COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: I want to start by thanking Mayor Golding, Alex Spanos, the Super Bowl Host Committee and all the people of San Diego for their warm hospitality this week.

I remember when San Diego was awarded this game at our league meeting several years ago, Alex Spanos guaranteed that everybody would have a wonderful time in San Diego. And, Alex, I have to tell you that that guarantee is as good as Joe Namath's guarantee on Super Bowl Ill.

Alex brings a level of warmth and friendship to everything he does, and I think it's evident here in San Diego this week. We're concluding this week another year of tremendous football at all levels. Professional as well as amateur. This season featured highly entertaining, very competitive NFL games, week in and week out from the beginning to the end. The players of the year were many, many, starting with Brett Favre and Barry Sanders.

The Team-Of-The-Year will be determined on Sunday. But, there were many other team stories in 1997 that were outstanding. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the resurgence of the two teams in New York, the Falcons late season winning streak; the consistently strong performances of the Steelers, the Chiefs, the 49ers, the Patriots, the Jaguars and a number of other teams.

Off the field we made strides on a number of fronts. On ownership policy and franchise stability with new ownership in Seattle and progress in a number of cities on stadiums.

We nurtured the growth of the game, most importantly at home and abroad in a variety of ways. We expanded our youth football and high school football programs. This coming year, 1998, following many discussions with high school football administrators, college administrators and others, we're going to join together for a first of a kind national forum of representatives of football at all levels to talk about the health of the game, and the participation of young people in football.

Internationally we expect continued success with the World League in 1998, when it will kickoff in several months with a new name, NFL Europe. We've begun an exciting new alliance with a Canadian football league in 1997. We returned to Mexico with an American Bowl Game attended by more than a hundred thousand people and new grass roots programs.

We held a very successful football summit in Japan in May. The biggest news was the television contract announced last week. Staggering, stunning, unbelievable, and so on, were some of the terms used to describe it. I think of the contracts in a very different way - as just a beginning.

The television contracts quite obviously reaffirmed the enormous popularity of NFL Football. The contracts are tributes to past and present performances by many, many players and coaches. We all build and stand on the shoulders of those people who came before us. The contracts are also tributes to the passion of our fans and the interest in our game.

The best news for fans under these television contracts is that we will continue to have the most widely available game on free, over-the-air television. All of our regular-season and post-season games will continued to be televised on free, over-the-air broadcast television in the future just as they have been in the past. Because we're unique among leagues in equally sharing all of our revenues among all the leagues, the contracts will also benefit and strengthen all of the teams equally. I think this is very important for cities, from Green Bay, Kansas City and Buffalo to New York, Chicago, to San Francisco and others.

The television agreements also present challenges, beginning with the challenge to use the money in constructive ways. This means, among other things, an extended labor agreement with the players, team stability and reinvestment in the game. At the collective bargaining table the focus is on how to help veteran players across the board. This would include a large increase in the minimum salary for veteran players to the $400,000 range; the largest share of revenues for veteran players rather than speculative money for untested rookies. And, a major improvement in requirement benefits for veteran players.

Happily, Gene Upshaw recognizes these priorities. I think we have a lot in common with the Players Association and the teams in terms of priorities. Many other great retired players also have spoken with us in recent weeks about these priorities, including players on our player advisory council, players such as Mike Singletary, John Mackey, Roger Staubach, Willie Lanier and many others. They repeatedly emphasized to us that we should spread this money better to guarantee current players and their families financial security at ages 40, 50, 60 and beyond; not just at the age of 22 or 23. So, those will be our priorities with the Players Association.

On Sunday we're all going to be thrilled to watch two teams that have met their challenges very successfully during the past two seasons. The Packers and Broncos have a combined record in the past two seasons of 59 and 14. Both teams are marked by superb talent in many areas, playing, coaching, management and tremendous fan support, in the Rocky Mountain area and in Packerland.

I don't make predictions or guarantees like Joe Namath or, for that matter, even as Alex Spanos does, but I know one thing for certain, Brett Favre Dorsey Levens, and all are going to give us a tough, exciting Super Bowl XXXII.

