BullBuchanan
-
Posts
5,895 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by BullBuchanan
-
-
59 minutes ago, BillsFan17 said:
Free speech is free speech, on any platform. Across any playing field you put it on.
No, it's really not.
You don't have the right to say whatever you want, and you certainly don't have the right to do it without consequences. You just have the right not to be imprissioned or sanctioned by the government for it.-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:
How many people is he entertaining?
When I was a smoker, an ounce would last a LONG time. Like a few weeks.
He's a professional athlete, I'm sure he has more than his fair share of hanger-ons. Also, if I was a pro athlete I'd buy in bulk too. I wouldn't exactly want to be popping down to a dealer on a weekly basis. -
5 ounces is really not that much at all. Personal consumption is completely realistic here, especially if he entertains. Thats's a completely legal amount in a lot of places that have legalized. $1000 street value/$500 from a dispensary.
-
1 hour ago, Jrb1979 said:
What does that have anything to do with what I posted? Do people not enjoy the summer?
I don't, but it hovers between 95-110 down here the whole time, so that's why. The other 9 months of the year are pretty great.
I'll always have a place in my heart for bitter cold snowy days, though. -
I see a lot of Jay Cutler so far, but it's early. Elway would be in that line but it's a bit early for that.
-
Am I the only one that kinda likes Mike Schopp? he does a pretty good job with quality content, but most of the callers to WGR are completely terrible. His interviews with bills players and coaches is usually solid, and he typically doesn't shy away from tough questions.
-
1
-
-
Hyde was a 92 in 2018, but he fell off pretty hard from that high last season. i think an 86 is fair. However, Poyer should easily be that high. Shady is done, Hughes is on the back side of his career and no one else is really worth mentioning except the ridiculousness of White. He should have started at 90.
-
1
-
-
This draft is bogus. Why draft a WR top 10 when McBeane can get a 5'7 guy after the draft?
-
14 hours ago, H2o said:
I got Brady. How many SB wins do the Pats have without him as the starter?
They've only had one crack at it to find out during BB's reign and he went 11-15. I think that's a pretty compelling case. If he was able to trade Brady and keep Jimmy G, I don't think he'd have missed a beat. -
You don't "have to" have the elite #1, but it makes you have to compensate in a ton of other areas. there's a lot of ways to build a great year-in-year-out team. You don't even need a #1 RB or a #1 QB. You either need to out-skill your opponents or you need to be able to out-scheme them and you need the requisite talent to make that happen. Having elite players at positions that help you score or prevent the other team from scoring makes that whole process a hell of a lot easier.
Winning the Super Bowl takes a bit of luck, but the better you are, the better position you put yourself in to get lucky. -
6 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:
That's the same thing they said at the advent of the forward pass, plastic helmets, facemasks, and artificial turf. If football lost its soul, it did so long before the Astrodome.
I mean, let's not kid ourselves. The quality of game itself has been on a massive decline since the eighties.
-
22 minutes ago, Jrb1979 said:
You keep saying that but then explain how it works in Cleveland. They have PSL's and just raised their ticket prices. I am pretty sure Cleveland as a city isn't any more well off then Buffalo is. I think it's just that a lot of are afraid of being priced out.
It DOESN'T work in Cleveland. In fact they got rid of PSLs 5 years ago. Also, the Browns stadiumw as built in 1999, they have cheaper tickets than we do, and their attendance is lower.-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:
Apparently you don’t know any , ergo they don’t exist in the humble hamlet that is WNY.
I sure don't know 70 thousand of them. The top paying fields in Buffalo are all high end medical jobs, and there aren't that many of them. How many luxury clothes stores stores exist in Buffalo where you pay $500 for a tshirt? How many Teslas, Range Rovers, Porsches, Bentley's, Ferarri's do you see on your commute?
If you see them chances are good they're athletes, high-end doctors, or construction company owners. You need that kind of money to afford the types of ticket prices they charge in new stadiums, and there simply isn't the volume for that in Buffalo NY. Maybe someday soon, but they need to start attracting more high end IT companies where making 100k is on the low end of comp. -
10 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:
Once again, this is not about filling seats. It’s about getting fans who are paying higher prices to fill them.
Who are these people in western NY?
-
No roof. Let the "fair-weather" fans watch at home or in the box seats. If you add a roof, say goodbye to the Winter Classic, too.
