Buffalo Barbarian Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Losing seasons, Letting top talent go instead of tagging them to get picks to assist the team? So far it looks like the same **** Ralph Wilson has done for Decades. This team is not making progress regardless of the wishing and koolaid Drinking many fans do. yep, we are just spinning our wheels. If we ever get a good QB then all will be well though. Edited March 5, 2014 by Buffalo Barbarian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Any response to the Bills putting the Toronto series on a one year hiatus and the Aaron Williams extension? Does this fit into the "same old Bills" paradigm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Any response to the Bills putting the Toronto series on a one year hiatus and the Aaron Williams extension? Does this fit into the "same old Bills" paradigm? If you don't have anything negative to say don't say anything at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Any response to the Bills putting the Toronto series on a one year hiatus and the Aaron Williams extension? Does this fit into the "same old Bills" paradigm? For all the grief that Russ gets, he truly is a marketing genius. It's no coincidence that 2 days after they decide to let Byrd walk, they communicate the Williams extension and Toronto hiatus. It's just a brilliant move from a communication standpoint. That guy should win executive of the year for his handling of this team. No other small-market team with a decade long drought of good football would be this financially successful. He is really good at what he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 If we spend some money this offseason and can fill 3-4 starting spots with good ball players, I won't be as upset as I am now. Really bummed we let him go. itll be interesting. i beat the wait and see drum on levitre last year and was surprised (and not the good way) on how it played out. i still hope that we get a quality replacement to fill our starting safety roles, but copy/pasting my posts from last year with levitre swapped out for byrd probably isnt going to be my approach. at this point i think much of my optimism has given way to accepting that there are a lot of questions about the front office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pills -N- Bills Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I am never amazed at the amount of whining on this board! How the hell do you know it wasn't the right decision? It's a forum for people to speak thier mind, your whining about the whining. Get over it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Will be interesting on how we move forward with our next group of players who are up to be resigned... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 itll be interesting. i beat the wait and see drum on levitre last year and was surprised (and not the good way) on how it played out. i still hope that we get a quality replacement to fill our starting safety roles, but copy/pasting my posts from last year with levitre swapped out for byrd probably isnt going to be my approach. at this point i think much of my optimism has given way to accepting that there are a lot of questions about the front office. You looked at not signing Levitre as bad? Really? The only thing bad related to that issue is Marrone's judgement of Brown. They should've been more active in bringing in better competition. I for one am glad we don't have a $6 mil + price tag for a G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 If you don't have anything negative to say don't say anything at all. Ha-ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantankerous Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 For all the grief that Russ gets, he truly is a marketing genius. It's no coincidence that 2 days after they decide to let Byrd walk, they communicate the Williams extension and Toronto hiatus. It's just a brilliant move from a communication standpoint. That guy should win executive of the year for his handling of this team. No other small-market team with a decade long drought of good football would be this financially successful. He is really good at what he does. What are you gushing about? The Bills are an NFL team. They will make money regardless of the circumstances. You're praising him for trying to make up for the blunder that is the Toronto series? Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Any response to the Bills putting the Toronto series on a one year hiatus and the Aaron Williams extension? Does this fit into the "same old Bills" paradigm? When they realized they weren't signing Byrd....and saving $4M per year in the process by signing AW instead.....they decided the $4M extra they make playing the game in Toronto could be spared. People act like the Toronto game was making the Bills a fortune. It's not that big of an additional impact. The goal was drawing the interest of wealthier Toronto fans long term. I think they got about as much good publicity out of almost entirely bad publicity as they were going to get.....time to bring the generic product back to Buffalo and sell what really matters......the gameday experience. Enter: Canada House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) I didnt think it was the same old same old as of last year when we got Pettine . I still think it IS a new era. Not sure era of what ? But its different than the Gailey Nix years. A bit of zip on that ball i think , now Edited March 5, 2014 by 3rdand12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 For all the grief that Russ gets, he truly is a marketing genius. It's no coincidence that 2 days after they decide to let Byrd walk, they communicate the Williams extension and Toronto hiatus. It's just a brilliant move from a communication standpoint. That guy should win executive of the year for his handling of this team. No other small-market team with a decade long drought of good football would be this financially successful. He is really good at what he does. If the NFL ever creates a P.T. Barnum award for league executives, Brandon should be the first winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanC883 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 For all the grief that Russ gets, he truly is a marketing genius. It's no coincidence that 2 days after they decide to let Byrd walk, they communicate the Williams extension and Toronto hiatus. It's just a brilliant move from a communication standpoint. That guy should win executive of the year for his handling of this team. No other small-market team with a decade long drought of good football would be this financially successful. He is really good at what he does. He really is. And that is his job. I don't know why people burn him for Byrd, etc. He hasn't been the GM for a long time. He is really good at selling the team. But, I think the A. Williams signing was a good thing. He is more valuable than Byrd to our D, was relatively inexpensive. When they realized they weren't signing Byrd....and saving $4M per year in the process by signing AW instead.....they decided the $4M extra they make playing the game in Toronto could be spared. People act like the Toronto game was making the Bills a fortune. It's not that big of an additional impact. The goal was drawing the interest of wealthier Toronto fans long term. I think they got about as much good publicity out of almost entirely bad publicity as they were going to get.....time to bring the generic product back to Buffalo and sell what really matters......the gameday experience. Enter: Canada House. I love the Canada House idea. It's so weird. "We will build a place to cater to Canadian fans." I think they come here already because: (1) they like the Bills; and (2) to tailgate. But that's cool, if they build a house with good Canadian stuff I'll be there. (and I'm not from Canada). