Bills scheduling woes

[MattM]

This scheduling issue certainly doesn't absolve the Bills of years of suckitude--I haven't seen anyone make that claim, BTW, except for posters on the other side of the issue setting up straw men--but is pretty evidently something the League needs to work on based on the factual evidence above. I'm glad the Bills are pointing it out. By doing so it puts the League on notice that someone's watching.....

[CodeMonkey]

It is pathetic how so many people put so much effort in rationalizing why the Bills lose and why other teams more often win. I find the excuse mongering responses to be embarrassing.

Extremely embarrassing. As are the weekly posts during the season on how bad the officiating was biased against the Bills.

What makes this particular one even worse is where it came from.

Edited June 21, 2013 by CodeMonkey

[JohnC]

This scheduling issue certainly doesn't absolve the Bills of years of suckitude--I haven't seen anyone make that claim, BTW, except for posters on the other side of the issue setting up straw men--but is pretty evidently something the League needs to work on based on the factual evidence above. I'm glad the Bills are pointing it out. By doing so it puts the League on notice that someone's watching.....

 

The yearly scheduling complaint that this franchise makes to the league is that there are too many late season cold weather games that are difficult to sell out. This year the league accommodated the franchise. If the Bills fielded a competitive team the scheduling issue would be irrelevant,

 

I'm glad the Bills are pointing it out. By doing so it puts the League on notice that someone's watching.....

 

I doubt Roger Goodell and the league headquarters worry an iota about being watched by this ineffectual and losing franchise. With respect to scheduling this franchise lost their already very limited credibility when they moved home games out of their own town for the extra buck.

[MattM]

 

 

The yearly scheduling complaint that this franchise makes to the league is that there are too many late season cold weather games that are difficult to sell out. This year the league accommodated the franchise. If the Bills fielded a competitive team the scheduling issue would be irrelevant,

 

 

How do you explain the wide disparity in schedule treatment over time that some have shown above? This isn't one year we're talking about. A league that prides itself on parity should take steps to level its playing field where (like here) it can.

 

 

I doubt Roger Goodell and the league headquarters worry an iota about being watched by this ineffectual and losing franchise. With respect to scheduling this franchise lost their already very limited credibility when they moved home games out of their own town for the extra buck.

 

The League is extremely image conscious. They'll pay attention if enough noise is made.

 

As for Toronto, that's just a fact of economic life, my friend. Would you rather lose a game a year to our northern brethren or the team to LA? In some sense, that's what it boils down to, particularly after Ralph inevitably passes. That should get little weight in this discussion.

 

 

[CodeMonkey]

As for Toronto, that's just a fact of economic life, my friend. Would you rather lose a game a year to our northern brethren or the team to LA? In some sense, that's what it boils down to, particularly after Ralph inevitably passes. That should get little weight in this discussion.

I think most understand the economic reasoning behind the TO series. But I believe it should get significant, not little, weight in this discussion. The reason being how can the Bills complain about a disadvantage some years regarding time between games when they knowingly and purposefully gave up one home game every season, which is a huge disadvantage. And not only once, they renewed the deal recently! If the Bills are concerned about disadvantages, they should cure themselves first before whining about scheduling.

Edited June 21, 2013 by CodeMonkey

[Cash]

The yearly scheduling complaint that this franchise makes to the league is that there are too many late season cold weather games that are difficult to sell out. This year the league accommodated the franchise. If the Bills fielded a competitive team the scheduling issue would be irrelevant,

 

Do you mean the late-season home game scheduling issue? If so, then you are correct, but that has very little to do with the discussion at hand. MattM was talking about the issue being discussed in this thread, which is that there is a large disparity between how many rested opponents some teams play and how many rested opponents some other teams play. That issue would be much more important if the Bills did field a competitive team. Last year's team might have picked up a win or two if none of their opponents had been coming off a Thursday game or bye week, but that still would leave them well outside the playoffs.

[Cash]

I think most understand the economic reasoning behind the TO series. But I believe it should get significant, not little, weight in this discussion. The reason being how can the Bills complain about a disadvantage some years regarding time between games when they knowingly and purposefully gave up one home game every season, which is a huge disadvantage. And not only once, they renewed the deal recently! If the Bills are concerned about disadvantages, they should cure themselves first before whining about scheduling.

 

That's a fair point to make, but I still disagree. We all understand why the Bills are doing the Toronto series, and I think we all agree that from a competitive standpoint, it is a huge detriment and very stupid. But I don't think that doing one stupid thing disqualifies you from complaining if something unfair happens to you. To make an analogy, if I shot myself in the foot, that would be really stupid, hurt me a lot, and 100% my fault. But if someone then stomps on that foot (or even the other foot), don't I still have the right to complain?