As Chan Gailey said, "It's a tough game for tough people." -
On 7/2/2019 at 12:14 PM, The 9 Isles said:
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/07/02/issue-of-stadium-credits-hovers-over-cba-talks/
“Spinning it forward to cities that currently have stadium issues, the NFLPA would/should/could have influence over the stadium solution in Buffalo. What if, collectively, the NFL’s workforce deems it prudent to have its own money spent in a different market? A market where the return on the investment could be greater? A market where more NFL players would prefer to live and to work?”
Why would NFL players care about the stadium? They're onsite for 8 days a year and not as fans. The playing surface is good (if not better) than any in the league. -
1 hour ago, Zerovoltz said:
My unsolicited two cents.
I don't claim to know anything about the stadium in Buffalo, the politics of the city, county or state. I don't know what motivates the Pegulas etc....but I would say that having read through the thread....the zoomed in view about the local issues of it all are what is being discussed.....and that matters..but consider this.
The NFL revenue model isn't really based all that much these days on "local" revenue. The big money is the TV deals. ....When you look at the NFL TV data in the United States...it is a mature market. Cities that do not have a local team, have practically the same viewership as towns and cities that do have one. The NFL gains NOTHING from a TV viewer stand point just because a team moves. You could move the Bills to Portland Oregon for example...and you might get a small bump in TV viewers in that area...but they've already been watching. There isn't a spot on the US map where you can put a team today, right now, and make any sort of impact on TV viewership. From this standpoint, Buffalo is VERY SAFE....it's a good market, with good fans that support the team. There is no more empty LA sitting out there anymore for the owners to ponder about...
The problem for Buffalo though is in fact TV viewers...and I don't mean local, Western New York viewers. The NFL has got about as big a domestic audience as it can get. To increase revenues in a major way, they need to expand internationally. We've all known for a long time they've been looking at London.
Stay with me here.....so keep this in mind as well....if the leauge expands, they have to divide the same TV revenues they get now, with more teams..that makes each slice of the same pie, a little smaller for all the owners. What they would like to do, in order to maximize revenues for the existing owners and share less of it with new owners...is instead of expansion to international markets...they are going to want to move a couple of existing franchises......keep in mind..NFL viewership in the US is practically the same in towns with teams, as opposed to towns without them...you don't lose significant numbers of viewers if you move the Jags to London for example. ....but you GAIN a TON of new international viewers and TV rights over there....big addition of revenue.
Now...the way this could affect Buffalo is that the NFL, in their quest for TV MONEY (not the small fries of local stadium revenues) ....could view the Bills as a potential franchise to move to an international destination......including Toronto, even thought the exhibitions and regular season games there were flops.....the NFL and certainly a good many willing businessmen, would view the CANADIAN TV market as something worthwhile to expand into. I've read some studies that show Toronto has enough NFL fans to make it work....and just because the Bills weren't supported, doesn't suggest it would fail....rather, they want their own team to root for...and just as most of the nation of Canadas baseball fans follow the Blue Jays....and the NBA fans in Canada are Raptors fans....they expect the same of a lone Canadian NFL team.....you don't just get Toronto...you get a good portion of the whole of Canada.......same with Mexico.
It would not surprise me that at some point in the next 10 years, the NFL identifies up to 3, but most likely just 2 existing franchises to move to London and Toronto. I'm not saying that it is a given that it's the Bills, but just something to consider.
The existing 32 owners could then expect huge new revenue streams, while keeping the streams from domestic markets in tact...AND not having to share those new revenues with an expanded pool of owners.
...and also...Arrowhead..while old, was very well designed, and has been successfully renovated/updated over the years. It produces revenues at a decent clip, and they have a good lease with the county to where the Chiefs control concerts/events there. There isn't much clammoring for a new stadium in KC because the existing structure is fulfilling.....or rather filling, the owners wallet.
Agreed on all counts. Add Soldier Field and Lambeau to the list.
-
14 hours ago, GimmeSomeProcess said:
Good take 30 years ago, not so much any more. The people moving into are young and tech savvy and future Bills games attendees. A new covered stadium downtown will still be affordable. It’s going to be a convention center/football stadium/concert/special event venue. A place that generates money more than 8 times a year.
