BarleyNY
-
Posts
10,482 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by BarleyNY
-
-
I applaud the urgency you're projecting but I'm not sure that your statement is factually accurate. If an owner takes a leap of faith, he/she will do so knowing there's "only" a handful of years left on the lease, after which time the franchise is a free agent. So he can give Buffalo the benefit of the doubt initially but still relocate if WNY can't get it's act together. Or he can sell to yet another buyer who won't have the Erie County lease to contend with.
My thinking is this: While there might be an owner willing to go the route you are stating I can't imagine that they would be the winning bid. An owner who can only depend upon staying in Buffalo and playing at The Ralph will have a valuation of their potential investment in the Bills that is much less than an owner who prices in moving the team to a bigger city with a better/newer stadium. The potential owners will know their options in detail before valuing the team and putting together their bid. Buffalo needs to make sure that the valuation of the team staying in Buffalo is reasonably high. Even if they aren't as high as LA or even Toronto there are relocation costs including the relocation fees to the other NFL owners to consider as well as inherent risks in moving a team. Lastly, the PR of the situation matters a great deal. If Buffalo is at the table with a quality new stadium and deal it will be tough to justify a move. If it looks like there isn't support for such measures, well, I'd use the Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns as examples of that.
Could a new owner assume that he's going to get a good deal here or simply move in a few years? Sure. But the problem with that is that potential owners are likely to be talking deals with new cities (as well as Buffalo) now. That's dangerous territory. Art Modell was a big voice in denying Baltimore an expansion team years before he moved the Browns there. Many people think he saw what they were offering and cut a deal to move the Browns to Baltimore years before it became public. I worry that someone cuts a similar deal with LA (or maybe even Toronto). Then they drag their feet (like Modell did) on the specifics of new stadium/renovated stadium front. Lots of public griping, but slow actual progress. Then it's too late and the reason given is that the city wasn't committed to supporting the team when, in reality, it was a done deal a long time before. I am a native Clevelander. I just don't want to see Buffalo lose the Bills and this situation looks way too familiar. What will likely keep the a Bills in town is getting a deal together a few years earlier than the lease says it needs to be in some incremental amount of money. It just isn't that much different.
-
I have been saying the same thing since it was known that the Bills were coming up for sale. The city has to put together it's best offer now, including a bright, shiny new stadium. The difference in value between a team in Buffalo playing at the Ralph and one playing in a new stadium in Toronto or Los Angeles is far too great. Buffalo needs to make it difficult for an owner to leave even if they can't quite compete with the Los Angeles. The time to do that is now, not in three or four years because by then it will be far too late. No new owner is going to buy the team without a plan and that plan isn't going to be "Buy the Bills and Hope Everything Works Out". If Buffalo doesn't have a solid deal on the table you can bet some other city will. Another city might anyway, but if Buffalo doesn't come to the table pre-sale then they are simply conceding losing the Bills. Then the city will end up trying to lure the Jags or another team here with at least as good of a deal. A deal they should have offered the Bills to stay.
Isn't the greater duty of the trustees to carry out the wishes of the deceased?
That is one hell of a hand to push all your chips in on. If that is what Buffalo is going to pin its hopes on then this is over - and not in a good way. I'm sure it will be a factor if bids are reasonably close. If not, then the decision is easy.
-
You don't think the fact that his former coach as well as his family have reccomended alcohol counseling and that his family says he drinks to cope miiiiight be worrisome for an nfl qb?
That's not to say it can't be fixed, but it's certainly a strong mark in the "con" side if your doing pros and cons of Johnny football, and trust the commentary coming from those around him (which doesn't sound unreasonable given his long term track record)
I think that you are
- forgetting what it is like to be his age
- missing that the main difference between him and many other players is not their behavior, but the number of cameras pointing his way
- missing that his drinking has not seemed to have had an effect on his play or preparation
- missing that he has seemed to be exercising a lot more responsibility than many others who party (no positive drug tests, drunk driving, etc.)
I'm not saying that his situation doesn't bear watching. It does. But Pettine is right, until his behavior impacts his job it really isn't much of the team's business. The minute it does, then it is.