We thank everybody for being here; especially those of you here in San Diego. We want to thank the mayor, Mayor Golding, the Host Committee and everyone in San Diego, volunteers especially for making this Super Bowl such an outstanding success already, just as was the last Super Bowl in San Diego a decade ago.

We can begin the questioning now.

Q: Paul, given the in flux of money, if you're a mayor or governor and a NFL owner comes to you and asks for public financing for luxury suites or a new stadium, how can you say anything but "No?" In other words, you've got 18 billion dollars to play with; can anybody claim poverty?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: I don't think we can claim poverty. We haven't done that. What we have claimed is that we provide very strong economic benefits in communities. As I mentioned, all of the television is shared equally, so smaller communities get a tremendous infusion of revenue from the television contracts that go back into their economies.

What we will talk about is public/private partnerships on stadiums. That rests on the concept that millions of people in a given area enjoy this form of entertainment, this form of passion, and in many, if not most communities, there comes a recognition at some point that the public/private partnership that we invest, as well as public money is invested makes sense.

Currently we have already invested about $300 million on a one-time basis into stadium construction, and we're already committed to another $100 million annually into stadium construction, that's revenue that would otherwise go to the teams or to the players.

So, we're pursuing those policies, I think, in an intelligent way and will continue to do that.

Q: Paul, how concerned are you about what sees to be a growing number of incidents involving cheap shots, quarterback hits and Romanowski type incidents this past season?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, I think this year we didn't have - put it this way, I think we had good, solid football, without many cheap shots. We had a few high visibility players early in the season, seems like we always have some enthusiasm in the preseason that has to be brought into check. A few years ago we had it in a Steelers' game. This year we had it in a couple of games. But, overall, we feel that the players played good, hard football. We didn't have flagrant fouls at an unnecessary level. We didn't have injuries at an unnecessary level. The type of conduct I think that Bill Romanowski - I think he recognized as much as anybody, it was not Bill Romanowski and I think that those types of emotional outbursts by players are very few and far between in the NFL, which is a tribute to our players. They're playing an adrenaline-filled, emotional game.

But, for the most part, their conduct is exemplary. I think Bill recognizes what he did was wrong, and we won't see any repetition of that type of thing.

Q: You've had four head coaches vacancies so far this year; three have been filled by white males; who knows what Jerry Jones is going to do. What would you say to the minority, predominantly, African-American assistant coaches that feel they have very little chance of getting these jobs, let alone getting an interview?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: I would say to them what I have been saying, but I think we can say a lot more right now than we could have said a year ago.   First of all, we made this diversity in hiring and identifying the best talent at the coaching level a priority last year. We had very intensive discussions with many people in the league: owners, coaches, general managers and a leadership group of black coaches.

The second thing I would say is that I think this year is very different from last year, even though there are far fewer openings this year it's been very different in terms of the candidates interviewed, the candidates considered, the candidates given jobs. Indianapolis, for example, had as its No. 1 candidate Tyrone Willingham, as you know, who decided to stay at Stanford.

Other clubs have been interviewing African-Americans and diverse groups of prospective coaches. At the coordinator level, we already have Buffalo for one; Kansas City for another already filling positions with African-Americans, which was a major focus of the coaches last year.

We're going to be meeting again with the coaches at the Combine in Indianapolis. I'll be meeting with management in Indianapolis. I think when we have that meeting in February, we'll be able to say this year was very different from last year. There's still things we need to continue to do.

We continue to need to make it a priority, but I think we'll be able to show some real change and progress compared to where we were a year ago.

Q: Along those same lines, some of the comments we've heard from the players this week seem they're annoyed at the situation, though. Do you think, what seems to be a festering situation, can explode if we don't see some results in the near future?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE:No, I don't think it's festering. I read some of the comments by players. I respect the comments that players make, except that they're preoccupied with preparing to play the Super Bowl, and in many instances they don't know what's going on in terms of interviews and candidates being considered and positions being offered. I respect what they say. I know it's important to them.

