The reasons why the Bills will probably stay in Buffalo

[Hplarrm]

I know there was one thread which was started by a likely lurker and had even more misspellings than even I pull off. However, though the real answer is no one knows fer sure, but looking at the situation I am becoming quite convinced the Bills will remain right here in WNY.

 

To me the important reasons seem to be:

 

1. You can almost always count on the NFL to go where there is the most $ for the team owners to be made.

 

To ne this would seem for the NFL team owners to be not from the huge but relative chump change of 1/31xst of a relocation fee from the team being moved, but from maintaining the actual value that this original AFL team provides for the NFL going after the real much larger dollars from setting up new franchises in new municipalities around he world.

 

I simply think many of us fans and the media simply are misreading the actual marketplace the NFL is getting $ from and which the NFL plans to grow.

 

Many of us outsiders make the MISTAKE of thinking that the biggest $ the NFL is looking to increase is the take from individual markets.

 

Nope.

 

Don't get me wrong but the money gained from 40,000 plus season ticket holders, cash for parking, all the hot dogs and weinies they can consume and even local advertisers is huge $. However, the combined local takes still pales in size compared to the REAL HUGE $ from the TV networks which the NFL brings in.

 

Making even bigger $ in the future does not depend on whether the NFL exploits the bigger LA market rather than the smaller Buffalo market (and splits that local take with 31 other partners.

 

The real money and the one the NFL wants to satisfy and expand is to acquire a bunch of eyeballs in Mexico City, Toronto, Stutugart. and even figure out the timezone implications of accessing eyeballs in Tokyo an Beijing.

 

Buffalo's prime value to the NFL and quite frankly one which can never be equaled by some dot.commer in CA or gambling mogul in Vegas is that by maintaining this original AFL team and selling to the eyeballs in a new franchise membership in the same league as the American icon of Buffalo, keeping the Bills here is quie fine for the NFL team owner looking to make as much money as possible for themselves.

 

2. Ralph has quite nicely passed on his estate in a manner which makes it hard for the team to leave for at least 7 and probably 10 years.

 

The contract developed before Ralph dies essentially presents a bunch of legal realities and uncertainties which make it hard for a new owner to move the team for at least 7 years and probably for all 10 (even if the Bills are sold in the short golden window of 7 years where the decision to move only costs 20+ million rather than $400+ million, the team may still be forced by the contract to remain here the full 10 while the contractually prohibited discussion of the logistics of franchise movement and building a stadium in their new town are worked out.

 

The contract seems to guarantee that at worse, a new owner would be sued by Erie county/ and/or WNY residents beginning in some local WNY court which in essence would keep the team here even while appeals are going on for the entire 7-10 years.

 

During that time the NFL story displayed in TV show after TV show would be the sad tale of our depressed municipality seeing its team leave in a slow motion version of the midnight run from Baltimore to Indy.

 

And while this drama drags on the NFL would be working to sell franchises to new municipalities who though overjoyed with their new NFL toy would also have to witness the sad fate the NFL can deal to a municipality.

 

3. Given the choice between the money associated with Buffalo and the money associated with Toronto, the NFL choice seems obvious. They want both!

 

We simply have a real world example of how Toronto and Buffalo can each easily support 2 hickey teams, and there is little reason to somehow pretend they also cannot support two football teams. The financial deal here with the recently postponed Bills game per season in Toronto was NOT about testing a move but the Bills trying to build a case of Toronto being their territory so that they might more easily extort payments from the new owner.

 

4. People misunderstanding who is the actual decision-maker here. It is not the high bidder. It is the NFL which must furnish a 75% vote of a new owner. The team is not simply sold to the highest bidder with the deepest pockets but to the highest bidder the partnership wants rather than the individual. If some relative of Osana Bin Laden, oligarch from Russia or who ever, the NFL cannot be forced to take on any partner.

 

5. The players have also already demonstrated in the case of Rush Limbaugh that they have the power as a partner of the team owners to block a partner from being part of a bid. I suspect that players from minority descent would object to the Donald who ridiculously has player the Obama is from Kenya card and is not above making repeated foolish statements about what the black people should do.