I'm not sold on him as an NFL QB. He's got a lot of work to do and things to improve before he is viable, but people need to get over themselves.
-
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if Manziel fails in the NFL, it will have nothing to do with his partying. He just gives a lot of people a flashpoint to push an agenda and shout uninformed opinions.
-
$963M Pegula
-
Most of those teams have some hope (regardless of whether of not I like the young guys on the teams). Even Houston has Savage which provides a little. The Jets have Vick and Geno which qualifies as a short term possibility for some success and little to no opportunity for long term success. But Tampa Bay has neither with Glennon and McCown. TB gets my vote.
-
Then maybe off to Philly for a nice dinner at Del Frisco's!
-
Where did I contradict that? Did I imply I didn't understand the economics?
I just pointed out that it's the fans that pay for these excesses, and wondered where the tipping point for fans might be. It's pretty close for me, and not just due to the behavior of the players.
I think that the implication was pretty clear. Why do you care what the players spend their money on? Do you care that Irsay uses the money he's making from owning a team to pay for his dope and booze? The fans pay for those, too. What other goods and services do you refrain from purchasing because of how employees of those companies spend their money? It just seems odd that this particular situation is such an affront to you.
-
Does this restaurant have a luxury box or multiple season tickets? Do the car dealerships where players purchase their cars have them? I think there is a lot of that kind of thing going on. Nothing I'm gonna lose sleep over, because it's all part of becoming a multi-millionaire overnight, and is a rite of passage into the crazy, mixed up world of professional sports. I just hope most of the money gets circulated back to the low rungs of the local economy....probably not though.
Ultimately it's the fans that pay for this kind of excess. The tickets, the parking, concessions, etc. And of course, being endlessly bombarded with advertisements. They don't just want your money, they want your time (and mind). At what point does that experience become more unpleasant than pleasing?
The fans will pay the same regardless of whether or not athletes are "responsible" with their money or not - or even if they are well paid or not. That's just economics. The league and the owners primarily seek to maximize revenues and profits. The NFLPA joins them except in cases where it adversely effects the players (like more games). Then the owners and NFLPA fight over each's share of the take.
As for how players (and even owners) spend their money I could not possibly care less. If they want to burn through it in five years and live the life of their dreams, so be it. It's their money. If they want to make it last their whole lives, then that's great. The only ones I have any sympathy for are the ones that invested and tried to be responsible, but got taken by scam artists. I bet they would have rather blown it all on $60k dinners and Bentleys than have seen Bernie Madoff or one of his ilk make off with it.
-
But, $10.50 for onion rings???
Ouch. They'd better be some damn good onion rings.
-
$3 for caramelized onions is pretty reasonable.
-
Windows close quickly. The d line has a chance to be a dominant unit but Kyle Williams is getting older, Mario's cap number spikes, Hughes is a free agent, and Dareus' issues are well documented. Gilmore is not far from free agency and if he is the elite CB that some believe the going rate on that is quite a bit. Glenn will be one a FA at the same time. Spiller & Fred are both up (although I don't think too much to resign). Mike Williams cap number spikes next year as well. Spikes becomes a FA again next year. There are a lot of question marks in the not so distant future. Some will work themselves out and some will not. I am not trying to be depressing but when you start looking at it we are not far from some tough decisions.
Some players will age out and some will have to be replaced for that or other reasons. I don't think the Bills' cap situation is bad. They should be able to retain the players they want to keep. Kyle and Mario will be the toughest to replace, although I don't think either are at the end yet. It will take some work on the FO's part, but that's good. If there isn't work like that to be done then you don't have much of a team.
-
I am by no means EJ's biggest fan (or hater). I have some reservations based on what I have seen but think that he has a chance. With that being said I still have no issue with the move for Watkins. They had him as the best player in a great draft. He can be a game changer and has a high floor. You only have so many opportunities to add elite (not good) players and he can be that.
