birdog1960

So who pays you to be here? Are you an (pardon the pun) astroturf blogger like they have on the political sites?

Good points. He probably will, even though his accountants have probably told him that his net worth equals about 15% of the annual income of all the current residents of metropolitan Buffalo ($24.500 per year per capita X272000 population versus $1 billion rough estimate) from whom much of his wealth came, while providing a poor product most of the time. But his happiness is what's important.

Depends on how you define loser. A fair definition might be one who loses. .475 winning percentage over 50 years means you lose more than you win (i could be wrong my calculus is rusty). If you lose more than you win over that time span and are unlikely to change that ratio, then yes, I think that qualifies. If you mean that he's a winner because he's worth over a billion dollars, I'd say your right but I thought this board was about football.

Isn't success in sports usually defined by winning and losing? By that criteria, he's a loser (and not over just the last 10 years) and one wonders why the committee chose him. If success in sports is defined as getting rich...I guess you're right.

No but it had been rumored that he was instrumental in RJ starting over hot handed Flutie in that game. anybody know if that's true? Maybe the game doesn't come down to the final kickoff if Flutie starts.

I'll bet these posters are just overjoyed to get your little nod of approval! I'm terribly offended in not being mentioneed (oops, better catch that misspelled word or I'll be disciplined by the master). Pontification is just as offensive as vitriol to many of us. So if you don't like the vitriol, stop the holier than thou crap. I'm certain that you know much more of the history and inside workings of the NFL than I but I'm even more certain that I know much more about my field of expertise than you. That doesn't mean that every conclusion I make in my field is better than the one you might draw in opposition from the same general evidence. The historical corrections you made to those disagreeing with you do not in any way change the conclusion that Ralph Wilson has been a subpar owner, is unlikely to improve. and is the legitimate target of fan vitriol. Now, if you could please enlighten me, great one, regarding Ralph's motivation to keep the team in Buffalo all these years, I would greatly appreciate it. While many here would like him beatified for this (much less put in the HOF), I wonder if he is merely keeping his word by not moving the franchise. By all means, correct me if I'm wrong (and do it with vitriol if that pleases you) , but didn't the NFL pledge before congress at the time of the merger that franchises would stay put to avoid anti trust questions. If that's his reason for staying (i.e. keeping his word) then it's certainly honorable relative to some of his colleagues but hardly worthy of adulation.

Well, that was promised to congress at the time of the merger by the NFL so I concede that is a plausible explanation. If that's it then I applaud him for keeping his word when others did not.

So Ralph didn't move or sell because he loves Buffalo and its people so much? There could be multiple other reasons, including deals none of us know about that would explain his staying. But, you choose to believe (based on his strong philanthropic history and generous demeanor, I suppose) that the most flattering explanation to Ralph is correct. Does it seem in character for him to give up hundreds of millions of dollars out of the goodness of his heart? What is this estimate based on? Finally, to paraphrase your last paragraph ..."a crappy city deserves a crappy team so be happy with that crappy team". I just don't accept any of the premises or the conclusion in that statement.

The players and coaches on the 68 Jets and the 69 Chiefs had nothing to do with the merger, right? It was all Ralph's doings.

I just can't feel bad for the Titans fans. I was at the "miracle in music city" game, and while the titans fans were very hospitable (and some there were actual original Oilers fans) the memory makes sympathy impossible. I think that one play, more than makes up for all the AFL wins over them. Plus, Nashville is a great city (if the bills are decent at all this year, consider going to the Titans game-check out the honky tonk country music bars the night before the game).

He was protecting his investment. We all try to do that. It was a good bet and paid off handsomely but it's hardly heroic. Many of the guys in the HOF qualify as heros but Ralph...not so much. BTW jahbonas, love the "riding secretariat to second "metaphor but I think it's misapplied here. Levy was a great coach.

Would love to... unfortunately (actually, fortunately in the bigger picture) I had many of the same kinds of experiences with my dad and Buffalo and Bills games that Tim Russert described in "Big Russ and Me" and I hope those memories never leave my consciousness. That's how I can loathe Ralph Wilson and still love the Bills. I suspect many others on this board maintain their loyalty for similar reasons. But many of us won't be sorry when a new owner finally takes over. So, I'll ignore your suggestion.

As a fan, do you feel those are legitimate criteria for induction? Do you think future visitors to the HOF, 20 years from now will huddle before his bust and gush over his importance to the game.

Well said. would only add that I believe ralph has done a cost benefit analysis on attempting to produce a team competitive enough to have a run at a championship and decided long ago that the costs are too high. Unfortunately, the equation still hasn't shifted in our favor as he approaches his inevitable demise.

Dick jauron never quoted machievelli (but neither did Marv Levy and they both went to Ivy League schools).

Anybody want to speculate on what makes Ralph tick. If you were over 90, wouldn't you be desperate for immediate success in your lifetime project? The only conclusion I can draw is that winning football games isn't his measure of success. Guess it isn't for the HOF either.

Agreed. There seems to be an unwillingness to accept any criticism of the Bills by some on this site. Kill the messenger. Yes, Bills fans are in a weak position to enact change but that doesn't mean they should just shut up and take it. Rochester D and C in a better position than most and are doing their job. Positive results from this are open to question but blithely accepting failure doesn't work either.

"was" being the operative word. Some might contend that his success was despite Ralph.

More importantly, Ralph is a lifetime sub .500 owner.

Current betting odds to win superbowl 35 to 40:1. Between 7-9th worst in league depending on site. I've made this bet with payoff enough to go to Superbowl (if a miracle happened) last 2 years at 100:1 or greater. Wouldn't take these odds though. Would you? Do you discount the preseason that much?

Logically, it makes no sense to invest emotionally or financially in this organization. The one constant over 50 years of mostly unacceptable teams (.475 winning percentage, 9th worst among active NFL teams) is Ralph Wilson. Coaches, quarterbacks, GM's, and entire rosters change but Ralph remains and the product remains poor. Yet he gets into the HOF and garners our allegiance. Why , because he's fulfilled the American dream and gotten richer over those 50 years or because he's stuck tenuously by a city down on its luck? To me, those aren't good enough reasons but the psychopathology continues and I too will watch the early season, cheering for the Bill's jerseys and hoping for a miracle. Wish it wasn't so but it is.