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 When they realized they weren't signing Byrd....and saving $4M per year in the process by signing AW instead.....they decided the $4M extra they make playing the game in Toronto could be spared. People act like the Toronto game was making the Bills a fortune. It's not that big of an additional impact. The goal was drawing the interest of wealthier Toronto fans long term. I think they got about as much good publicity out of almost entirely bad publicity as they were going to get.....time to bring the generic product back to Buffalo and sell what really matters......the gameday experience. Enter: Canada House. I believe that the sponsorship payment for the series was $72M for 8 games initially. It is a substantial amount of money. The goal of the series was to generate non shared revenues that you simply can't get from the Ralph. It was a brilliant business decision but a bad football decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 He really is. And that is his job. I don't know why people burn him for Byrd, etc. He hasn't been the GM for a long time. He is really good at selling the team. But, I think the A. Williams signing was a good thing. He is more valuable than Byrd to our D, was relatively inexpensive. I love the Canada House idea. It's so weird. "We will build a place to cater to Canadian fans." I think they come here already because: (1) they like the Bills; and (2) to tailgate. But that's cool, if they build a house with good Canadian stuff I'll be there. (and I'm not from Canada). It's a great idea. Lot 1 for many years basically served as the official parking lot for people whose natural route to the stadium was big tree road(20A). We weren't from Buffalo, most were from small towns where interest in the Bills isn't necessarily universal. But as a result of lot 1's proximity to the route in and out, you were constantly meeting people who knew where you were from.....or knew people you knew etc..... and it made for fast friends and allowed small groups to gather into larger and larger groups. We originally had a group of about 6. Of those original 6 that group dwindled to 2 but the group we formed in the process is 20-30 strong every game now. The Canada House idea should give people with things in common in addition to the Bills a better opportunity to meet and form bonds and create larger and more sustainable groups. There are a lot of longtime Canadian fans who have started their own tailgates or assimilated into existing ones but there are still a lot of people who come down in very small groups and this is a great way for them to meet up with other Canadians and get some synergy going. They are very much like the central NY Bills fan. It's not like half the people they know watch the Bills every week, they may be the only Bills fans that they know from their town. I generally think bigger groups are safer as well because if a couple people get trashed there are usually a bunch of others there looking out for them. It also will help fill up some of the dead space in the official lots that have been depleted by disney parking etc.. I can't believe I am saying this, but the Bills may actually be finally realizing how important the pre-game is to their product now. The lack of a pre-game really put the Toronto series at a huge disadvantage. Existing Bills fans, US and Canadian weren't really buying the pre-gameless product. In a sense, they spoke with their wallets. I believe that the sponsorship payment for the series was $72M for 8 games initially. It is a substantial amount of money. The goal of the series was to generate non shared revenues that you simply can't get from the Ralph. It was a brilliant business decision but a bad football decision. That figure doesn't include the lost revenue from not playing that game in Buffalo. I believe the difference in revenue from playing at the Ralph was about +$4M per game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 That figure doesn't include the lost revenue from not playing that game in Buffalo. I believe the difference in revenue from playing at the Ralph was about +$4M per game. I was under the impression that number was just for the rights? If not, I apologize and stand corrected. If that is the case then it is not that big of a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I was under the impression that number was just for the rights? If not, I apologize and stand corrected. If that is the case then it is not that big of a deal. That is how I understood it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 That is how I understood it too. The difference in the Bills take between a game in Buffalo versus Toronto was originally about $4M. That doesn't sound like a lot in "NFL" money but it's still nearly $60 per ticket for every seat at the Ralph. So it was almost a double sellout. Of course, ticket sales are a small part of overall revenue and revenue from one game is obviously a much smaller piece of that pie. According to the TBN article.....the new agreement was much less lucrative....so I guess it was no longer even close to a $4M difference. It's hard to win in the NFL......the Bills have been paying upwards of $20M per win in payroll since the Jauron era began. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Personally I'd place that more on Whaley than Marrone. Marrone coaches the players he's given, granted he has some say in who they sign and whether he felt he could make Brown work. He likely was also going off of tape of Brown, may be he's one of these people who looked better on tape than live. But if you're going to place the blame for Brown with Marrone, than you also need to give the credit to Marrone for Alonzo, Robey, Hughes, R Woods, Branch, and Lawson. Personally I'd give more of the credit and blame with Whaley but if you want to fault Marrone, then needs to get credit too. You looked at not signing Levitre as bad? Really? The only thing bad related to that issue is Marrone's judgement of Brown. They should've been more active in bringing in better competition. I for one am glad we don't have a $6 mil + price tag for a G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts