Golisano Talks Future of the Bills in Buffalo

[Ronin]

To everyone on this thread, has anyone considered that if the Bills leave Buffalo after Ralph's death, that he will have been the only owner in the history of the Buffalo Bills forever. ... or at least until such a time as Buffalo would be selected for an expansion team. LOL

 

Nice legacy, huh.

 

I don't trust Ralph! He's screwed us over, whether intentionally or not, for decades.

Edited July 21, 2011 by TaskersGhost

[OvrOfficiousJerk]

In what alternate universe did this happen in?

 

PTR

 

Not to turn this into a Sabres thread, Gumby is actually not half-wrong

1) As far as meddling goes, Golisano won't be confused with Jerry Jones anytime soon -- he didn't use a royal fiat to play and/or keep pet players and personnel that were obviously underachieving. You could argue that maybe Regier was someone he had kept beyond his expiration date (the free agent exodus of 2006-2008 will be an indelible mark against him), but versus the Bills' FO at least Regier had a decent track record (the playoff misses from 2002-2004 were more due to the Rigas' stripping of the franchise and bankruptcy more than anything else). The only requirement was that they stayed within a budget, which is not necessarily unreasonable for a small market franchise.

2) Before and during the Troubles (the bankruptcy crisis), weekday night games at HSBC arena regularly drew circa 10,000. Within just a few years they became the hottest ticket in town again, with no small credit to the pt/au/ag/bronze/value set up. There are worse things than losing home field advantage to a bunch of Maple Leafs fans, especially when the Leafs haven't given us problems since Clinton was in office.

3) The teams that were put on the ice during his tenure were, if nothing else, entertaining. Not to speak ill of the "hardest working team in hockey" (or the French Connection, as I was not alive at the time), I would put the 2005-2007 Sabres the most entertaining teams I've seen.

 

The central point of those who think Golisano would be a great owner for the Bills is not that he'll do anything to put a championship product on the field, because July 1, 2007 certainly suggests otherwise. However, he'll be a great owner because he has a history of turning a moribund franchise on the cusp of relocation/contraction with a dwindling fanbase back into relevance. Say what you will, that sounds like a dead ringer for the Bills franchise right now, and if Golisano rides on his white horse up from Florida to save the Bills, I'm falling in line.

Edited July 21, 2011 by OvrOfficiousJerk

[JohnC]

This isn't really true--- Golisano himself vetoed a relatively modest contract extension to Chris Drury which Darcy Regier had negotiated (and Drury agreed to) in December 2006. By stalling with Drury and then ignoring Briere altogether the Sabres wound up with neither, and were then forced to agree to the ridiculous offer sheet the Edmonton Oilers' Kevin Lowe created for Thomas Vanek. The policy of not negotiating contracts during the season was something he believed in strongly, until it completely backfired.

 

In hindsight, allowing Drury to leave was the right decision. His productivity since his departure from Buffalo has diminished to the point that the Rangers bought out his contract this year. Golisano addressed the issue of the Briere and Drury departures in his final press conference announcing the sale of the Sabres to Pegula. He made the point that the Sabres spent almost to the top of the cap and that there were other player signings that needed to be made in the near future(Vanek).

 

In any sport with a cap system tough player and contract decisons have to be made. You can't keep all of your players at the contracts that they want----that simply is the nature of the system.

 

The bottom line is Golisano presided over a competitive and well managed team. The Bills' franchise has been in a state of front office and coaching staff for more than a decade. They have not been very entertaining and competitive for a very long time----out of the playoffs for a dozen years (including this season).

 

I find it very odd that anyone who has been exposed to the style of ownerships of Wilson and Golisano would prefer Wilson.

 

Good points. Anyone who says they worry about Golisano owning the Sabres (yet have no problem with the current owner) are historical revisionists or just crazy.

 

Golisano is hardly "cheap". He spends his time giving away his vast fortune, whereas Ralph is still wringing every last dollar from the faithful that he can while he's still breathing----for what, exactly?

 

By the way, we've moved past "Ralph is cheap" to "Ralph is incompetent". Try to keep up, PTR..

 

What owner in any sport would have his trusted marketing guru to head the football operations? Ralph. What clueless owner would bring back an 80 yr old congenial former HC who was out of the NFL for at least four comes to help him salvage his failed franchise? Ralph. That decision of hiring Levy as a hollow GM set this franchise back for years.

 

Now Nix, who I like, is undoing a lot of what the disasterous Levy era did. Incompetent is too kind of a word too describe the way Ralph has run his organization. It is beyond incompetent---it is outright weird.

[gumby]

Anyone that doesn't have a problem with how Golisano ran the Sabres was simply not paying attention. There's a reason Pegula and his executives have taken great strides to publicly declare there will be no restrictions or interference on/with the Hockey Dept.---- "hockey people" were not making the decisions in the Hockey Dept. Larry Quinn was not a hockey man, and he held sway over too many important hockey decisions. The budget wasn't a problem in principle, but refusing to negotiate contracts in-season and lock up key players (not only Drury/Briere, but also JP Dumont and Jay McKee and others) is what ultimately tore apart what was arguably the best Sabres' roster in the history of the franchise.

 

Of course Golisano's wealth would contribute mightily to an ownership group (it's not vast enough for him to go it alone, anyhow), but that's the extent to which I'd feel comfortable regarding his involvement. Furthermore, the NHL would have never allowed the Sabres to leave Buffalo, unless there were absolutely no suitors. The League bent over backwards to keep the team in Western NY, just as they have done for the Coyotes in Phoenix (a much worse situation than Buffalo's circa 2002-03). He deserves credit for stepping in, but he made a pretty big profit in the long run---- it's not as though he martyred himself for the good of the team.

 

You can't compare Pegula to Golisano. Buffalo won the ownership lottery the day Pegula bought the Sabres. Pegula is a rare exception in sports where the owner doesn't care if he loses money so long as he wins a championship. There are very few teams in any sport that operates that way. But even with that we don't know if his spending will result in championships like Steinbrenner or become a joke like Dan Snyder.

 

If you think the Sabres were not in danger of leaving your fooling yourself. The NHL couldn't keep the Thrashers in Atlanta and saw them relocate to Winnipeg. There's no way Bettman wanted to see a team go to what is now the smallest market in the NHL. (replacing Buffalo BTW). Coyotes have one more year in Phoenix and they'll be gone too. Phoenix is in a dire situation but Buffalo was every bit as much so. The former owner was led away in handcuffs and thrown in jail. The team was being run by the NHL on an austerity budget until such time as an owner could be found. But that was a temporary solution at best. Only the Hammister group came forward with a proposal to buy the team and that offer was all smoke and mirrors. Golisano literally came in at the 11th hour and saved the team. Yes I know much of that was for political reasons at the time but he still stepped up when no one else did. I don't begrudge him one penny of the money he made on the transaction.

 

There has been a lot of speculation as to how much control Quinn had over the hockey department. I have never seen any proof one way or another. Briere wasn't part of their long term plans, Drury was. Then Drury screwed them over. After assuring the Sabres they would have the opportunity to negotiate with him before July 1 he never once returned any of their calls and signed in NY. I am by no way saying mistakes weren't made but the decisions that were made was to keep the club on the team's self imposed cap. As for the other players mentioned. McKee was a UFA and signed a huge 4 year contract in St. Louis in which he was bought out before he fulfilled the contract. I will give you Dumont. That was a mistake, but that was a hockey decision in which the team decided to keep Kotalik and cut ties with Dumont. Quinn is no saint but I never doubted his desire to bring a championship to Buffalo. I have never thought that about Wilson.

 

And to PTR: Just stop. Haven't you embarrassed yourself enough already.

[Homey D. Clown]

In hindsight, allowing Drury to leave was the right decision. His productivity since his departure from Buffalo has diminished to the point that the Rangers bought out his contract this year. Golisano addressed the issue of the Briere and Drury departures in his final press conference announcing the sale of the Sabres to Pegula. He made the point that the Sabres spent almost to the top of the cap and that there were other player signings that needed to be made in the near future(Vanek).