But, as I say, once we're through this hiring season, I think people will recognize that there's been a considerable amount of progress made. I spoke with Sherman Lewis last summer in the Packers training camp. He and I, I think, have a good understanding of his priorities, his interests, some of his perspective on the issue. He's expressed some frustration recently, but Brian Billick has expressed frustration recently:   One's black, one's white.  We're in a business where you have four or five hundred people who regard themselves as extremely talented trying to get 30 jobs. There are going to be frustrations. But, I don't think that they're going to break down over time on racial lines.

Q: This coming August the Baltimore Ravens will be moving into a new downtown state-of-the-art stadium. You've been conspicuously absent during the first two years of the teams. Are you going to come to a regularly scheduled game? The fact that this stadium is going to be near John Kent Cooke's stadium, do you feel the two can coexist?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: I think the two can coexist, and I'm sure they'll compete well on the field.  I do intend to be attending games in Baltimore. This year, I was conspicuously absent from a lot of games, because I had back surgery and didn't go to too many football games. But, I do expect to be involved in other cities, now that I'm no longer worrying about my back.

Q: I just came from a meeting of the Professional Football Writers Association, and the thrust of it was that things seem to be regressing as far as our relations with the teams and with the players. We now have 13 teams out of 30 that allow writers into practice. ft used to be open to everybody. You've got a situation in New Orleans where the coach makes himself unavailable to the press two days a week, and yet has his own TV show. You have a situation in New York where the coach has dictated whether assistant coaches can speak to the press, they can't without his clearing. Players are not allowed on their own time to speak to the newspaper people. In other words, it's a gestapo-type of organization, where everybody is told how to live. It's quite serious. Most of our complaints come from there. You've got a situation where locker rooms during the week are supposed to be open a minimum of 30 minutes, and yet some coaches run their practices into that period. And, then they tell the players they don't have to be in the lockers?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Are we going to get to a question?

Q: There's a chance of it. This is something that's been piling up a number of years. In effect, you're interviewing an empty locker room. Eight years ago I wrote you all this and you said you were quite concerned, you'd get back to me and we'd have lunch and talk about it. I'm still waiting for the lunch. I'm still waiting for you to get back to me. And I'm wondering: Are you still concerned about that?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE:We could have lunch tomorrow, if you like. We discuss this every year with the Professional Football Writers, with the officers of the Professional Football Writers Association. We discuss it with the AP sports editors. We deal with it on a case-by-case basis. I think, in most of the cases, we work through the issues very successfully.  We had issues in Buffalo a few years ago where Marv Levy was involved. We spoke to Marv. He worked through the issues. Some of your characterizations I can't really take seriously, so I don't think I need to comment on them.  I think what we are trying to do is to guarantee what the readers and what the fans are most interested in, which is to understand what the players are thinking and saying during the week. We're giving priority in those areas.  The practice issue varies from community to community; different media have different views on the issues relative to covering practices. Coaches, like Bill Parcels, you mentioned, Mike Ditka are larger than life and I think they have their own view of how the world should be in a lot of areas. They do comply with our policies. We require them to comply with our policies. We fine people heavily when they don't comply with our policies.  We'll continue to work with these things, and continue to resolve the problems. The one thing that is repeatedly brought up with us by the players and the coaches is the pervasiveness of the coverage. And, I understand from the media standpoint that that's sometimes a minimal concern.  From the players' standpoint, coaches' standpoint, some element of privacy in your life is a legitimate interest, so, there's a balance to be struck.  I think we'll work it out well. Like I say, principally through the Professionally Football Writers and the AP sports editors and with local media in the cities we have teams. We value the coverage enormously, but we need to strike a balance in terms of how we handle some of these issues.

Q: Paul, you said in October you wanted Houston and LA to have a solid stadium financing plan in March. If they do, what is the next step in the process? Where does Houston stand?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: As you know, we've had a lot of discussions in recent months with both public authorities in Houston, with the private business leaders in Houston, and we are very encouraged by the progress that's being made. My understanding is that they may have a proposal on a stadium and a financing package to present to us by our March meeting.

