NFL Is Playing Games Off Field Too : News analysis: By keeping L.A. groups in the expansion picture, league appears to be putting squeeze on Houston for a higher franchise fee.

WASHINGTON —  NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue said Thursday the league will still honor a Sept. 15 deadline, and based on what it has learned by that date, vote Oct. 6 to award an expansion franchise to either Houston or Los Angeles.

He said no one has the lead in this dragged-out race.

He said the league remains very interested in meeting with invited Los Angeles groups, and will do so Monday in New York.

He said a delay in making a final determination between Houston and Los Angeles is unlikely.

That’s what he said.

But here’s what really happened at Thursday’s meeting of the NFL expansion committee a few blocks down Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House.

The NFL’s Sept. 15 deadline is bogus.

The negotiations to secure an expansion franchise are just beginning and will continue daily through the evening of Oct. 5, when the expansion committee will meet to decide if it will make a recommendation to the league’s owners the next day.

Houston has had the lead in this expansion derby for years and will be asked now to display a finishing kick.

The NFL will be looking for at least a $600-million franchise fee from Houston’s Bob McNair. McNair will balk initially and maybe even low-ball the league if he thinks L.A. no longer provides any threat.

The NFL will ask Marvin Davis, a recluse with an unspecified Hollywood Park plan, to make his own franchise-fee proposal in the next few weeks. It will do the same with Michael Ovitz and Ron Burkle, representing a Carson plan for a combined stadium and mall--already rejected by the NFL.

As a courtesy, Eli Broad and Ed Roski, representing the Coliseum, will also be asked how much they will be willing to pay.

League officials will then giggle, crumple it up and discard it. The NFL has eliminated the Coliseum from consideration--as if it is really considering Hollywood Park and Carson.

“We just don’t know about Marvin Davis,” one NFL owner said. “Maybe this will smoke him out. Let’s see if he writes the big check.”

How badly does the NFL want L.A.? After declaring a new franchise in L.A. could be successful only with a good owner, it’s now talking about embracing a guy who has no credibility in the sports world.

There are still several NFL owners upset at the prospect of walking away from all the money in Los Angeles, all the TV sets and millions of people who might make their sponsors more satisfied. Looking toward Houston, they appear to be suffering from buyer’s remorse.

There are also several NFL owners irritated at the front office’s decision to highlight the Coliseum, believing all along that Hollywood Park was the ideal site for a new stadium, the league having already approved it earlier for the Raiders.

But now the league is in a bind. Davis has an option on the Hollywood Park land, but it expires Sept. 24. If he doesn’t exercise a second option, it will be sold to a developer with no ties to sports.

NFL officials remain skeptical about Davis’ interest because of his penchant for expressing interest in a sports project and then disappearing. They also wonder if he’s an upgrade from Georgia Frontiere and Al Davis, and say his age and poor health are serious concerns.

Davis chooses not to talk directly to people. He can be on one phone line, a spokesman on another, and a reporter on a third line and his answers will be relayed to avoid direct voice contact.

He said something through a spokesman Thursday, but it was gibberish. The NFL acts as if he makes sense, but is the NFL really interested in Davis, or the size of his bankroll and how it might influence Houston’s franchise-fee offer?

The league has always been fascinated with Ovitz and Burkle--Burkle is the one with the big money--but it’s not convinced that if asked to put it up, Burkle will. If Ovitz had Burkle’s money, L.A. would have its football owner.

In the next two weeks, the NFL will not only be asking Davis and Burkle to suggest what franchise fee they might be willing to pay, but also will demand an earnest-money deposit that could top $100 million if selected to direct the project in Los Angeles. It’s not likely to happen.

Broad, the billionaire, could walk in and buy the whole thing, but he didn’t get to be a billionaire giving away his money. It would still be nice to see the NFL’s reaction, though, given their reluctance to deal with him.

“If someone in Los Angeles stepped forward and made that kind of commitment--even if the franchise fee they were willing to pay was less than that offered by Houston, the owners would probably go for it,” said a league owner. “There is still a strong feeling that it’s in the best interests of the league to have a team in L.A.”

But not at the Coliseum. The NFL does not think the state of California and the city of Los Angeles will agree to implement an incremental tax plan that would allow for the construction of parking garages. The money would be raised from taxes generated by the new team and its stadium, depriving the city and state of its share from taxes, but allowing the NFL owner to keep parking revenues.

So it’s a no-go at the Coliseum, and if Tagliabue is to be believed, renewed interest at Hollywood Park and Carson.

But do you really think the NFL will suddenly be swayed by Marvin Davis or Carson before Sept. 15? Before Oct. 6?

Or do you believe the NFL has already made the decision to put the squeeze on Houston, using L.A. to get a higher franchise fee from Bob McNair?

The meetings continue in New York Monday with the pretense of Sept. 15 meaning something. Ovitz will be there. Broad said he will not attend Monday’s meeting in New York, staying in L.A. as honored guest at a banquet. Roski will take his place.

The NFL said it expects a representative of Marvin Davis to speak on his behalf. Of course, he only speaks to his spokesman.