiders in their lawsuit against the NFL, which will be heard in a Los Angeles Federal Court. “The NFL has never beaten the Raiders, and never will.

“They started this, and must deeply regret it. Mr. Rothman and Commissioner [Paul] Tagliabue have got to be apologizing to all the owners for getting them into a mess again. There is so much hostility against Al Davis . . . judges have mentioned it in some previous discussions.”

Tokyo Rose and Jesse James

Why would anyone express any hostility against Al Davis?

“We’re really clear in the law,” said Alioto, whose father directed Davis’ earlier victory in court. “And we will be offering some additional evidence that we’ve found that will blow them out of the water in regards to who owns L.A.”

Rothman, whose resume is filled with his own successes, said any suggestion that the NFL might be running scared in its legal skirmishes with the Raiders and might be willing to let Davis return to L.A. in exchange for him dropping his lawsuit, is either outright fiction or Davis’ influence on a small group of owners.

“We’re not worried about the lawsuit; I’ve told the owners that time and time again,” said Rothman, who is looking for Federal Court Judge George King to rule shortly in the NFL’s favor indicating there is no basis to Davis’ L.A. ownership claim. “You can bet anything you want, if you’ve talked to any owners who think we have a weak case, they could have only gotten that information by talking to Al Davis. I’m the only one who has reported to the owners, and we’re not concerned.”

Alioto said Rothman’s pronouncements sound like, “Tokyo Rose, ‘Give up, you have no chance, you’re going to be bombed.’

“The arrogance of these people is just something. The only difference,” Alioto added, “between these guys [NFL] and Jesse James, is that James always had the personal integrity to wear a mask.”

Rothman, the attorney who lost the NFL’s suit with the USFL but in effect gained a major victory by keeping the damages to $1, which forced the league to fold, said no one needs a law degree to evaluate Davis’ claim.

“Just say to yourself,” he said, “ ‘Does Al own L.A.?’ You’ll laugh. Just stop and think about it for a moment. When Donald Sterling moved the San Diego Clippers to L.A., he paid a fee, but does he still own San Diego? . . . If Al was smart, what he would do is move to eight cities, and then under his theory, he’d own eight cities and pretty soon he’d own the whole NFL.”

He probably hadn’t thought about that--look out, Sioux City.

Los Angeles might be without a football team, but it looks like it will have an entertaining trial around the first of the year matching two football powerhouses. OK, so maybe one football powerhouse, and the owner of a bad football team.

The NFL has asked the court not to make public the depositions that have already been taken in the case, making it difficult to determine who is standing on solid ground. There are several issues to be judged, but the two that affect Los Angeles the most are who owns the market, and whether the NFL forced Davis to leave town.

The NFL contends that common sense makes Davis’ claim to L.A. ludicrous, but just in case it also has a technical argument pointing out the Raiders’ past inconsistencies in filed paperwork on who owns the L.A. opportunity.

“There is no authority that gives him the right to own L.A.,” Rothman said. “He’s got a wild theory he made up, but the cases go the other way and it’s a clear issue of law.”

Alioto countered by saying that the injunction the Raiders filed in the early ‘80s saying the NFL couldn’t stop them from moving to L.A., which was later upheld by the courts and upon appeal, still gives Davis legal claim to L.A. because Davis paid for it per the court’s instructions.

“Evidence will show that everybody still follows that pattern,” Alioto said.

Most teams leave a market to make more money elsewhere and lay no claim to the market they left. Davis contends he was forced to leave, the NFL had no plans to expand in Oakland, and citing the Ninth Circuit Court’s ruling in favor of the Raiders a decade ago, he says he’s entitled to the difference in value between the expansion opportunity in Oakland, which is worth nothing, and that in L.A.

The Raiders paid more than $10 million for the right to move to L.A. in 1982. If Davis wins his present claim, he would probably stand to make 50 times that, considering the Cleveland expansion franchise probably will be sold for more than $500 million.

“If the NFL is thinking about any kind of an expansion team in Los Angeles, it’s going to have to make an arrangement with us,” Alioto said. “It’s not a deal where they get a choice. It’s the law.”

Said Rothman: “That’s baloney. The Raiders’ case does not impact us going forward in L.A.”

‘Why Does He Go to Oakland?’

The second major part to the Raiders’ lawsuit is the contention that the NFL did not want Davis in Los Angeles and scuttled a deal with Hollywood Park after other owners realized just how good a deal it could be.

Rothman said the NFL agreed to let Davis build at Hollywood Park, agreed to award L.A. a Super Bowl, provide him with the home team’s allotment of Super Bowl tickets and 10,000 more to use as enticement to sell luxury boxes and season tickets. He said the league also gave him the option of allowing a second team to occupy the stadium in exchange for a second Super Bowl and another 10,000 tickets.

“How does Al vote?” Rothman said. “He raises his hand and says aye, and it passes 27-1 with two abstentions.

“So he’s agreeing to all the terms of the resolution, and a week later he’s in Oakland. Why does he go to Oakland? In typical Al fashion they give him $54 million in cash.”

Alioto said the Raiders did vote to accept the Hollywood Park deal, but after the vote the NFL established a stadium committee, he said, and they began to add elements to the deal designed “to undermine us.

“That’s what they wanted; they were trying to bounce us. There’s just this intense dislike for Al Davis.”

But what does all this have to do with the chances of the Raiders moving back to Los Angeles? “I think all of this impacts that,” said Alioto, keeping the door propped open for a Raider invasion.

The city and county surrounding the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum have sued the Raiders, and the Raiders have sued them. The team expects a season ticket base of little more than 30,000, while selling less than 50 luxury suites. The city of Oakland is expecting another $20 million loss.

“That team up there is no damn good, that’s why they aren’t doing any good,” Rothman said. “We would see football here real fast in L.A. if there was a plan in place for a stadium. We’d have a team playing in a temporary stadium while a new one was being built--that’s how fast the NFL would move.

“L.A. is still captain of its own destiny,” Rothman said. “But nothing is happening. . . . The mayor of New York wants to rebuild Yankee Stadium, and they are talking about a billion-dollar project. You watch, they’ll get that done before we get this done.

“Yeah, I’m worried about football in my own city.”

Because if the Raiders come back to town, he still won’t be able to go and watch a game.