 

In any sport with a cap system tough player and contract decisons have to be made. You can't keep all of your players at the contracts that they want----that simply is the nature of the system.

 

The bottom line is Golisano presided over a competitive and well managed team. The Bills' franchise has been in a state of front office and coaching staff for more than a decade. They have not been very entertaining and competitive for a very long time----out of the playoffs for a dozen years (including this season).

 

I find it very odd that anyone who has been exposed to the style of ownerships of Wilson and Golisano would prefer Wilson.

 

 

 

What owner in any sport would have his trusted marketing guru to head the football operations? Ralph. What clueless owner would bring back an 80 yr old congenial former HC who was out of the NFL for at least four comes to help him salvage his failed franchise? Ralph. That decision of hiring Levy as a hollow GM set this franchise back for years.

 

Now Nix, who I like, is undoing a lot of what the disasterous Levy era did. Incompetent is too kind of a word too describe the way Ralph has run his organization. It is beyond incompetent---it is outright weird.

 

 

I would definitely welcome Golisano over Wilson, but would I rather have Golisano over others? Not sure, but I do like his strong stance of how important this team is to WNY, and as much RW love that is tossed around here over the years, one thing is undeniable, Ralph Wilson has never publicly acknowledged that fact. And for the record, it has been far more profitable for Ralph Wilson to keep the team in Western New York, the county maintains the stadium, and the state and local funding he gets would never happen anywhere else. It would have cost him MILLIONS to relocate, there is no other reason this team is still here, plain and simple.

[gumby]

 

The central point of those who think Golisano would be a great owner for the Bills is not that he'll do anything to put a championship product on the field, because July 1, 2007 certainly suggests otherwise. However, he'll be a great owner because he has a history of turning a moribund franchise on the cusp of relocation/contraction with a dwindling fanbase back into relevance. Say what you will, that sounds like a dead ringer for the Bills franchise right now, and if Golisano rides on his white horse up from Florida to save the Bills, I'm falling in line.

 

 

 

Not for one minute do I think Golisano would be a great owner. But he would be an owner who keeps the team in Buffalo and that's what we all want. One of the stipulations of selling the Sabres is that on the day Pegula ever sells he has to sell to an ownership that will keep the Sabres in Buffalo. That is clearly assuring the fans the team will be in Buffalo for a long time. Wilson has never come close to that.

[Doc]

You can't compare Pegula to Golisano. Buffalo won the ownership lottery the day Pegula bought the Sabres. Pegula is a rare exception in sports where the owner doesn't care if he loses money so long as he wins a championship. There are very few teams in any sport that operates that way. But even with that we don't know if his spending will result in championships like Steinbrenner or become a joke like Dan Snyder.

 

If you think the Sabres were not in danger of leaving your fooling yourself. The NHL couldn't keep the Thrashers in Atlanta and saw them relocate to Winnipeg. There's no way Bettman wanted to see a team go to what is now the smallest market in the NHL. (replacing Buffalo BTW). Coyotes have one more year in Phoenix and they'll be gone too. Phoenix is in a dire situation but Buffalo was every bit as much so. The former owner was led away in handcuffs and thrown in jail. The team was being run by the NHL on an austerity budget until such time as an owner could be found. But that was a temporary solution at best. Only the Hammister group came forward with a proposal to buy the team and that offer was all smoke and mirrors. Golisano literally came in at the 11th hour and saved the team. Yes I know much of that was for political reasons at the time but he still stepped up when no one else did. I don't begrudge him one penny of the money he made on the transaction.