This team is built to win now. If EJ isn't that guy I think that they will miss their window waiting on another rookie to develop. If he is not the guy they will have to acquire a veteran that is ready to play and win now. I understand that the Bills don't have a 1st to trade but often 1-2 shake loose. I could see Bradford, Dalton (if they don't in alone his extension), Smith, Cutler, Romo, Palmer, Cassell, Roethlisberger, Cousins, Mallett, Hoyer, or Henne. Obviously, some are better options than others. Bradford or Romo would be realistic options IMO. If the Cowboys win 5 games are they going to pay that price tag for a 35 year old QB? The Bills could deal a 2nd for him and keep him for 3-4 years.
Trading or cutting Romo between the 2014 and 2015 seasons would mean $37.4M in dead money for the Cowboys, which would be almost $10M more than his cap hit if he is on the team. Parting ways with him is not feasible for the Cowboys. I doubt Dalton comes available unless he flames out this season. Bradford is a maybe, but I'd bet 2016 is more likely. The Rams will want a better option on the roster first. I don't see the Steelers letting Roethlisburger go, although I'm not sure how they are keeping him happy with his current deal. He is very underpaid for what he brings to that team. Cutler won't be available. He got his contract and is staying in Chicago. Hoyer will likely only be available if he fails/is injured and gives way to Manziel who, in turn, plays well. Not another name on that list interests me. Smith would be the best of the remaining names.
I don't agree on the "window" comment. This team can be stable for years. RB and MLB will need addressed for next season, but I don't see a lot of important contracts ending that I don't think can't be extended. Who is aging out in the next two years?
-
If EJ sucks and/or gets injured I guess I'd start by getting depressed early for the 2015 Bills season. Let's face it, that's the big risk here. If we are halfway through the season and EJ looks bad, then we know it will take a "rabbit out of the hat" move by the FO to effectively address the QB spot for 2015. Even if the Bills still had their 1st round pick it is a tall order to find a quality QB. And if EJ is very bad it is likely that the 1st round pick will be high in the draft. That's (obviously) the natural spot to get a good QB prospect. So the FO has taken away the team's best hedge for EJ failing. That should even make EJ's biggest supporters nervous.
If EJ shows he can be a quality QB in this league, then there's no problem. We can all hope for that, but I'm one to plan for all contingencies. That hasn't been done here. Not addressing the QB spot with even a developmental player was a big mistake IMO. Why not bring in a mid to late round prospect who has upside? He wouldn't have been an immediate threat to EJ's job as starter, but doing so would have at least given the team an "out" in 2015 or beyond if EJ failed. I really think the FO failed the team in this regard. If it doesn't work out then they'll pay the price.
-
Sounds like you need to take it to PPP
I only know PPP as "piss poor planning" so I'm not even sure what you meant. I just don't do the school girl crush thing on players is all I'm saying.
-
0 games, 0 catches, 0 yards, 0 TD's. How about "The Big 0"? Or, we can wait for him to actually do something before we give him a nickname.
.....or we could let people have their fun.
It's a mad mad mad mad idea but if he was a bit taller I'd have liked "The Big W".
I'm glad we didn't draft Mike Evans as I think ME might be the best nickname for him.
It doesn't make him any less right. Yes, people can have their fun. Yes, I see this from nearly every team nearly every year so I'm not pointing my finger at just Bills fans. Yes, it's a slow time of year. But I think the idea of giving a rookie NFL player a new nickname is pointless and kinda wrong in an entitlement way. If the player already has a nickname, fine. Go with that. If not, let him EARN one that has something to do with what makes him successful. It will be a better nickname that way anyhow.
-
There is no denying that they can move in 2020 but it is impossible to do so before that. I don't know the specifics of the Browns lease but the Bills lease and non relocation agreement are 100% ironclad. That is not unintentional. The faster that the sale takes place the better off WNY will be. I still am not that concerned. I started at about 75-25 that they were staying and I am at about 95-5 now.
Here is the issue we had in Cleveland. There were two years left when they moved. Negotiations had been going on for some time prior to that. There were no out clauses, but Modell wanted to move the team. His threat was that if he was forced to stay he would trade away draft picks and players for future picks and put a product devoid of any talent on the field for those two years. Then he'd move the team. No way did the NFL want to see that. He got released from the last two years after agreeing to leave the colors, name and history in Cleveland.