 

EDIT: Having said that, I should make it clear that the Toronto series does seem to be a legitimate hamper to the schedule-maker, since the Toronto people want the game to always occur after the CFL season ends, and the Bills want the game to be an NFC opponent. I still don't think we can throw up our hands and say that it's inevitable or fair that the Bills would play 6 teams coming off byes or Thursday games, while 3 teams play none. Or that the Falcons should play 4 or 5 teams coming off byes or Thursday games while 3 teams play none.

Edited June 21, 2013 by Cash

[CodeMonkey]

That's a fair point to make, but I still disagree. We all understand why the Bills are doing the Toronto series, and I think we all agree that from a competitive standpoint, it is a huge detriment and very stupid. But I don't think that doing one stupid thing disqualifies you from complaining if something unfair happens to you. To make an analogy, if I shot myself in the foot, that would be really stupid, hurt me a lot, and 100% my fault. But if someone then stomps on that foot (or even the other foot), don't I still have the right to complain?

 

EDIT: Having said that, I should make it clear that the Toronto series does seem to be a legitimate hamper to the schedule-maker, since the Toronto people want the game to always occur after the CFL season ends, and the Bills want the game to be an NFC opponent. I still don't think we can throw up our hands and say that it's inevitable or fair that the Bills would play 6 teams coming off byes or Thursday games, while 3 teams play none. Or that the Falcons should play 4 or 5 teams coming off byes or Thursday games while 3 teams play none.

Well to make your analogy the same, you would have had to have shot yourself in the foot ... on purpose ... and twice. So no, I would have no sympathy in that case.

But I do see the point you were making, I just disagree with it

[BuffBill]

Start winning consistently and you'll get some scheduling perks.

What difference is it really gonna make? Over the past decade on more then a couple occasions, the Bills had one of the NFL's most favorable schedules and they still only won 4-6 games. Quit whining and win, things will change. Not to mention how difficult the Bills make creating their schedule with the Toronto game not being against a division team or a team that might draw good in Orchard Park. And they whine about having home games in December, so you can't have everything.

 

Do you mean the late-season home game scheduling issue? If so, then you are correct, but that has very little to do with the discussion at hand. MattM was talking about the issue being discussed in this thread, which is that there is a large disparity between how many rested opponents some teams play and how many rested opponents some other teams play. That issue would be much more important if the Bills did field a competitive team. Last year's team might have picked up a win or two if none of their opponents had been coming off a Thursday game or bye week, but that still would leave them well outside the playoffs.

But it does have something to do with the issue. The Bills have let the league know they don't like home games in December because they can't sell tickets. Like the other poster said, if they put a winner on the field once in awhile, tickets will sell a little bit better and they won't have to ask the league for special scheduling favors.

[Doc]

The League is extremely image conscious. They'll pay attention if enough noise is made.

 

As for Toronto, that's just a fact of economic life, my friend. Would you rather lose a game a year to our northern brethren or the team to LA? In some sense, that's what it boils down to, particularly after Ralph inevitably passes. That should get little weight in this discussion.

Yep. And anyone who talks about the Bills playing a game in Toronto, knowing the NFL is looking to play more games internationally, needs to start thinking more clearly. Or maybe needs to start thinking, period.

[BuffBill]

I'm glad the Bills are pointing it out. By doing so it puts the League on notice that someone's watching.....

I don't think the NFL gives a crap if a team that nobody outside of Bills fans wants to watch play on sundays is watching them? Face it, until things change drastically here, the Bills are irrelevant to the big picture of the NFL. They will continue to take the shaft it if benefits the successful, and popular teams like the Patriots, Steelers, Giants, etc. I dont see the Patriots complaining, seems like we open with them quite often and we always have more rest then they do, since they almost always go deep into the playoffs and we never make it. Edited June 21, 2013 by BuffBill

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

 

Yep. And anyone who talks about the Bills playing a game in Toronto, knowing the NFL is looking to play more games internationally, needs to start thinking more clearly. Or maybe needs to start thinking, period.

 

I don't see how the Toronto Series or the December home games have any bearing on the rested opponents issue.

 

Forget the Bills for a second. This isn't a Bills issue, it's an NFL issue. Is it fair that the Falcons play 4 opponents coming off at least 10 days rest, while other NFL teams play 0?

 

I might've missed it but I don't remember Atlanta selling off any home games to Mexico.