If that turns out to be the case, we might be in a position in 1998 to move up and see how that fits in our planning for the future. Cleveland has got to be the No. 1 priority for 1998 because we're committed to launching the Browns in September of 1999 and we'll do that.  But, Houston is very much in our thinking and our planning for 1998 as well, as is Los Angeles.

Q: As you know, Pat Bowlen and the Broncos hope to go to Denver voters this year to ask for some sort of public support for a new Bronco stadium. There's growing cynicism among voters in the wake of these TV contracts. What would you tell them? It's going to be a tough sell, and I think it got tougher with the new contracts.

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, I was in Denver last week discussing this subject with a lot of the business leaders and with a number of the political leaders, including the governor. And what I told them was partly what I suggested to Dave earlier was that the Denver Broncos are in the 18th media market in the country, yet they'll be bringing into Denver and the Rocky Mountain economy over half a billion dollars of economic stimulus from this television contract. So, they provide a very strong economic benefit in the Rocky Mountain area.

Secondly, as you well know, Coors Field for baseball has already been funded by legislation that was passed in Colorado, and the proposed funding for a stadium for the Broncos takes account of what was done for Coors Field and puts the Broncos simply on an equitable basis with what was done for baseball.

Thirdly, Pat Bowlen has already committed to a major investment of his own money in the stadium, 25 percent of the cost is his commitment. So what we're looking at, I think, is a public, private partnership with a major contribution from the owner, and a worthwhile and proven investment for the community. In my judgment, it's certainly as good as and probably better than the investment that's been made already in the baseball stadium.

Q: He would be forced to sell the team and he predicts a new owner stadium would certainly move the Broncos. Is that kind of discussion healthy to the debate over a new stadium when an owner comes out with statements like that?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, I think that it just faces up to the reality of the Broncos needs to have a competitive facility; a facility that's competitive with the other sports in the area, and a facility that's competitive in the National Football League. I think Pat Bowlen has demonstrated and the team playing in this team on Sunday is part of the demonstration, that he's going to run a terrific football organization. He address a lot of value to the league on his committee membership. But, his team has generated consistent excitement since he's been the owner.  What I found when I was in Colorado last week, and what I think has been typical of Colorado since the American Football League stuck a flag in the ground there in the early '60s, it's a can-do attitude. They built the baseball stadium. The Performing Arts Center is now being held up as an example for the whole nation. And, I think there's a very positive, can-do attitude.   There's a recognition that the Broncos are a great asset, through a broad area of the Rocky Mountain region. I think Pat Bowlen recognizes that and I think eventually we'll get it done.

Q: Earlier this morning, Coach Holmgren talked about a growing increase of support for instant replay. Do you feel that could be coming back next year?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Mike is one of those optimists who always sees growing support for instant replay until we take the vote, and then we're always a few votes short. I think that because of Mike's leadership as the co-chairman of the competition committee, there's a better than normal chance that instant replay would be adopted this year. And I think it would be - I think the likelihood is that it would be adopted in the form that Mike and the other coaches recommended to the membership last year - the coaches challenge system, replay review on the field by the referee, and a very limited number of plays subject to review in a game, so you don't affect the pace of the game or other aspects of the game negative.  If the coaches and committee members come back with that type of proposal again, I would support it. I think it could help in those instances which were identified last year - what was called the season-making-type-play; not the routine call in a game, but the season-making or season-breaking-type-play. And we had some illustrations of that this year. Tony Gonzalez' catch in a Kansas City/Denver game, where he fell out-of-bounds and they had to settle on a field goal, which every piece of television footage showed was correctly called by the officials.

Then we had the Leon Johnson interception in the Jets/Detroit game, which we can argue about the call and we can argue about whether two feet were down before he flipped outside and hit the white area.But, those kinds of plays, I think, fit under the heading of season-breaking or season-making type calls. And, if we had a replay system to deal with those, I think it could very well get support this year at our league meeting and be voted in.

Q: Commissioner, with all the money that you're bringing in from the TV contract, why is it necessary to still have the TV blackout rules? The teams already get a lot of money before the game is even played, and yet some people can't even watch the games.

