Brent Schrotenboer

USA TODAY Sports

HOUSTON — The Rams are moving back to Los Angeles after 21 years in St. Louis. But will the San Diego Chargers join them?

NFL owners voted 30-2 Tuesday night to approve the relocation of the St. Louis Rams, ending a 21-year absence for the NFL in Los Angeles, the nation's second-biggest television market. The owners also gave the Chargers a one-year option to join them if they reach an agreement with Rams owner Stan Kroenke to share his proposed stadium in Inglewood, near the L.A. airport.

If the Chargers don't exercise that option, the Oakland Raiders, the third team that applied for relocation, would then be given the opportunity.The league also will offer $100 million to the Raiders and Chargers for a new stadium in their current markets if a binding stadium agreement is approved by the NFL by next January or possibly later.

Such was the decision handed down Tuesday at a marathon meeting of NFL owners - a giant victory for Kroenke, a giant loss for St. Louis and plenty of angst for the Chargers and Raiders.

"The excitement that we feel about being able to return the Rams to Los Angeles is balanced with a disappointment that we weren't able to get it done in St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland," NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said.

The Chargers had partnered with the Raiders in a proposed stadium deal in Carson, another L.A. suburb. But the package fell apart when owners favored the Inglewood site.

"We worked hard, got a little bit lucky and had a lot of people help us," Kroenke said. "First of all, my partners in the league and the league office were just outstanding. They really served to inspire me and keep me going. It is a difficult process, and as Roger said, it is bittersweet. We understand the emotions that are involved of our fans, and it’s not easy to do these things."

Chargers chairman Dean Spanos was non-committal about what he planned to do with his team next -- either try to stay in San Diego or join forces with Kroenke. "It’s very difficult to say right now I'm going to do this or do that," Spanos said.

A person close to the situation with the Chargers said the team expects to reach a deal soon to join Kroenke in Inglewood, leaving San Diego, the team's home since 1961. That could mean weeks, with the NFL helping negotiate terms for a Rams' stadium partner. The Chargers don't want to be in limbo very long, and any vote for a new stadium in San Diego might not pass.

Spanos called it an excruciating day, one that was filled with dramatic twists and turns. After studying the issue for months, a powerful NFL committee recommended earlier Tuesday that the Chargers and Raiders move into their joint venture in Carson.

But then came the first ballot. Twenty of 32 NFL owners favored the Inglewood project.

That was still four votes short of the 24 necessary for approval, forcing the league to find a way to negotiate a deal. The owners clearly favored Kroenke's Inglewood project over the Carson project and wanted the Chargers to join forces with Kroenke instead. The problem was that the Chargers said they had "zero interest" in joining the Inglewood project as recently as Monday. Any vote in favor of putting the Chargers in Inglewood with the Rams wouldn't be binding without a deal between the Chargers and Rams.

So it started to get even more complicated. To get the Chargers to agree to join the Rams in Inglewood, Kroenke likely needed to offer the Chargers risk protections and a greater share of control and revenues associated with the project. The league also needed to find a way to take care of the Raiders, which lack a viable new stadium plan in Oakland.

Kroenke said Tuesday night he was willing to offer a lease or an ownership stake in the stadium.

"My goal from the start of this process was to create the options necessary to safeguard the future of the Chargers franchise while respecting the will of my fellow NFL owners," Spanos said in a statement.

Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones had pushed the idea of the Chargers joining the Rams in Inglewood. But the Chargers initially responded to the idea by saying it was committed to the project in Carson, where it has spent significant resources and had a legal agreement with the Raiders.

Walt Disney Co. chief executive Bob Iger was tapped to shepherd the Carson project and made a presentation on its behalf to NFL owners Tuesday.

Iger told reporters earlier Tuesday that the NFL's return to L.A. should be "big and bold."

He was right about that from the NFL's standpoint, except the owners believed Inglewood was bigger and bolder. The plan is bigger than Carson and part of a larger entertainment, retail and office development covering nearly 300 acres near the L.A. airport. The 168-acre Carson project was expected to cost $1.7 billion, compared to around $2 billion for Inglewood. Both were to be privately financed.

"I think this is going to be one of the greatest complexes in the world," Goodell said of the Inglewood plan. "And I think it’s part of Stan’s vision."

All three teams were unhappy with substandard stadiums in their current cities and lack acceptable or actionable alternatives to replace them. But the NFL didn’t want three teams in L.A. and didn’t want to finance two separate stadium projects in the same metro area. Instead, it will support one new stadium plan in L.A. capable of being shared by two NFL teams.

Unfortunately for St. Louis, that leaves Rams fans there with with one older stadium and no NFL teams.

"Tonight’s decision is disappointing, and a clear deviation from the NFL’s guidelines," Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon said in a statement. "It is troubling that the league would allow for the relocation of a team when a home market has worked in good faith and presented a strong and viable proposal. This sets a terrible precedent not only for St. Louis, but for all communities that have loyally supported their NFL franchises."

Follow sports reporter Brent Schrotenboer on Twitter @Schrotenboer. E-mail: bschrotenb@usatoday.com