CodeMonkey

What has it generally been for, 8 games? So roughly a 25% increase more than likely.

I don't like going to games for reasons I won't get into again. So for my purely selfish reasons I like the Toronto games as it guarantees at least one home December game will be televised for me locally. From a Bills business perspective the game makes sense. They get a guaranteed December sellout plus get to keep season ticket prices lower which in theory anyway, means more sales. The only negatives are fans who like to go to games at the Ralph, can't, and it gives up home field advantage which would mean a lot if the Bills were in the hunt for a playoff spot in December. So i agree with you my robotic friend, anyone who has complained about the Toronto series should reward the Bills for this decision. Remember too that this is only a postponement, it could easily return the following season.

I couldn't possibly disagree more. You pay to see games, and for the privilege of having a local team, not for wins. The team owes you nothing more than putting on a game. If you do not like the quality of the product on the field, you have plenty of options to voice your displeasure including stopping financial support if you like. But the Buffalo Bills do not owe it's fans any more than they currently provide.

Yeah it was way better when only the owners were allowed to be greedy scumbags,

Many (not saying PTR does or not, I do not know) are of the opinion that to question or complain or worse still, fail to financially support the franchise will cause the Bills to relocate out of Buffalo. If you assume that mindset then you can see why some people can't accept complaints from anyone, be it after 14 years of suck or 114.

Along those same lines ... Once when my daughter was very young she came in and sat next to me while I was watching the super bowl. She asked which team was the Bills. I told her neither because the Bills weren't in the super bowl that year. She stared at me for a good 30 seconds with a puzzled look on her face and said "If the Bills aren't playing then why do they bother putting it on TV?". I gave her the proud papa hug

My kids simply expect the Bills to suck every year because that's all they have ever known. That's not all bad as they are never disappointed at the end of a season. However they are old enough to remember the Sabres not sucking so they do expect more from the Sabres than they do the Bills.

Two out of three of my now teenager kids weren't yet born.

Finally a thread worth reading this off season, well done! Now what you need to do is do the same analysis for college QB's and join the Bills analytics team!

I will admit that I find the entire definition of what the NFL considers a contract very odd. A player and a team enter into a contract whereas the player plays for the team for 3 years for 1 million dollars a year (no mention of "guaranteed" money). The next day after the contract is signed the team decides they no longer want the player and cut him. The contract is unilaterally dissolved and it is like it never happened. No money is paid to the player, there is no breach of contract or anything. However if the player the next day decides he wants to play for a different team, he cannot dissolve the contract. If he doesn't report/play there are repercussions. I understand it is legal because that's how the lawyers draw up the contract, and is the reason there is guaranteed versus non-guaranteed money in the first place. But it is ridiculously one sided. The NFL is given special considerations to allow their monopoly in the first place. This contract inequity should not be tolerated in my opinion. Why the players union allows it is mind boggling. If you and I enter into a contract where you agree to pay me $X a year for Y years for something and I fulfill my part of the contract you are not getting out of paying me, you can bet that /soapbox

I'm not sure that's true for Dareus, but maybe. Spiller????? Not a chance. Not yet in his career anyway.

Fair enough. A development league would certainly have value to the existing teams talent pool. But at the moment Roger has his hands full trying to find new revenue streams to keep the NFL inflation going. Both things concurrently is probably too much.

This all seems like much ado about nothing to me. There is no way NYS is going to fund a new stadium in Buffalo, even partially. There is no way Buffalo can afford it even if it was a good idea. The NFL certainly not going to fund it without assurance of a payback in a timely manner, which they could never get. The Ralph is going to have to do until either Buffalo turns into a major market or the Bills leave Buffalo.

The NFL wants to expand its market to increase profits and pay for ever inflating player salaries. A D-League in the US will not do that. If they have any hopes of keeping the inflation going, they need to start bringing in revenue from outside of North America. I don't think they have a chance in hell of making that work, but it is their only hope. This is not about development at all, it is strictly a business issue.

I agree but am puzzled by the EJ one. There is no border between below average and solid starter

I agree with this one with the exception of Mario Williams who I would bump up by one.

The NFL is basically trying to remove overly dangerous things like kickoffs so good luck with that one. Though logically I agree with you. Out of bounds should be out of bounds in all directions.

YES! I was going to suggest this one as well. Right now there is almost no reason for a WR not to pull down a DB if there is a good chance of an interception. It should clearly be loss of down and I would also say 15 yards. PI now puts the ball at the spot of the foul. They have to make offensive PI sting as well.

A lot of things factor in but yeah the fans take a financial hit for sure. P. Manning as an example got paid 18 million for the past season. This about that for a minute. Ignoring preseason and playoff games, that's more than 1 million dollars per game. That is pure insanity and that economy has to have a correction at some point I would think. Even TV advertisers are going to have to balk at some point.

It crossed my threshold several years ago. But even with things like PSL's ticket sales league wide are still pretty strong. I have to believe though that at some point the NFL will push it too far and will have to roll back prices, salaries etc. or face a collapse. Until then though they are making crazy money.

Leaves a bad taste in peoples mouths though. Paying money for the privilege of giving them more money for your season ticket.

I never understood that. So a kid signs a letter of intent with a college then the next day the coaches he would have been working with are gone? I'd be pretty pissed, particularly if the deal was made ahead of time. Bait and switch.

Yeah I imagine they would consider it bad press to have players opening using weed.

A good short term fix to generate more revenue. Well done Commish!

i disagree. It's neutral in my opinion (assuming you aren't using it during a game or practice ). But I agree with it becoming a team issue at that point, along with alcohol and any other recreational drug,