Edited June 21, 2013 by J-Gun Boone

[MattM]

I don't think the NFL gives a crap if a team that nobody outside of Bills fans wants to watch play on sundays is watching them? Face it, until things change drastically here, the Bills are irrelevant to the big picture of the NFL. They will continue to take the shaft it if benefits the successful, and popular teams like the Patriots, Steelers, Giants, etc. I dont see the Patriots complaining, seems like we open with them quite often and we always have more rest then they do, since they almost always go deep into the playoffs and we never make it.

 

You mean those same Patriots* who've played one game in 5 years against a better rested opponent? The same Pats* who a few years back pioneered the idea of getting the League to allow them to play their 2 West Coast games back-to-back? What beef could they possibly have against the schedule-makers? Just more data points (to go along with the MANY others) showing that there's something rotten going on with that team....

[Doc]

I don't see how the Toronto Series or the December home games have any bearing on the rested opponents issue.

 

Forget the Bills for a second. This isn't a Bills issue, it's an NFL issue. Is it fair that the Falcons play 4 opponents coming off at least 10 days rest, while other NFL teams play 0?

 

I might've missed it but I don't remember Atlanta selling off any home games to Mexico.

It doesn't. I was merely pointing out those who harp on the Bills for "selling" a game to Toronto and how that affects the schedule, when the NFL is trying to get teams to play more games outside the US.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

 

It doesn't. I was merely pointing out those who harp on the Bills for "selling" a game to Toronto and how that affects the schedule, when the NFL is trying to get teams to play more games outside the US.

 

Oh I agree with you-- no doubt the Toronto deal made Goodell and company happy.

 

The same goes for the December home games- I very much doubt the league is grumbling, "those crazy Bills and their ridiculous desire to make me as much money as possible."

[JohnC]

As for Toronto, that's just a fact of economic life, my friend. Would you rather lose a game a year to our northern brethren or the team to LA? In some sense, that's what it boils down to, particularly after Ralph inevitably passes. That should get little weight in this discussion.

 

You missed the point I was making regarding moving games to Toronto. I have no problem with it, and have not stated so. It is on balance a very good thing. My point in referencing the Toronto game is that since the league allowed us to move games out of town the organization lost whatever miniscule leverage and credibility it had with respect to scheduling. Let's not forget that the league accommodated the organizatiion when it allowed us to play in Toronto and the league accommodated the Bills prior numerous requests by playing fewer late season games this year.

 

 

 

The major problem I have with the Toronto series is that it is over-priced for a garbage product. The best way to market the Bills, in Canada and western NY, is to upgrade the product on the field. In my view scheduling is an inconsequential issue and a lame manufactured excuse that has little to do with what ails this franchise. It's about the product----always has been and will be.

Edited June 21, 2013 by JohnC

[Doc]

Oh I agree with you-- no doubt the Toronto deal made Goodell and company happy.

 

The same goes for the December home games- I very much doubt the league is grumbling, "those crazy Bills and their ridiculous desire to make me as much money as possible."

And again, it's not like the league is doing them any favors scheduling 2 home games after Thanksgiving after giving them 4 last year. And I don't think that winning makes a difference there. I believe that even during the SB years, there were maybe a couple fully-soldout seasons and lots of no-shows at the end of the year.

 

You missed the point I was making regarding moving games to Toronto. I have no problem with it, and have not stated so. It is on balance a very good thing. My point in referencing the Toronto game is that since the league allowed us to move games out of town the organization lost whatever miniscule leverage and credibility it had with respect to scheduling.

 

The major problem I have with the Toronto series is that it is over-priced for a garbage product. The best way to market the Bills, in Canada and western NY, is to upgrade the product on the field. In my view scheduling is an inconsequential issue and a lame manufactured excuse that has little to do with what ails this franchise. It's about the product----always has been and will be.

What does the Toronto game have to do with scheduling and losing leverage and credibility? For all intents and purposes, it's like any other Bills home game. It's not like the Bills demanded it be considered an away game, or even alternating home and away game (i.e. home game one year, away game the next year).

 

And I don't believe the Bills set the price for tickets.

[JohnC]

And again, it's not like the league is doing them any favors scheduling 2 home games after Thanksgiving after giving them 4 last year. And I don't think that winning makes a difference there. I believe that even during the SB years, there were maybe a couple fully-soldout seasons and lots of no-shows at the end of the year.

 

 

What does the Toronto game have to do with scheduling and losing leverage and credibility? For all intents and purposes, it's like any other Bills home game. It's not like the Bills demanded it be considered an away game, or even alternating home and away game (i.e. home game one year, away game the next year).

 

And I don't believe the Bills set the price for tickets.

 

Excuse making defeatists are manufacturing excuses as to why the Bills are at a disadvantage. The general claim is that this team is treated unfairly by he league by the way the games are scheduled. My point regarding Toronto games and not having home games late in this upcoming season is that the league has acted to accommodate this losing franchise, not acted to hinder it.