Those tactics and others like them are available to the next Bills owner, too. Cleveland thought they had a lot more time than they actually did. I don't want the Bills fans to be too complacent and rely primarily on the lease. It would be a mistake. The sale of the team will take time. Stadium deals take time. Financing, design and construction take time. Things could be a lot tighter time-wise than most realize.
-
Every situation is unique because of their lease deals. There are no situations that are completely alike. If a move is to take place it will be in 2020.
The lease is the best thing about the current situation IMO, but any contract can be broken for the right price. The Browns only had two years left on their lease (with no buyout) and got nothing but the team name and colors for Model breaking it. The Bills have 5 seasons before a buyout is contractually permissible, but the sale could take this season (or longer) to complete. Time can tick away quickly.
-
Points taken, only difference is Cleveland's owner was alive and he moved the team. If Mary Wilson sells the team to someone who will move them, she completely taints her husband's legacy. IMO, I don't think she wants to do that. Art Moddell willingly tainted his own legacy.
So Mary Wilson wouldn't taint her deceased husband's name for something in the neighborhood of an extra quarter of a billion dollars? Heck, she could sell under a tacit public agreement that the new owner would keep the team here (nothing legally binding, of course). Then the new owner moves citing a lack of commitment by Buffalo (read: didn't get the deal he wanted here, but found it somewhere else). She can then say she was as blindsided as the rest of the city. While that might still tarnish her reputation somewhat, I doubt it impacts her husband's.
-
Well but we don't know what she is keeping. Could be a lot of good stuff.
I had the same thought. Or maybe she's not a fan of impressionists and is trading those in on some Jackson Pollocks.
-
1. Rogers would need approval first from the trust to buy the team, then from the league.
2. He would need to win a court case in Erie county so that he could pay the $400 million
3. He would then need approval from the NFL to move the team.
4. He'd have to pay a relocation fee, if approve.
5. He'd have to have a place for them to play, as Rogers centre doesn't meet NFL requirements for attendence and is getting refitted with grass the seats in the lower bowl can't be positioned for football games hence the Argos leaving. That means building a stadium, which hasn't started, and even if it did start today, it would still be at least 2 years before it was finished.
6. These stories are getting more and more ridiculous.
EDIT: And I assume you mean Edward Rodgers, son of Ted Rodgers. Rodgers communication, can't buy a team.
Very similar to the arguments in Cleveland circa 1995. If there is more money to be made, then there is a way out for the owner. And who says they'll move the Bills the instant they buy them? They could time it as they saw fit. If there is a move to Toronto there is a temporary stadium in places to use while a dedicated one is built. They actually have an advantage over other cities with that. I'm sure they could get a temporary exemption for attendance for a year or two. None of the arguments against a move is something that can't be worked around. I saw it up close last time and would rather not go through it again here, but the situations look too similar for my comfort.
-
This helps to hurry up the new stadium in WNY
I hope so. I'm a Cleveland native and the current situation here looks very similar to the one there. The change of ownership is different as is the lack of incentive that the NFL had to want the move. At the time of the Cleveland move many NFL teams were finding it difficult to get quality deals from their cities for new stadiums. The Browns move spurred that in a big way as cities were worried about losing their teams.
The reality in Buffalo is simple, disturbing and familiar to me. A new owner will want to maximize revenue and the key to that is a quality new stadium at favorable terms. If Buffalo (Erie county) wants to keep their team they will need to pony up and they are going to want to do it before there is an all out bidding war. If they drag their feet before agreeing to a new stadium, like Cleveland did, they may find that there is already an undisclosed deal in place somewhere else and that it is too late. Then Buffalo will be handing out the deal they should have offered the Bills - or better - to a team like the Jags to get them to move here.
-
As usual, the $126M is for entertainment purposes only....
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/05/the-full-kaepernick-contract-details/
That seems a lot more reasonable. Makes sense now.
-
Wow... So much money for a guy that has a LONG way to go as a pocket passer. This is a huge gamble.
Agreed.
Poloncarz confirms there are suitors who want to move the team
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I don't doubt that some prospective owners would do that. But again, their valuation of the franchise will be less than that of a prospective owner who has a good deal already worked out with LA, for instance. That's a bid that should be higher, so that's the bid that would almost certainly win. That is my concern.