Bills(70)

Contrary to popular belief, the Green Bay Packers are not free loaders. As a point of fact, the Green Bay Packers have the largest financial backing of any team in the NFL. This team is publicly owned and backed by not just the city of Green Bay, but by the Great State of Wisconsin as well. Last time I checked, In 2008 Wisconsin’s gross state product was $240.4 billion with an annual average over the last decade of $200.3 billion (source: http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Wisconsin_state_budget). The Packers aren't hurting to say the least. The Bills should be allowed to follow this model, unfortunately the NFL will no longer allow it, which is discreminatory practices to say the least.

From what I understand, the new uniforms are geared for a Canadian fan base prespective.

I see your POV. The indication based on the Saints is solidified in the State population numbers for LA. That's the point I was attempting to get across there. Also, on Toronto, I tend to agree with you, I feel the Canadian fan base isn't as nearly interested as people preceive, but it did not stop the organization from their course of actions with regards to promoting the sport within Toronto itself. As for my statement on ownership. I just watched the press conference with Golisano and the sale of the Sabres. I stand corrected, to a point. Mr. Golisano has no current interest in owning the Bills, he did however, keep the window open with regards to the future given the atmosphere surrounding the team and any attempt to relocate the team. I must stress this however, Mr. Golisano is a treasure here in WNY. He is loyal to the region in so far as attempting to maintain it's current status as an area worthy of keeping the sports franchises in WNY. That is the first time I've heard any of this. I own my own small renewable/alternative energy company that does utility scale projects from time to time. I have spoken with some business leaders in the region and none of us, not one, had any idea he would be interested in retaining the Bills here in Buffalo. This is ground breaking news, and should put Bills fans at some ease on the current situation with the organization. It most also be pointed out that Mr. Golisano would need a significant partner with vast financial resources to secure such a deal, if the possible sale of the Bills can be achieved. What does this all mean then? In affect, it means that there are individuals with large capital resources at their disposal, that would be interested in partnering with Mr. Golisano to purchase the Bills, if it becomes necessary to prevent their depature from the region. That is fantastic news. Every Western New Yorker should forego any anger they have about the Sabres in these past 7 years and extend a hearty thank you to Mr. Golisano for what he has done and what he just offered in that press conference.

The Saints are not a small market team, not by far. They deliver a fan base that stretches farther north than Baton Rouge (where a good portion of my family lives). The Packers are a very fortunate team indeed. And you are absolutely correct in pointing them out. However, they have the luxury of a state tax base (not just a city) behind them. The Packers are the model I wanted to the Bills to mimick. They are publicly owned, and the fan base there is much larger than just Green Bay alone. The Packers are consistantly one of the top 10 teams in terms of popularity among NFL franchises. Of course, the storied history and past has much to do with this, but it's also due, in part, to the large contingent of fans that reside outside of Wisconsin itself. These fans were never from Wisconsin either, something the Buffalo Bills have never been able to generate in their history. Many variables here, but take a look for yourself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Bay_Packers Once again, comparing the Packers to the Bills is apples to oranges. Not even in the same catagory. As for your question on what markets are potentials outside of Toronto and LA, let me start by saying the Buffalo Bills won't be going to LA. That dog don't hunt. Toronto is already being groomed for the possibility. This stint of games up in Toronto (who by the way, already have a domed stadium, albiet, a subpar one for what would be needed here) isn't a market scheme to get people to come to Bills games from Toronto. It's an acclaimation period, giving the fan base of Toronto time to "grow", if you will, into NFL fanatical fans. And having their own NFL team in Toronto (the first one outside of the US) is a bonus for another large Canadian city, Vancouver. With both of these cities vast populations, it makes sense that the NFL would target one of them, if not both of them, for future business growth. Starting with Toronto. The other cities with great potential are Salt Lake City, Utah and Portland, Oregon. Or, you could look to cities such as Las Vegas, Nevada and San Antonia or Austin, Texas. As these cities populations continue to grow or rebound from the downturn, it is very plausible to see an NFL team finding success in anyone of those markets. They already have or are approaching the population numbers that would be needed to run a successful, privately owned team.

Prevailing North American weather patterns have always been driven by the Jet Stream as well as the Arctic Trade Winds. Both of which flow in a west to east pattern. Remind me again which side of Lake Michigan Chicago sits on? A majority of Chicago's winter weather comes across Nebraska/N. and S. Dakota/Iowa/Minny and the Kansas Corridor. I don't know about you, but I don't see a whole lot of great bodies of water in those areas. This is not to say Chicago doesn't get it's fair share of snow. It does. But it doesn't compare to Buffalo, and once again, this leads us into a "Strategic" view of the Bills survival in the region, not just a "Tactical" one. http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/askjack/2003-10-01-snowiest-cities_x.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake-effect_snow