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, the TV blackout rules, I think are proven over 50 years that they make a lot of sense in the context of pro football.   First of all, they contribute to the quality of the game and the quality of the experience for everybody. The worst thing that you can have in the football game is a half empty stadium. That just leads people to stay home in droves, and it takes away from the excitement of the event. We don't want our stadiums to be studio shows for television. And, 50 years of history has demonstrated that the blackout policy serves important goals in that respect.

Secondly, we have 12 hours of television now, wall-to-wall phenomenal television, pre-game shows, three live games on Sunday, and I think that if we didn't have our current policies relative to the blackout, it would have a very negative effect, especially on the teams that are struggling, and the "haves" would get hit hard - the "haves" would not get hurt; the "have-nots" would get hit hard in terms of interest and attendance. I think that a change in the policy would be very counterproductive.

Q: In light of the poll in the paper this morning that indicated some degree of indifference towards the NFL in Los Angeles, could you comment about the future for the league in Los Angeles?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE:Los Angeles is a real priority to us, as I said before, in response to a question. We think that - we know that there's a lot of interest in NFL Football in Los Angeles. All we have to do is look at the television audience that watched last years Super Bowl game in Los Angeles. It was the biggest share of the audience than in most other parts of the country.

We know that we have to reestablish some credibility in the marketplace, and that's why we're working as hard as we are as a league to do that. And I think when we have the right stadium, the right ownership and launch it in the right way and present it in the right way. We'll be looking back with the same kind of pride that the Rams brought to the National Football League, going back to Waterfield, all the way up through Vince Ferragamo, and other good seasons that the Rams had before they left.

I don't have any doubt that the NFL will do real good in Los Angeles. I think it's dicey to spend too much time worrying about polls. Because one week they say there's tremendous interest and the next week they seem to say there's not. And, frankly, sometimes I can't figure out what they mean. But, I don't think they're too meaningful, when you have the kind of interest we have in our game as evidenced by television ratings.

Q: While the NFL is in litigation with Al Davis, is the league negotiating with or talking to any other NFL franchises about moving to Los Angeles?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: No, we're not. We're talking with representatives of the public sector, Councilman Mark Thomas and others, and we're talking with people in the business community. We're talking with representatives of stadiums other than the LA Coliseum.  The coliseum has got a lot of our priority attention in the past couple of years. but we're not having discussions with other teams about moving to Los Angeles. We're trying to keep all the other teams exactly where they are in good facilities and have team stability.

Q: After Cleveland had its team stolen from it a few years ago, and you came up with this plan to put football back into Cleveland in 1999, the Browns, you said that you thought that the whole thing had worked out and it was a tremendous solution. A two-part question, (1): Is it absolutely sure that it will be an expansion team in Cleveland and all of a sudden the price tag that's being thrown around is $500 million and I was just wondering if that's an accurate number?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: On the second question I would say that it's a throw-around number. No one has done any analysis of what the new television contract means in terms of values of NFL franchises. Normally, in business, the value of an asset grows because your net gross, not just because your gross revenue grows. Here two thirds of the revenue that comes in is committed to go to the players under our collective bargaining agreement. So, how that translates into a franchise price for Cleveland is something we haven't had a chance to look at yet. So $500 million, I would say, is a throw-around number, not a number that reflects any analysis. On expansion to Cleveland, I think we're on track to do that. We're going to be discussing it at our March meeting. I think there's a growing recognition in the league that expansion to Cleveland would be the optimal way of re-launching the Cleveland Browns, and recapturing the great tradition of the Browns, and serving the fans in the Cleveland area and the fans who are Brown fans all over the United States, and, indeed, throughout the world. When we get our discussions launched in March, and bring them to a conclusion sometime later in the year, I think there's a real good shot there will be an expansion team.

Q: But you haven't ruled out that something might be done to another city like what Baltimore did to Cleveland?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE:We haven't made that decision, but we have made a lot of progress in solving the issues that teams had in their communities. Indianapolis is one; Seattle is another; Tampa Bay is another. You can go right down the list. Teams that felt they were facing difficult economic straits in their existing communities have successfully addressed those problems - Indianapolis being the most recent one.  So, that is part of the reason for the growing optimism that expansion of the league to 31 teams with that expansion team in Cleveland, will be the decision that eventually emerges. It's not a final decision. There's going to be a lot of discussion, but I think that many of the factors are pointing in that direction.