 

There has been a lot of speculation as to how much control Quinn had over the hockey department. I have never seen any proof one way or another. Briere wasn't part of their long term plans, Drury was. Then Drury screwed them over. After assuring the Sabres they would have the opportunity to negotiate with him before July 1 he never once returned any of their calls and signed in NY. I am by no way saying mistakes weren't made but the decisions that were made was to keep the club on the team's self imposed cap. As for the other players mentioned. McKee was a UFA and signed a huge 4 year contract in St. Louis in which he was bought out before he fulfilled the contract. I will give you Dumont. That was a mistake, but that was a hockey decision in which the team decided to keep Kotalik and cut ties with Dumont. Quinn is no saint but I never doubted his desire to bring a championship to Buffalo. I have never thought that about Wilson.

 

Not for one minute do I think Golisano would be a great owner. But he would be an owner who keeps the team in Buffalo and that's what we all want. One of the stipulations of selling the Sabres is that on the day Pegula ever sells he has to sell to an ownership that will keep the Sabres in Buffalo. That is clearly assuring the fans the team will be in Buffalo for a long time. Wilson has never come close to that.

I agree with everything, except about Wilson not wanting to bring a championship to Buffalo. I think everyone involved in an organization from the owner on down wants that, even if it's not said out loud.

 

And if anyone thinks that Golisano will spend more on the Bills than merely to break-even, you're fooling yourself. At best he'd be a place-holder owner, a la what he was for the Sabres, and that's fine. Ideally Pegs steps up and buys the Bills, but I doubt he spends tons of money on the team like he's doing with the Sabres.

[flomoe]

move them to Orlando fl. that's where i live. lol

 

 

I'm in Orlando too but I would prefer the Bills to stay in Buffalo. I like going there for the games and it would be too hot and uncomfortable here to watch some of the early season games.

[Mr. WEO]

I agree with everything, except about Wilson not wanting to bring a championship to Buffalo. I think everyone involved in an organization from the owner on down wants that, even if it's not said out loud.

 

And if anyone thinks that Golisano will spend more on the Bills than merely to break-even, you're fooling yourself. At best he'd be a place-holder owner, a la what he was for the Sabres, and that's fine. Ideally Pegs steps up and buys the Bills, but I doubt he spends tons of money on the team like he's doing with the Sabres.

You may be right about Wilson and what he wants. Yet he has done nothing in almost 2 decades to make that happen.

 

I want to be a Blue Angels pilot.

 

Golisano doesn't want to be a sports team owner. He bought the Sabres as an obvious act of charity for the city of Buffalo. When an owner with a true interest in the team was found, he made the sale. He's a philanthropist, not a money hoarder worried about his "legacy".

[JohnC]

I would definitely welcome Golisano over Wilson, but would I rather have Golisano over others? Not sure, but I do like his strong stance of how important this team is to WNY, and as much RW love that is tossed around here over the years, one thing is undeniable, Ralph Wilson has never publicly acknowledged that fact. And for the record, it has been far more profitable for Ralph Wilson to keep the team in Western New York, the county maintains the stadium, and the state and local funding he gets would never happen anywhere else. It would have cost him MILLIONS to relocate, there is no other reason this team is still here, plain and simple.

 

What I know for sure is that Golisano would never be the type of owner, like Ralph, who went to the podium in Toronto and made disparaging remarks about the smaller scale market in Buffalo. I'm not against the Toronto association; but I am appalled at the classless way the owner handled himself. I'm very aware that at his advanced age Ralph might have not clearly expressed himself. But what was very obvious was the sentiment that he was not satisfied with the original market that has enriched himself beyond his own imagination.

[Doc]

You may be right about Wilson and what he wants. Yet he has done nothing in almost 2 decades to make that happen.

 

I want to be a Blue Angels pilot.

 

Golisano doesn't want to be a sports team owner. He bought the Sabres as an obvious act of charity for the city of Buffalo. When an owner with a true interest in the team was found, he made the sale. He's a philanthropist, not a money hoarder worried about his "legacy".

To quote Jagger and Richards, "you can't always get what you want." And again on the flip side, spending money like it's water, a la Snyder, doesn't ensure anything.

 

And yes, Golisano has donated millions of dollars. Most of it during his quest to become governor.

