That's No Moon

Rutgers in the Big10 has been an absolute disaster for Rutgers in terms of being competitive. The Big10 wants them in because it gives them the NYC media market and, frankly, that's the only reason they are there. Rutgers has been a doormat the vast majority of their time in the conference because they haven't been able to compete at that level. They haven't been able to consistently recruit for squat and NJ gets raided for talent all the time. One other thing we haven't spoken about a lot is what conferences are looking for when adding schools. It's not always about the school or quality of competition they would bring, it's very often about what TV and media markets do those teams bring because that it what drives the big money for the conferences. I'm going to leave the Big 10 alone because it's not worth discussing any time soon. Let's stick with the AAC. They will lose Houston, Orlando, and Cincinnati. That's, in order, the #8, #17, and #36 media markets in the US. Buffalo is #53. That's a major downgrade when teams like UNC Charlotte (#22), UNLV (#40), Florida Atlantic (#18 and #39), Rice (#8), UT San Antonio (#31), San Diego St (#27), Air Force (#16 and #82 + a nationwide following to add to Navy), Army (#1 + a nationwide following to add to Navy) are all out there to be recruited. If you want to talk about an upcoming program who would be looking to move up who has made a MASSIVE commitment to athletics across the board recently it would be Liberty. Their market size is smaller at #71 so, again, they wouldn't be top choice, but if they could snag UNC Charlotte to go along with them and add to East Carolina it would make a lot of sense.

If that's where the administration wants to go then they better be rounding up their donors and expanding their booster base to pay for the upgrades they will need to compete. Football is both a blessing and a curse. In basketball they could probably move to the A-10 without much difficulty but that's not a football conference. Finding a home that is beneficial for both programs is not easy and the reality is that, even at the biggest schools, athletics as a whole lose money. For example, at Penn State, football and men's basketball make money, men's hockey breaks even. Everything else loses money. In some cases a lot, largely because of the required air travel and lack of tv money. Football needs a plane to get to Tampa to play South Florida, SMU etc, so do all the other sports. It racks up fast.

If they want to be big the investment in facilities goes up a lot. Like exponentially. Penn State has an 80 million dollar hockey arena, a 100,000 seat football stadium, a really nice new lacrosse field, and the Bryce Jordan center and nice facilities for all of the other sports as well. On top of that the training facilities are top notch. That is the Big 10 level. They aren't close. They are doing well with respect to their current conference because compared to Akron or Bowling Green, Amherst can be pretty appealing. The school is good and the facilities stack up well against those people. To recruit against the current AAC means recruiting against Tampa, Memphis, Dallas, Philadelphia, New Orleans, etc. What's going to be your sell to the athlete as a growing program? You can't sell tradition, you can't sell facilities unless they build a ton of them, you really can't sell the weather compared to some of your competition, you can't sell market exposure. There isn't really a community of alumns who are willing to pony up big NIL money to buy recruits.

I dont agree with that either. They'd be recruiting against Cincinnati, South Florida, Temple, Tulane, East Carolina, SMU. The travel is terrible and they'd still get wrecked. They are in the correct conference for them and their level of commitment to athletics.

Middle of the human centipede.

Conferences shop for schools that give them a recruiting footprint and/or TV market access. UB isn't one of those schools so it's not going to be on anyone's short list to add. They will be one of the schools that are leftover and fill up conferences like the MAC. They are competitive in the MAC, they can be competitive in that conference in the short and long term. The Big 12? UB is going up against Texas and Baylor and Oklahoma St and West Virginia in football but also basketball? They'd be roadkill. The Big 10 would be worse. It's a good school but it doesn't have anywhere near the athletic facilities to recruit against even someone like Rutgers let alone Penn State or Michigan or Ohio State. FWIW, I have to think West Virginia would like to get into the ACC to realign with Pitt and VA Tech, etc. Big 12 and WVA never made sense.

And the net result will be the same.

It's been swell. Bye.

And many of those got tax subsidies which just another way of giving public money to a project so those aren't even fully privately funded.

Well, you'll be alone on that path because that's not going to happen. You know why they need that? Because someone else will give it to them. That's why. That's the only reason they need. And "someone else" is out there and it will happen. Rather than ***** footing around just come out and say it, you don't care of the Bills are in Buffalo or not. That is the choice. Either play the game and have a team or die on your principles and don't. That's your choice. None of your strawman examples are valid. They aren't going to happen. They aren't going to happen because they don't need to happen. There are several cities in this country with wealthy people who would be more than happy to write the check not only for the Bills but for a stadium also. Pretending there aren't and that you are calling some sort of epic bluff where the Pegulas have no options is ridiculous. You've set up a scenario for yourself where you will be unhappy either way, either the public will pay for part of the stadium and the Bills will stay or they won't and they won't. You get to be upset either way. Congratulations.

Then stop watching them now because that's where your proposal leads.

The question then is would you root for the Bills of they are not in Buffalo and I, personally, would not. Not would I have a reason to return to Buffalo and spend money so both entities would essentially be dead to me.

Yeah, I'm sure the cartel that is the NFL will go right ahead and vote in a super majority to change that rule. Keep dreaming.

Here's the problem. All of us know the economic argument. We know this. If that's the argument you want to stick with you are right, they should let the Bills leave. I'm not sure how many people actually agree with that because that is the real discussion. Enter a partnership where the public pays a significant portion and higher ticket prices, or watch NFL football on TV forever. Those are the options, no bloviation is required. There is no perfect world where the billionaires pay for their own stuff. Do you want it or not yes or no. They just said they won't sign a lease extension without a stadium deal. What do you think that means? That isn't an option. The NFL made it against their own rules after Green Bay. You can't do it so anything related to this line of thinking is a wish and a waste of time.

There isn't so the choice is do you want a team or not and that's not a bluff. If you think it is there are many cities you can ask how that works out in the end.

Which recent downtown stadiums are you talking about?

Terry is an older gentleman.

If not though a PS is a nice way to keep collecting a check while you are waiting for an opportunity

Ben Roethlisberger has entered the chat I wonder about that. Bills sold an awful lot of season tickets. Hard to imagine THAT many people will cash out on opening day.

On the plus, borrowing money is as close to free as it has been basically ever. You can build 12 months a year in Vegas. Buffalo is a little more challenging.

I was just explaining how the one reflects on the other. I have no idea if there is actual weight to it or not and I didn't make the original post. See above

Because Hollister doesnt have one.

Kaufusi from Green Bay and Yeboah from the Jets are both on waivers. I'd love to see one of them come in. Even if we dont have a roster spot I wonder if we could lure one onto our PS.

I guess my question would be why didn't he do that already then. Pittsburgh for example needs a better #2 than what they have and there is a much clearer path to future playing time there.