Q: Commissioner, in light of your concern over what you termed as half-empty stadiums, I'm curious as to if you have a preference or not, if the league has a preference or not where the Oilers play their home games next season, and if you do want them to change, would you or someone from the league participate in any negotiations to get that done?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: We don't have a view right now. Obviously our preference would be that they don't play in a half-empty stadium. And, we spent a lot of time this season trying to catch up with a situation that unfortunately was not a good situation.  And, the fans, I think, responded in a positive way in the latter part of the season. When I was in Memphis several months ago we had discussions with the people in Memphis about the conditions that would have to be anticipated in '98 for the Oilers to stay in Memphis in '98. Eventually, the team is going to be in Nashville, beginning in '99. So, some consideration has to be given to how best to lay the groundwork for the team to be Tennessee's NFL team, and not just the team that generates interest in part of the state.

I'll be talking to Bud Adams probably next week about those issues. And, I expect I'll be involved with him in discussions with leadership groups, both in Memphis and in Nashville, to see how we can best create permanence for the Oilers, and make it Tennessee's team. That's the objective.  The objective is not to deal with a part of the state in a way which is prejudicial to the Oilers becoming Tennessee's team.

Q: Football has always been a very grass roots type of activity. But, as each new cycle of stadium seems to go up, fans complain that the game is moving away from them. Do you have any words of encouragement to make them feel they're not going to lose the game, they'll no longer have access to it except on TV?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, in a lot of our stadiums I think the fans feel they're getting closer and closer to the game in very real ways.  In those stadiums such as in Carolina and Jacksonville, I think the experience of going to a NFL game is one of - that has had little precedence in the past, because you're so close to the action at football-only stadiums, you don't have some problems you have in the dual-purpose football/baseball stadiums.

Ticket pricing is another issue. A number of the owners have indicated to me they're going to have restraint in their pricing. Some have frozen their prices where they are, in light of the television contract, and they're very responsive to keeping the game accessible to a wide spectrum of fans. I see Lamar Hunt sitting out here. I know in Kansas City they work very hard, not only reaching out through a big sector of their fan base, but they also spend a lot of time keeping access to Chiefs' games accessible to people at all levels of economics and all levels of pricing. They've been tremendously successful. Other teams model their programs on those of the Chiefs and other successful teams. So I think we'll continue to be responsive to that.

Q: We had a strange situation in Washington this year, where a franchise player never signed and sat out the whole year. Their position was that they should not be allowed to franchise again as the Redskins said. What's your opinion on - about Sean Gilbert should be allowed to be franchised again?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: I don't know if we have a position on Sean Gilbert. The Redskins have said different things or reported to me about the Red Skins' intentions with respect to Sean Gilbert. We have told the union in our recent collective bargaining notions that it's critically important that the franchise player concept remain in our collective bargaining agreement. I think it's one of the most important features that serves the interests of the fans, because it's a key element of our agreement that provides for player stability, player loyalty, player commitments to their existing teams among the top players.

And, so our ownership feels very strongly that the franchise player concept is critically important. How Sean Gilbert gets resolved in that context is something that I'm sure the Redskins are focusing on. If we can play a role, as we have in some instances in the past where there have been holdouts, working with Gene Upshaw and his people, we'll be glad to do that.  Gene, I think, has been very constructive in these situations where there have been holdouts, and we would look forward to working with him on the Sean Gilbert situation, as I'm sure the Redskins would.

Q: The guy didn't sign for a whole season; they want to franchise him again in this situation?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: I understand that. We would try to resolve it.