[Mr. WEO]

To quote Jagger and Richards, "you can't always get what you want." And again on the flip side, spending money like it's water, a la Snyder, doesn't ensure anything.

 

And yes, Golisano has donated millions of dollars. Most of it during his quest to become governor.

No, simply spending money doens't do anything in this league, although many posters here would argue otherwise with their "small markets can't compete" mania. Ralph and Snyder are equally incompetent.

 

Yes, Golisano has spent a fortune on quixotic bids for governor--at least he had some interesting ideas and would have been a change from the Cuomo, Pitaki, Patterson, Cuomo negligence that has overseen the fall of the Empire State. But your attempt at humor falls flat. I would venture that TG has given away more money than Ralph has ever made. Golisano's job now is deciding where to give his fortune away. Wilson's is squeezing ("expect another 3 years of the same") the last dime form his team's generous fans until he literally dies.

[apuszczalowski]

If he has been thinking about his legacy, it's not evident on the field. And why wouldn't you want Golisano as owner? The Sabres did pretty well with him.

As for Golisano's comment, not sure what, exactly, he could do to prevent the Bills from moving once purchased by another owner.

If you thought ralph was cheap, you wouldn't want Golisano as the owner. He is all about the Bottom line first, team second. The Sabres did pretty good financially with him, but they very rarely were able to spend the extra money to build on what they had. He made many cutbacks to the team to make sure they didn't lose money.

 

its not a bad thing, cause this will be needed by a new owner to ensure the bills stay in Buffalo, but not good for those who think they need to spend more and not be cheap.

[Doc]

No, simply spending money doens't do anything in this league, although many posters here would argue otherwise with their "small markets can't compete" mania. Ralph and Snyder are equally incompetent.

 

Yes, Golisano has spent a fortune on quixotic bids for governor--at least he had some interesting ideas and would have been a change from the Cuomo, Pitaki, Patterson, Cuomo negligence that has overseen the fall of the Empire State. But your attempt at humor falls flat. I would venture that TG has given away more money than Ralph has ever made. Golisano's job now is deciding where to give his fortune away. Wilson's is squeezing ("expect another 3 years of the same") the last dime form his team's generous fans until he literally dies.

You can venture all you want. Some people don't broadcast all of their philanthropic efforts. And most of Ralph's fortune is tied to the value of the Bills.

 

BTW, does Golisano fly up from Florida to check-up on Paychex?

[Tcali]

If you want to criticize Golisano for the manner in which he ran the franchise that is fine. But it is Golisano who salvaged the bankrupt franchise. He purchased the team, financially stabilized the franchise and had hockey people running the team. He set a budget and the organization had to stay within the budget. It wasn't overly exspansive; but it wasn't so tight that the team couldn't compete. During his ownership stint the team periodically made the playoffs. Under the clueless Ralph the team has been out of the playoffs for 11 consecutive years, next season making it 12 consecutive years.

 

When Golisano sold the team to Pegula he had a clause in the sale agreement that Pegula could not move the team out of Buffalo if and when he sold the team. Compare that to the current aged owner of the Bills who will auction the team off when he passes, possibly causing the franchise to be relocated.

 

Another appealing facet of Golisano's ownership compared to the incompetent owner of the Bills is he didn't interfere in the hockey operations. He let the hockey staff make the hockey decisions within the framework of the budget. Unlike the owner of the Bills who at one time had his marketing guru be the head of the football operations. How unusual is that?

well stated

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

Does Ralph's silence speak volumes? Why won't he come out and say that he has worked to keep the Bills in Buffalo after he passes?

Does he know they will just be sold and likely moved, but wants to keep the paying fans on board until then?

Just wondering....Not addressing it directly seems odd.

Been off the grid for a few days - - here's my take on the matter:

 

Your instincts seem consistent with what the publicly available 2006 version of the NFL Constitution & Bylaws says about the manner in which a membership in the league (i.e., an ownership interest in a team) can be transferred. Maybe Ralph has never said who the team will be sold to when he dies because he knows that the only way he can control who becomes the next owner of the Bills after his death is to leave his controlling interest in the team to a member of his "immediate family," as that phrase is defined in the NFL Bylaws. He stated in 2007 that the team will be sold after he dies - - so unless he has changed his mind, he simply doesn't control who the next owner of the Buffalo Bills will be. If anyone thinks that can't possibly be true, you need to read the NFL Constitution and Bylaw language quoted below.

