No Competition--and No Leadership

Three years later, it’s still the first quarter, and Los Angeles continues to go nowhere in this game of who ultimately wins the NFL’s favor for the return of football.

And now Los Angeles city officials have called a timeout, bringing this game to a standstill.

Despite the NFL’s suggestion that Los Angeles allow some fresh competitors into the competition, city

politics has dictated that everyone else stay out of the way of the Coliseum.

Dodger owner Peter O’Malley, who will require City Council approval for a variety of issues if he is to be successful in bringing football back to Los Angeles, was given no choice but to remain on the sidelines after being asked to support the Coliseum.

In effect, O’Malley wasn’t asked to step aside, but rather told to stay out of the game. To do anything differently would have been to start a war, and you can’t win fighting city hall.

But now is it a defeat for Los Angeles?

Mayor Richard Riordan, who gave the Coliseum its exclusivity standing with the NFL after asking O’Malley to shelve his new football stadium plans, refused to comment after Commissioner Paul Tagliabue said the NFL had no interest in dealing only with the Coliseum.

He passed word through a spokesman that he does not want to be interviewed about his position on the NFL.

More than likely he does not have one.

Mayors in Nashville, Baltimore, St. Louis and Cleveland played key roles in putting together deals with the NFL. The mayor of Los Angeles, meanwhile, formed “Football LA” on Aug. 14, 1995, a task force of more than 30 civic and business leaders, charged with bringing football back to the city. As a group, they never met. In fact, they no longer exist.

His next move was to hire and then fire O’Malley, and since then, the mayor has played no role. Although the new Coliseum has his endorsement, in four presentations to date, he has taken no part in addressing the league’s owners to help sell it.

O’Malley is not at the forefront of Los Angeles’ bid for football because Riordan does not want to upset Ridley-Thomas or Kings’ owners Edward Roski and Philip Anschutz as the city gets ready to close a deal for a proposed downtown sports arena.

His initial request to O’Malley to back off--in the form of a signed letter 13 months ago that contributed to O’Malley’s decision to sell the Dodgers--was born from a political desire to barter support for the Coliseum in exchange for City Council votes for the sports arena.

Ridley-Thomas, no friend of the mayor’s before Riordan knocked O’Malley out of the football game, has since become his ally, reminding all interlopers that it would be political suicide to challenge the new Coliseum. In a press release announcing that he had secured O’Malley’s agreement to not fight the Coliseum, Ridley-Thomas included a statement from Riordan congratulating O’Malley on his wise decision.

So that leaves Los Angeles pushing the Coliseum, and everything here riding on Roski and Anschutz.

Question: If Roski cannot convince Anschutz, his Kings and sports arena partner, into publicly discussing his level of dedication for the new Coliseum, why should anyone think he can woo 23 NFL owners into coming his way?

Roski has been a staunch champion of the new Coliseum, Mr. L.A. in talking up his city, but he lacks the financial wherewithal to pull off the NFL’s return without Anschutz.

And who wants Anschutz? Who wants an absentee owner in Los Angeles, who has already flashed the aloofness of Georgia Frontiere and the arrogance of Al Davis? Who wants a billionaire Denver businessman who is too busy to respond to the citizens who will pay good money to buy the tickets he will be trying to sell? Who wants a guy who lets small “misunderstandings” become big problems because he’s out of touch?

It has been a week since questions of Anschutz’s involvement were raised with Roski, and while city officials hope for the best, they have been troubled as well. NFL officials said they heard Anschutz had already made a decision not to pursue football in Los Angeles, and so in an interview a week ago Friday, Roski was asked about this.

He was told a story would have to be written raising such a question, although there were three days remaining before its scheduled publication. It was suggested there was time yet to clarify everything with a response from Anschutz.

Nothing. Anschutz did not return a telephone call to his office. And although an irritated Roski can’t understand why anyone would challenge his football partnership with Anschutz, he could not get or did not try to get a reply from Anschutz.

So either:

A) Anschutz is not committed to being the money man behind the football project and he does not want to go public with that revelation at this time for fear of messing with next week’s City Council final look at the proposed sports arena. Or,

B) He is committed, and doesn’t ordain it necessary to let people know.

If the answer is A), the new Coliseum project is probably dead, but not before killing more than a year of time and jeopardizing other potential solutions.

If it’s B), who wants him? If he can’t step forward in the days just before and after the NFL owners meetings in Washington to help the credibility of the new Coliseum, how’s he going to react as an owner when fans question the way he does business? By the time Los Angeles has football, Barry Switzer will certainly be available to coach--how do we know Anschutz won’t hire him?

The Kings’ owners are blowing it, a reminder once again that if football returns to Los Angeles, the most important ingredient will be credibility.

They struggled with that concept during the sports arena process, but Roski said they had learned from their mistakes and wanted an air of openness in regards to football. And then just as quickly he refused to let the public know the details of his public-funding campaign for a new Coliseum, although disputing a report that the plan will call for $150 million in public funds.

Credibility? Ridley-Thomas publicly welcomed competition only to return to Los Angeles and sack O’Malley with political clout, while Riordan continues to provide little leadership.

O’Malley may or may not have the right solution for Los Angeles, but he has credibility, and as long as nothing is happening, his involvement would at least be refreshing.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Receptions Come to Pass

The only players to complete at least five passes, rush for at least 50 yards and have at least 50 receiving yards in one season since 1970:

*--*

Player Year Rush Rec Comp Kordell Stewart 1996 171 293 11 Kordell Stewart 1995 86 235 5 Mark Malone 1981 68 90 45 Freddie Solomon 1978 70 458 5 O.J. Simpson 1972 1,251 198 5

*--*

The most career receptions by players with at least 10 completions since 1970

*--*

Player Comp Rec Marcus Allen 10 576 Walter Payton 11 492 Guido Merkens 27 36 Kordell Stewart 16 31 Jim McMahon 1,492 5

*--*