Q: Ben gals owner Mike Brown has said that if a land transfer agreement between the City of Cincinnati and Hamilton County is not in place by January 31st, he would withdraw from the city-stadium deal. Are you prepared to step in and facilitate an agreement if no progress is made?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Yes, we've been already involved in that.   I spoke to Mike yesterday about it. I've spoken to elected officials in Ohio about the Bengals' situation. We expect to be involved between now and the 31st of January in the effort to get it resolved.  It's an unfortunate situation. It's almost bizarre to think that a plan that was as thoughtfully worked out as that, agreements that were put in place on an unconditional basis, could get hung up by some collateral dispute. That's where it seems to be at the moment. But, I think we'll get it resolved.

Q: Last year San Francisco stadium referendum, which barely passed, is under investigation for possible voter fraud. Now, they're going to have some legal action. They promised those people out there, the people in the Bayview seemed to think they were going to have ten thousand jobs. Now we read that there's a possibility that the Super Bowl is going to be there in 2003. What are the NFL plans if they don't get the new stadium, and what are they going to do about these people that seem to think there's a possibility of 10,000 jobs or 8,500 permanent jobs?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, again, I think that the stadium will go forward. I was in San Francisco during the campaign, as you know. Mayor Brown was very emphatic that it was not just going to be a stadium; it was going to be a retail complex. That the stadium would be part of a much broader economic development project in San Francisco. The mayor is proceeding on that basis. The 49ers are proceeding on that basis, and I think the project will eventually get done on that basis. And, that would include a lot of new jobs as the mayor has insisted upon. And, as you know better than I, when Mayor Brown insists on something, and gets a commitment, he's usually pretty good at making sure that those commitments get honored.

Q: As you well know, we've been involved in this on going stadium controversy this year, and the task force is going to go back in March to seek the 2002 Super Bowl. There's been some talk along the way that some more improvements need to be done in the stadium for the next Super Bowl. The capacity of the stadium is not going to reach 70,000 Sunday, as agreed to in the previous bid. Now, if there's an exemption process, I understand where you can be exempt from that particular criteria, is that something that you would do or are these people going to have to put more money into the stadium?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, I think that the stadium here is only one element of the equation. Some of the talk about improvements and the price tag on the improvements, I think, were premature, to put it mildly.  We have already committed to the people in San Diego, to the mayor and others; that we will sit down after the Super Bowl and talk to them about the 2002 Super Bowl selection process - the geography of the area, the people, the spirit of volunteerism, the friendliness that's here. All of those things are extremely important.

Alex Spanos' commitment to make these things succeed is extremely important. There are going to be other cities competing for 2002. There are a lot of factors that are going to go into San Diego's chances of getting the Super Bowl in 2002. But I think all the discussion about improvements and a big price tag, I think, has been premature. Certainly, I've not been part of those discussions. They don't grow out of any analysis that we've done. That analysis will be made after the game, and we'll have those discussions with people here. It's a very strong candidate for the Super Bowl, but there are a lot of factors that go beyond whether we can seat 69,000 people or 71,000 people, or whether we have certain types of seats and don't have certain types of seats.

Q: How much influence do the Spanoses have on getting the next game and how much did they have on getting this game?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, Alex is a very persuasive owner for a couple of reasons. Number one, they were in the Super Bowl themselves several years ago. He works extremely hard with his management team, Bobby Beathard and others, to put an outstanding team on the field, so he is committed to great football.  Secondly, he's committed to this area in a way that's been demonstrated not only with his support of the Super Bowl bids, but the Republican National Convention and other things.  And, thirdly, when Alex sets a goal and commits himself to do something as he's done, he keeps his word. And he has a lot of respect among the other owners because he thinks about the league first and only about Alex Spanos second, third or fourth. And so he contributes strongly to the league, to the strength of the league; people appreciate that. But, he's also selling a very strong area. So I think he's a pretty persuasive salesman.

Q: Commissioner, throughout the years the Mexican fans have shown the love for the game, the NFL, the biggest attendance ever, and maybe the fans are ready for that second step. My question is first: Is the American Bowl going back, the Cowboys may be playing in August against New England. And, secondly, there's been some talk about Tennessee not having the attendance they want, and maybe they'd be willing to play Pittsburgh in the regular season and maybe Mexico will set another record.