 

Unless you have some reason to believe that the relevant provision of the NFL Constitution & Bylaws has been amended since 2006, the following language controls all transfers of team ownership during Ralph's lifetime OR after his death - - whether any of us or even Ralph likes it:

 

http://static.nfl.co...ers/pdf/co_.pdf [see Article III, section 3.5("Transfer of Membership"), specifically at pages 8/292 through 9/292]

 

"3.5 No membership, or any interest therein, may be sold, assigned, or otherwise transferred in whole or in part except in accordance with and subject to the following provisions:

 

A. Application for the sale, transfer or assignment of a membership, or of any interest therein, must be made in writing to the Commissioner. Upon receipt of such application, the Commissioner is empowered to require from applicant and applicant shall furnish such information as the Commissioners deems appropriate, including:

 

(1) The names and addresses of each of the buyers, tranferees or assignees thereof;

 

(2) The price to be paid for such sale, transfer, or assignment, and the terms of payment, including a description of the security for the unpaid balance, if any;

 

(3) A banking reference for each buyer, transferee, or assignee; and

 

(4) If the buyer, transferee or assignee is a corporation, a copy of the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws thereof, together with a copy of the share certificates of each class of stock to be outstanding, the names and addresses of the directors and officers thereof, the names and the addresses of the stockholders therein, and the price paid or to be paid and the time of payment for said stock, a copy of any proposed voting trust agreement and of any voting trust certificates.

 

B. Upon receipt thereof, the Commissioner shall conduct such investigation as he deems appropriate. Upon completion thereof, the Commissioner shall submit the proposed transfer to the members for approval, together with his recommendation thereon, and all information in respect thereto that the Commissioner deems appropriate. All sales, transfers, or assignments, except a transfer referred to in section 3.5© hereof, shall only become effective if approved by the affirmative vote of not less than three-fourths or 20, whichever is greater, of the members of the League.

 

C. If any person owning or holding a membership, or an interest therein, dies, such membership or interest therein may be transferred to a member of the "immediate family" of the deceased without requiring the consent or approval of the members of the League nor the Commissioner. Similarly, if any person owning or holding a membership or an interest therein, by stock ownership or otherwise, seeks to transfer such membership or any interest therein by gift, such membership or the interest therein my be transferred to the donee if the donee is a member of the "immediate family" of the donor. In such event, no consent or approval of the members of the League or the Commissioner shall be required to complete such transfer. The "immediate family" for the purpose of this paragraph shall mean the wife, child, mother, father, brothers and sisters, or any other lineal descendant of the deceased or donor. In all other cases involving death or transfers by gift, any person succeeding to a membership or an interest therein, whether by gift, will, intestacy, or otherwise, must be first investigated by the Commissioner in such manner as the Commissioner deems appropriate. Upon the completion thereof, the Commissioner shall submit such succession or transfer to the membership for approval and shall accompany the same with his recommendation thereon. No such succession or transfer shall be effective unless first approved by the affirmative vote of not less than three-fourths or 20, whichever is greater, of the members of the League."

 

The above language doesn't necessarily mean the team will be moved after Ralph dies, but it does mean that the other 31 NFL owners would control who becomes the next owner of the Buffalo Bills if (1) Ralph still owns the controlling interest in the team when he dies, and (2) Ralph does not leave his controlling interest in the team to an immediate family member.

[Mr. WEO]

You can venture all you want. Some people don't broadcast all of their philanthropic efforts. And most of Ralph's fortune is tied to the value of the Bills.

 

BTW, does Golisano fly up from Florida to check-up on Paychex?

Your claim was that Goliasano donated more to his vanity than to charity. Now in full retreat, you hint at clandestine giving by Ralph.