Buffalo's population will continue to decline. Along with the surrounding regions (i.e. Rochester, N.F., as well as the rural areas). I respect that opinion because quite frankly, to date, the Buffalo-Niagara region was fortunate to have owners step in and save the Sabres. But this isn't a 190 million dollar hockey team in the 4th rated sport in North America were speaking on here. The NFL is a very serious business, and it's bottom line shows it. The Buffalo Bills won't be here long after Mr. Wilson passes, that much I am sure of. Unless an investment can be made long term not only to the enhancement of team facilities, but to the fan base itself. I am sorry, but the numbers don't lie here. The exodus continues out of this region, and shows no signs of stabilizing. Some in the business community have privately stated that the region could drop below 1 million in population by 2025. That's a mere 14 years away. That would make Buffalo the lowest local fan base in the league by far. Not a good indicator for the future of a professional football team to remain viable market wise in the NFL while there are a multitude of other locations with larger markets. A domed stadium would not only stave this off for a bit, but would also generate interest in development and hopefully some growth in the region. You really have to look at the strategic plan, not just the tactical one when approaching a situation such as this.

Gate receipts would make it financially viable given the lack of fan base remaining in the region for merchandising locally.

Chicago and Cleveland have stable population bases above 2 million.that can support a team that does not need there facilities to operate on a near 365 day a year basis. The locations of Buffalo and Cleveland have very similiar situations weather wise, but Chicago doesn't compare considering the lack of condensation collection coming across the plains as opposed to bodies of water such as the great lakes. The number I arrived at stems from NY regulations, infrastructure upgrades, prevailing wages and material costs for the engineering of a structure that can withstand the weight of accumalted snow or a heating element system to keep the snow weight down combined with a drainage system. The prime location for such a facility, to minimize such costs is in southeast Buffalo, within a 3 mile distance of downtown given the existing infrastructure there in an effort to minimize costs. The reasoning is fairly simple. In order to drive business to the Stadium for non-football related events, a close to proximity of downtown location allows for further enhancement of revenue generation. As for the LOS, it seats 60+ thousand I believe, a stadium here in Buffalo will most likely seat in excess of 80 thousand. Plus there is the mandated programs that are sure to come with a project such as this for the immediate surrounding area around the stadium. Parking and Business are in the immediate area are going to need growth capital as well. But the larger costs will be the infrastructure upgrades needed as well as the structual integrity of the facility itself in such a high volume snow accumulation area as Buffalo. I happen to know Mr. Pegula. I work in the energy industry. So yea, I guess I do know a little more than you.

LA will not be the destination. In case you haven't noticed, Toronto is being groomed. (It baffles me how so many people are in denial over this). Yes, in point of fact, the area will need a Domed Stadium. Comparing NYC to Buffalo is oranges to apples. The weather is as different as night and day. One sits by frozen fresh water, the other by moderate temp ocean. You cannot seriously compare the 2 when it comes to the need of a domed stadium or not. For this region, on the "Western" side of the Appalachian Mountains with weather 7 months out of the year flowing down from the arctic via Western Canada and the Great Plains of the US, then crossing the large bodies of fresh water, a domed stadium is the only way you are going to get a servicable 365 days worth of business out of a facility of this nature. And don't kid yourself, Football is a business, first and foremost, just like any other, and as such, positive cash flow is the only way to mark success. Especially for a constantly declining area such as WNY.

Pegula is out. He is going to spend alot of money in multiple areas, the Bills aren't one of them. Golisano isn't interested in another round in sports franchises either. Jacobs? Maybe, but he lacks the financial means to achieve all of the necessary goals for the Bills to stay in Buffalo. Rich? No way, he is down with this area. Kelly? Hahahahahaha, please, if this guy had the tools together, it'd be a done deal already. No, I think many people here are discounting what the real cost of the Bills is going to be. It's not just the franchise itself. It's the new Domed Stadium that will without a doubt, have to be built for any Professional Football Team to stay here in the area and remain financially viable. The team itself is no longer justified given the ever shrinking fan base regionally due to the constant lose of population numbers in the region as industries continue to downsize, fail or pack up and leave. Without a Domed Stadium, the Bills are as good as gone, it's merely a matter of time now. The cost of a Domed Stadium engineered for the eastern end of the Great Lakes would be roughly 1.7 billion dollars or more. That does not include the price of the team.

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner johnny. This! There will be a law suit and out of court settlement for sure on this one. It is against the law, period.

I'm not stating that they shouldn't be exposed, I am stating I do not believe the owners (outside of GB) have any responsibility to do so. I do agree they should negotiate from a position of integrity, but at the same time, it's the owners who should be making the most money, not the players. If I look at the NFL as a business (which it is), then I would have to include all expenses as liabilities, including the players contracts, stadium expenses...etc....etc..... I cannot subscribe to the average of 33 million on 32 NFL teams. That makes no sense what so ever given the overall net worth of the NFL product. I do believe in price controlling in the current economic environment given the affects it has on the overall product. Football being the number 1 sport in America currently, the owners have no motivation to show the records/books. Like I said, the owners are in the drivers seat now, and the players can fully expect a "hold the line" or "reduce expenses" mentality from ownership given the reduced purchasing power within the market. As ticket prices, concessions and merchandise pricing go up, there has to be an off setting cost somewhere else to maintain a cash flowing business. The owners or the players? Thats the question, and as I stated, the owners control the overall product, they are now in the drivers seat.