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: You might. You think you could get 140,000 people there?  We're going to be looking at that possibility of having a regular season game In Mexico. Over the period of this television contract, those discussions will look not only at Tennessee, because of the uncertainty of its stadium situation for 1998, but whether we can have some type of a rotation, where there would be games, regular season games, played outside of the United States in a way that would not be a major negative for the committed fans of our teams in their cities.  So, it would have to be a fair rotation. It would have to be only an occasional obligation of the team to play a regular season game away from its normal fan base.

In Mexico, as you know, we're not only looking at playing games, we're looking at grass roots programs. We're looking at development of athletes at the NFL level, based upon the performance Marco Martos had last year.  I think we have real pros for continued growth in Mexico, not only for the American Bowl preseason games, but long-term for regular season games, as you suggest.

Q: Recently Edward DeBartolo, Jr. resigned as active owner of the 49ers, pending investigation of his obtainment of a casino license. We see the warning you post on the wall in the locker rooms, asking them to refrain from gambling or associating with known gamblers. But, correct me if I'm wrong, owners do not have the same rules. They can obtain a casino license legally. He did that, voluntarily, not because it was against any law, stepped down, rather. Owners also, as I understand it - owners could drive to Las Vegas and place wagers on football games, even though owners are in a position to trade a player, order a player cut; order a move. Do you see any contradiction there? Do you anticipate any changes in NFL's rules about owners being involved with gamblers or gambling? Could you explain that, please? Thank you.

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Owners are subject to the same rules as players, and all other employees. The signs in the locker rooms are directed principally at the integrity of our own football games. The signs in the locker rooms are directed at taking bribes, influencing the outcome of games, betting on NFL games, and those prohibitions apply to everybody: Coaches, general managers, commissioners and owners.   What Ed DeBartolo may or may not have been involved in with respect to casino gambling in Louisiana has nothing to do with betting on NFL games. It is a form of casino gambling; that it does not involve point spread betting; does not involve sports betting of any type.

There are also questions as to whether he was proposing to be directly involved in casino ownership or primarily involved in ownership and management of the retail mall that was to be constructed as part of the casino development. So, those issues are entirely separate from the issues that is our primary focus, which is point spread betting on NFL games and other types of sporting events.  In that area we have seen what has happened in college sports in the past several years, where there have been players involved, in one way or another, in gambling. We are more vigilant than ever, more thorough than ever, and that's our focus.  On the other side of the coin, there's been an explosion of gambling in the United States that many people find to be mind-boggling. Indian reservation gambling and other forms of river boat gambling and so forth, that's an area we're currently studying to see whether owner involvement or player involvement or any other type of involvement with that type of gambling creates direct risks for the National Football League and for the integrity of NFL games.

At one end of the spectrum, traditionally horse racing and ownership interests, in one way or another, in horse racing has not been a concern, because people have satisfied themselves in the NFL that it's strictly regulated by the state. It's remote from football; strictly regulated by the state; doesn't pose an issue.  What we're trying to do now is analyze, in light of the new realities of non-sports gambling, where we should draw the line. Ed DeBartolo's potential investment in Louisiana is being looked at in that kind of a framework. And I don't see any contradiction between that and how we deal with the integrity of our own games.

Q: You said earlier you have spoken to representatives of stadiums other than the coliseum. For the benefit of people in our town, does that mean you have ruled out the coliseum for a return of football to Los Angeles?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: No, not by any means. It means we are proceeding on parallel tracks and not limiting our discussions to the coliseum at this point. 

Q: What is your feeling about the coliseum as a place?

COMMISSIONER TAGLIABUE: Well, my feeling about the coliseum is that it ultimately is a question of how the fans would react to NFL Football in that venue. And then that, in turn, involves two questions: What are the qualities of the stadium, itself, and what are the qualities of the broader entertainment zone - if that's what you want to call it - that people are considering for that section of Los Angeles. And that's been the focus of our discussion.  It has to do with the museum complex. It has to do with the relationship of the USC Campus to the museum complex to the coliseum, to the sports arena and so on. And that's part of our ongoing discussion. Under the right circumstances it could work. Under the wrong circumstances, I think there would be serious risks that it wouldn't work.

End