 

As I previously stated upgrade the product on the field and the bogus side issues will vanish. This never ending quest for finding excuses as to why the Bills lose is embarrassng. Have some pride and stop with the incessant whining. Losers make excuses and winners win!

[Doc]

Excuse making defeatists are manufacturing excuses as to why the Bills are at a disadvantage. The general claim is that this team is treated unfairly by he league by the way the games are scheduled. My point regarding Toronto games and not having home games late in this upcoming season is that the league has acted to accommodate this losing franchise, not acted to hinder it.

 

As I previously stated upgrade the product on the field and the bogus side issues will vanish. This never ending quest for finding excuses as to why the Bills lose is embarrassng. Have some pride and stop with the incessant whining. Losers make excuses and winners win!

Having more time to rest and prepare is most certainly an advantage. Hence the reason teams try to get a coveted first-round bye in the playoffs. You can call it whining, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a disadvantage for the Bills, even if slight. In this biz, you use any advantage you can, like the Pats did with videotaping.

[Cash]

Well to make your analogy the same, you would have had to have shot yourself in the foot ... on purpose ... and twice. So no, I would have no sympathy in that case.

But I do see the point you were making, I just disagree with it

 

Haha, true! In fact, I would have to keep shooting myself in the foot every year. But in my defense, some rich guy is paying me a lot of money every time I shoot myself in the foot.

 

But it does have something to do with the issue. The Bills have let the league know they don't like home games in December because they can't sell tickets. Like the other poster said, if they put a winner on the field once in awhile, tickets will sell a little bit better and they won't have to ask the league for special scheduling favors.

 

I'm not sure I follow. One issue is that the Bills want home games front-loaded in the schedule because it's tough to sell December games. That will be heavily affected by improving the team, yes. But that's not what I mean by "the issue", because to me, that's a totally independent issue than the one the Bills are complaining about, which is that they play 6 teams coming off extra rest this year, whereas 3 teams play zero, including a team in their division. This is not a problem that could be solved by improving the on-field product. In fact, it would be a much bigger problem if the team was better. Playing 6 rested teams instead of 2 or 3 might cost any team a win or two. If that's the difference between 8-8 and 6-10, I don't really care. If that's the difference between 10-6 and 9-7, I care a lot.

 

No one has bothered to actually spell out how front-loading home games means that your opponents have to be coming off bye weeks or Thursday night games.

 

I don't see how the Toronto Series or the December home games have any bearing on the rested opponents issue.

 

Forget the Bills for a second. This isn't a Bills issue, it's an NFL issue. Is it fair that the Falcons play 4 opponents coming off at least 10 days rest, while other NFL teams play 0?

 

I might've missed it but I don't remember Atlanta selling off any home games to Mexico.

 

Thank you. Obviously I care more because the Bills got the short end of the stick this year, but it would still be unfair if the Bills played 0 rested teams and the Patriots played 6. Don't get me wrong, I'd be very pleased with that specific unfairness, but it would still be unfair.

 

And again, it's not like the league is doing them any favors scheduling 2 home games after Thanksgiving after giving them 4 last year.

 

Right. Last year, the Bills played 4 teams coming off byes or Thursday games, including Houston after the Bills' own bye. But they didn't get that front-loaded home schedule they want. So what was the NFL's excuse last year?

 

What does the Toronto game have to do with scheduling and losing leverage and credibility? For all intents and purposes, it's like any other Bills home game. It's not like the Bills demanded it be considered an away game, or even alternating home and away game (i.e. home game one year, away game the next year).

 

Not really. The Toronto people want it to occur after the CFL season ends (around Thanksgiving-ish). The Bills, after getting pasted by divisional foes the first 2 years in Toronto, now request that the Toronto game be an NFC opponent. Since there are only 2 NFC opponents that come to Buffalo, and only about 5-6 weeks in which the game can be scheduled, the options are somewhat limited. The NFL can't just make up the whole schedule, then decide on which of the two NFC @ Buffalo games moves to Toronto, because both could easily wind up during the CFL season. Nor can they make up the schedule, then pick any home date post-Thanksgiving to switch to Toronto, because that might leave them with only divisional opponents.

 

Now, that constraint shouldn't translate to "play 6 teams coming off extra rest" (or even 4 or 5), but it is a real constraint that other teams don't have.

 

And I don't believe the Bills set the price for tickets.

 

Rogers buys all the tickets from the Bills as part of their deal, then resells them at a price of Rogers' choosing. But the more money the Bills get for the series, the higher the price Rogers must charge to break even. So the Bills definitely do impact the price.