var _ndnq = _ndnq || []; _ndnq.push([’embed’]);

It’s not Las Vegas vs. Oakland any more, not really.

The Raiders’ future? As NFL owners get set to congregate in Arizona over the next few days, all attention is on Las Vegas, its freely available money (whether or not that’s wise), and the Raiders’ desire to relocate there.

Not on Oakland. And its lack of available money (which I think is wise). And the Raiders’ and the NFL’s extreme disinterest in, and distaste for, any potential plan to keep the team in the East Bay.

You can blame whoever you want for this, and there is plenty of it to go around, but for all Raiders purposes, Oakland is in the rear-view mirror, past-tense, removed from viability in this conversation.

(Except for the plan to keep playing in the Coliseum two more seasons while the prospective Las Vegas stadium is constructed, and yes, that could get quite awkward.)

For the upcoming meeting, this is singularly about the owners deciding whether Las Vegas is ready for a “yes” vote.

It’s not about Oakland; it’s not about Oakland mayor Libby Schaaf and Ronnie Lott’s development group trying to round up nine “no” votes for Vegas.

Because the NFL owners just aren’t listening to any Oakland representative anymore; there just isn’t an Oakland deal there that the NFL will consider and they have that Las Vegas money sitting there on the table.

The exact site in Las Vegas hasn’t quite been picked out yet, the terms of the lease agreement are still slightly blurry in some areas, and Bank of America only recently jumped into the picture to fill the $650 million gap opened up when casino magnate Sheldon Adelson (and Goldman Sachs) exited the project.

There are questions to ask and numbers to clarify, no doubt. And if there is an up-or-down vote for Las Vegas, it likely will be conditional just on firming up some of the numbers that the owners can only assume at this point.

But from very credible reports just in the last few days by CBS’ Jason La Canfora, Albert Breer of Sports Illustrated’s MMQB and the NFL Network’s Ian Rapoport, it’s obvious that the NFL’s process has shifted from figuring out if Las Vegas can work … to making sure that it does.

If there’s a debate over approval, it’ll be over Las Vegas issues, not because the NFL is trying to give Oakland more time. If there’s a delay over Las Vegas, it’ll be because the owners want more time to clarify the Nevada deal, not over any second thoughts about Oakland.

Basically, my understanding is that the NFL itself is tacitly back-boarding the Bank of America loan with a “will not fail” promise to the bank.

If Raiders owner Mark Davis cannot meet the future debt-service payments, the strength and liquidity of the NFL will guarantee the payments, and nobody has ever gone bankrupt betting on the NFL’s financial heft.

That’s a guarantee that the NFL either was not asked, or was not willing to make, in potential Oakland dealings, by the way.

Breer reported another key piece of information: The NFL likely will keep the Las Vegas relocation fee relatively low, under $400 million (payable over many years), instead of the $650 million fee for the Chargers and Rams to move to Los Angeles.

This is the NFL deciding that it needs to get the Raiders’ situation concluded and that the only way to do that now is to approve Las Vegas.

The owners can’t walk away from the $750 million already approved by the Nevada legislature for this project, and they know Davis is not likely to put together a stadium deal in any other way.

And by now the NFL absolutely knows that Davis can’t get this deal done in Oakland.

That is the essential point here: Davis plus Oakland is the specific combination that doesn’t work.

And if you can’t subtract Davis from this formula, well, there’s only one thing the NFL can do: Split off Oakland from this situation and try somewhere else.

Or else this will be stalemated forever and the NFL is signalling that it cannot stomach any further stalemate.

Even if the owners don’t especially want to leave the Bay Area with the East Bay booming, even if the owners know that Davis probably could’ve done a lot more to position himself to get a stadium done in Oakland, the relevant truths are that Davis is the owner and he can’t get it done in Oakland.

And the owners owe one to Davis, who tried to get a stadium deal in Oakland as best he could, gave up about two years ago, then played along with the owners when they rejected his attempt to move to Carson.

Oh, and he’s not selling the team.

Yes, the NFL has wanted to try to make Oakland work — or to get Davis to agree to spend a few years in Levi’s Stadium — but what we’re seeing now is some strong percentage of the owners deciding in real time that it’s just not going to happen.

So this clarifies things, but just not in the way anybody for keeping the Raiders in Oakland would want.

If the league believes the financing is workable for the Las Vegas plan, the Raiders’ application to move will be passed by a relocation committee.

If it goes to the committee, approval for Las Vegas will be recommended and it will go to a vote before the full ownership body, possibly by Monday.

If it goes up for a final ownership vote, it will — by all indications — get the 24 votes necessary for approval, and maybe many more than 24.

And the post-Oakland days for the Raiders, except for those two or three purgatory years waiting for the new stadium, will have officially begun.