You are correct, and you have no idea how close to correct you are. I've been at a table where 1 or 2 billion dollar deals were being discussed. Bottom line here is they cannot actually expect me to believe that at an average of 33 million annually league wide, there would be some nut willing to finance that, especially give the current state of the economy and the fiscal sector. People need to except the fact that high risk investment has officially gone the way of the doodoo, and for a good long while I might add. There is no inflationary factor built in that's realistically flexible enough to curve itself on a sliding scale outside of the roughly 2% annual range. We all know (or atleast you better dam well know if you plan to make some money in the next 10 years) that inflation is coming, and coming hard. There has never been a successfully controlled deflationary period then inflationary period to equate out to a balance sheet. It doesn't work, it can't work. The owners are the ones people should be paying attention to. The public sectors are out of money to help stave off a shutdown in any particular situation. The owners, not the players, have the upper hand now. If a lockout occurs, it's merely a write off for the owners, no biggy given the financial burden that lifts. Adn the most important thing of all, the owners only lose concession and gate ticket sales, an amount to be sure, but nothing compared to merchandising of NFL products.

Agreed CodeMonkey. Even if Kelly, Thomas and the crew can get an ownership grou together, they'll need to find an extra 2 billion dollars in the next 5 years or so and build a domed stadium. It's about the only way this team is going be cemented in Buffalo for any longterm period. People shouldn't be worried about the Ralph or the new ownership group. They should be worried about what is going to anchor this team here longterm, and a state of the art Domed Stadium does that without question.

It is old. Buffalo, New York needs a domed stadium, and not along the Lake front either, but NorthEast of Downtown, even in the Riverside area would be fine. You want to minimize the Lake affects dumping on the dome. South of the city is not the place to build it given the snowbelt, North/NorthEast of the city is the common sense place to put it. Without a domed stadium the Buffalo Bills are going to end up leaving WNY, sometimes, the truth hurts.

I firmly believe this is total BS. And here is my lone fact to back that up, and mind you, it cannot be disputed. The product on the field is proof itself. FACT: The Buffalo Bills have so many roster as well as depth needs that trading down, even to the middle of the 1st round would greatly benefit this teams roster as well as depth problems.

So, in essence what your implying is that due to people such as myself who not only believe its possibe but actually believe if the Bills reach out to each of the teams on draft day 1, we are dead wrong and that you, and people such as yourself who believe no trade can happen no matter what, are correct? This is the jist of what I'm getting here. I believe a trade partner can be found. You believe they cannot find one. History is on my side.

Absolutely correct John from Hemet. I believe we can trade down to around the 7th or 8th spot and still get an impact player with that extra pick. I would imagine a 2nd rounder would be the compensation, and I'd welcome it for depth purposes.

You are correct, we didn't have a trading partner the past 10 seasons to trade down with. Or are you? This may be the case some of the time, but I would suspect it wasn't the case everytime. The closest thing we've had to a top 5 pick is this seasons. I believe the 8th pick is the next closest. Some team will consider trading with Buffalo should they decide to trade down (which is what I believe they should do this season). It's simply a matter of want or desire for the 3rd pick overall. There will be a more than willing partner this season I am sure.

That all sounds really great about Kelly, until you come to the realization that he had guys like Wolford, "House" Ballard and Kent Hull blocking for him. This current Bills O-Line does not have that. I think it's safe to say that comparing the 2 is not remotely realistic given the conditions each have played under.

Great news. Tell your son my family says thank you to him and all his comrades for what they do for us. Enjoy your time with him while he's home and hope he has a great time while here.

We don't have to trade out of the 1st round to get multiple 2nd and 3rd round picks. We could trade down though. I would look to New England. New England gives: (1st round)17th pick overall (from Oakland), (2nd round)33rd pick overall (from Carolina) and (3rd round)74th pick overall. That is about the only way I see the Bills trading down, unless a team offers multiple years of draft picks.

Been saying it for a long while now. And completely agree. This team has multiple holes in the starting roster as well as a real problem with depth. Trading down to garner extra draft picks or, perhaps draft picks and a servicable player is the smartest play Nix and his team could make this off season.

Ah yes, the class of 83'. Without a doubt the best class in the NFL draft history. Great names came out of that class, Elway, Kelly and Marino. There were other positions as well, but as QB's go, it's hard to see the same draft class impact that those names had. Especially Elway and Marino. Kelly had a great run with the Bills, no doubt, but Marino transformed the game and Elway transformed how fans preceived the quintessential leader on the field as a general. Great days back then, and I miss those times.

Yes Please.