They already have the arena for that and a convention center. The only real value add would be stadium concerts, and how many of those do you think the Buffalo market can attract and sell out? It's a small city with average salaries 50% or lower of larger cities.
Buffalo can't even support local live music or comedy to a sustainable degree, what problem does Taylor Swift solve? The area needs more employers with a lot more six figure jobs if anyone is going to win on a new stadium. -
11 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:
Yours is a tired, outdated take from circa 1982. Things have changed in the last ten years or so, and continue to improve. Also, the stadium thing isn’t about selling more tickets. It’s about increasing revenue and generating new revenue streams. That’s hard to do with a subpar stadium in a cold climate with an entrenched cut-rate pricing schedule. How do you make a substantial price increase for the same cold, bare bones seat? How do you entice the more deep pocketed fan who stays away due to cold weather and a somewhat out of control stadium environment ? As always in sports, winning is far from guaranteed yet money needs to be made. The majority of the league misses the playoffs in any given year.
Seriously, even at the current bargain basement prices, the average man/ woman is hardly the target market for a pure luxury entertainment product like NFL football games. The current stadium is only about 72,000. A new facility should be around 65000 or so to create demand.
They aren't squeezing that much more money out of the Buffalo market. It simply isn't there. Stadiums also tend to make really ***** venues for other types of events. I saw George Strait at the Arena, and while the performance was great, the experience was pretty terrible. They'd be better served upgrading there for big events, and leaving the stadium alone. I'm also a hard-line no dome guy. I think it's detrimental to the game and the fan experience, but you probably know that already. -
Just leave the stadium alone. It's perfect for the market. The only thing they need to do to sell more tickets is win more games. Buffalo needs to focus on improving their economy if they want to replace their blue collar clientele with box seats and PSLs.
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, thebandit27 said:
I think that's a bit low for Kelly. I've become accustomed to calling him a top-15 QB.
But so much of it is subjective.
I think there's an unquestioned top 4 of (in no particular order) Unitas, Montana, Brady, Manning. After that there's a HUGE chasm before you get to the next tier of 10-12 that includes, IMO: Elway, Marino, Kelly, Aikman, Favre, Brees, and Graham. I can see an argument for Bradshaw based upon Super Bowl wins, so throw him in there as well. Same goes for Big Ben. I think recency-bias is weighing too much when I see names like Rodgers, Wilson, and Warner in there, but if you add those dudes in there, then there's your group of 12.
So I suppose I'd say there's a top-4, a top-16, and after that it's highly debatable.
Elway and Brees are easily top 6.
-
Browns coast to a division crown - lock of the century, of the week.
-
1
-
-
It's just a story to cover up how the logos are crooked. Man, what piss poor execution. Nike following the Gibson model it seems.
-
On 6/29/2019 at 5:54 AM, Nanker said:
Wrong. He had the sickest play-action fake I’ve ever seen. He had a great arm and was a budding star. Unfortunately for him and The League, he busted up his shoulder and after the (old school) surgery, he could hardly throw the ball any more. His talent was undeniable.
That story is as old as sports. Jim McMahon was another, and you could even make a case for David Carr. I'm sure it would make for a fun 30 for 30, but it's not exactly a big deal if you don't remember that version of a guy from 70 years ago.
Howard Stern Wants OJ Simpson Thrown Off Twitter; Interviews Kim Goldman
in Off the Wall Archives
Posted · Edited by BullBuchanan
It's not just gymnastics, but it's factually wrong. I am under no legal obligation to allow you to have your voice heard, and I can use any legal means at my disposal to prevent it if I want to. A non-government owned facility is in the same boat. If this forum, facebook, twitter or your local newspaper decided that they wanted to censor specifically you and your opinions, that is not at all illegal.
I'm a staunch defender of the first amendment and strongly believe in listening to dissenting opinions as long as they have merit, but in order to do that we need to be explicitly clear about what free speech is and what it is not. Various media outlets (and political figures) have blurred the lines as to what free speech is in recent years, but factually there's a very clear line between government entities (The FCC) and private individuals/companies (Facebook/Twitter, etc.) even when they are publicly traded.
Edit: you can consider it bad form, or unethical for a company to censor your opinions or gate the boundaries of discussion, but there's no legal merit to it in most cases as long as it doesn't discriminate against a protected class.