 

Why would golisano need to check up on Paychex? He doesn't run it anymore. He's no fool.

[Doc]

Your claim was that Goliasano donated more to his vanity than to charity. Now in full retreat, you hint at clandestine giving by Ralph.

 

Why would golisano need to check up on Paychex? He doesn't run it anymore. He's no fool.

"Clandestine giving by Ralph?" LOL! It's only "clandestine" if you refuse to see what's plainly in front of your eyes.

 

And Golisano has spent far more on his failed bids to become governor than he's donated to charity. This is not even debatable.

 

Wait, Ralph "runs" the Bills? Or he owns them and hires people to run them? What way do you want to spin this one?

 

Again doc, I applaud Golisano for buying the Sabres and keeping them in Buffalo. However he spent the minimum on the team so as to still turn a small profit. Fortunately for him, he inherited a great coach, a salary cap was instituted a year after buying the team, and it's easy to make the playoffs in the NHL. If he were to buy the Bills, you'd be whining for the days of Ralph's meager spending.

Edited July 23, 2011 by Doc

[May Day 10]

The Sabres are > Bills for me. Always have. I still love the Bills though.

 

 

 

I have little complaints for Golisano and would have no reservations with him buying the Bills. As someone pointed out, this team had less than 6000 fans in the building most nights. They were miserable and not relevant. They were an awful investment in terms of the viability of small market NHL teams (even some large market) and the upcoming lockout.

 

They made the Sabres very relevant. They spent up near the cap most years even though they were likely losing a little money. A few good playoff runs, a President's Trophy, a few Northeast banners, and a Winter Classic. Golisano didnt go over the top to win, but people forget, when he bought the team, he made it clear that the goal was to make the organization viable on its own.

 

As far as the Bills go, if Golisano applied the same philosophy, the team would not have to watch the pennies as tightly as it does under Wilson.

 

 

 

Golisano's one folly was the unleashing of Larry Quinn, making him kind of the owner of the team... then stepping away to Florida. Quinn was the issue with the Sabres and many bad decisions were made and tolerated with the on-ice team.... as well as presentation, uniforms etc. I feel we have a situation similar to that with the Bills in Russ Brandon. I dont think Brandon has as much of a grip as Quinn... but he has too much influence on everything just from credentials based on his decision for Rochester Training Camp and his relationship with Wilson.

 

I think if Golisano were to be involved with the Bills, he would require other wealthy investors. Perhaps of the competitive variety such as Bob Rich Jr, and Terry Pegula. The other owners arent going to allow a dictatorship in the front office like Larry Quinn had. Larry Quinn also will not want anything to do with running the Bills. He had health issues and I dont think he will want to face the scrutiny again.

[thewildrabbit]

What owner in any sport would have his trusted marketing guru to head the football operations? Ralph. What clueless owner would bring back an 80 yr old congenial former HC who was out of the NFL for at least four comes to help him salvage his failed franchise? Ralph. That decision of hiring Levy as a hollow GM set this franchise back for years.

 

Now Nix, who I like, is undoing a lot of what the disasterous Levy era did. Incompetent is too kind of a word too describe the way Ralph has run his organization. It is beyond incompetent---it is outright weird.

It is still weird, and is still incompetent....just different people running the show.

 

 

Both Nix and Gailey appear to be very well liked by fans ATM, but it just might be that anyone would look to be an improvement over Dick Jauron. From my view both Nix and Gailey are no better then Jauron or Levy, perhaps worse...only not many see it yet.

 

I have no idea why Perry Fewell wasn't retained as HC, perhaps to be finally rid of the infamous Tampa 2 defense. Yet the new 3-4 was a disaster and even worse then any Jauron defense against the run.

 

I can only hope that when the team flounders again this season that everyone doesn't blame the lockout, like last year was supposed to be a wash because this new staff had to evaluate the players.

 

 

Anyway, Golisnao would be a huge upgrade over Wilson...then again any new owner that wants to win would be an upgrade over Wilson.