 

Given his past ties to gambling and his general obnoxious nature my guess is that he either gets blocked or he just playing this for publicity.

 

In the end the Bills are much smaller potatoes for an NFL owner to get 1/31st of additions they add to the pot than Buffalo. The current season ticket base and deals with local advertisers are clearly smaller than other locales but they are a bird in the hand for the NFL and I think inertia keeps the team here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Chandler#81]

Waaay too long. I got bored after the 7th paragraph and quit.

[maryland-bills-fan]

You have to consider that "Buffalo" is not just this city but also west NY over to 'Cuse and Canada out to beyond Toronto. There are not too many other metro areas in the US that are not already saturated or considered part of an existing team's turf. How about a team in Conn.? (would the Giants be happy?), or San Antonio(?) (Cowboys and Texas?).. The only ripe area is LA and that is college football land. Remember that two NFL teams (Rams and Raiders) moved OUT of that area, primarily because the region did not have the unity to build or upgrade an acceptable stadium. We are more likely to see Flordia (Miami, Jacksonville and Tampa) lose a team to go to LA than for Buffalo to move. As to attendance, I wonder why our whiners don't look up the data. ( see http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance ). Buffalo is #19 out of 32 in attendance, while Jacksonville and Tampa are #28 and #29. Not to worry.

[Mr. WEO]

If there is a God....merge!

[BringBackFergy]

%inbeforelockedclosedormerged %rosettastonegrammarspelling

[BrooklynBills]

The AFL is a large part of the mythos of the NFL which is part of the league's appeal. Its why no team has been put in LA yet. Because LA is reserved for one of the Chargers, Rams, or Raiders depending on theor stadium situations. The Rams can leave after this season and need a new stadium. The Chargers and Raiders both need a new stadium as well and can leave at anytime. The Chargers specifically have stated that they won't be able to sustain a new franchise in LA without a new stadium. This is speculation but I would imagine that the Chargers have first dibs on the LA market if they cannot get a deal done in San Diego. They do not want to lose the Chargers brand being an original AFL team.

 

This is not Tagliabue's NFL. This is Roger Goodell's NFL and these team brands are very important to the league's appeal. Obviously the Bills need to do their part but I think the league will make it as easy as possible for them to stay.

[Best Player Available]

Everyone pay too pay $200+ to sit between the 20's because it will be coming. And that a deal compared to other NFL cities.

[BrooklynBills]

You have to consider that "Buffalo" is not just this city but also west NY over to 'Cuse and Canada out to beyond Toronto. There are not too many other metro areas in the US that are not already saturated or considered part of an existing team's turf. How about a team in Conn.? (would the Giants be happy?), or San Antonio(?) (Cowboys and Texas?).. The only ripe area is LA and that is college football land. Remember that two NFL teams (Rams and Raiders) moved OUT of that area, primarily because the region did not have the unity to build or upgrade an acceptable stadium. We are more likely to see Flordia (Miami, Jacksonville and Tampa) lose a team to go to LA than for Buffalo to move. As to attendance, I wonder why our whiners don't look up the data. ( see http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance ). Buffalo is #19 out of 32 in attendance, while Jacksonville and Tampa are #28 and #29. Not to worry.

 

I think you will ultimately see the Chargers and an expansion team in LA. But the whole deal with LA is that the city wanted one shared stadium for the Rams and Raiders and the Raiders wanted to be by themselves. Al Davis had a deal in place to build an LA stadium but the city wanted them to share it with the Rams. The city can support football just fine and the Raiders would be there to this day if Al Davis hadn't pulled the plug.

 

The NFL has also stated that THEY will control who is allowed to relocate to LA and when it will happen. It would seem they have a clear plan for LA.

[SF Bills Fan]

The Bills will stay because the lease makes it extremely prohibitive to move. In addition, there are somee heavy duty power players in NYS that will make it even harder to try to move them and they will make it easier for an owner with local interest to operate them in Buffalo. Lastly, there appears to be enough wealthy guys that are willing to step up to buy them to keep them in Buffalo.

[I'm Spartacus]

"We simply have a real world example of how Toronto and Buffalo can each easily support 2 hickey teams, "

 

I believe this is why so many people from both cities were turtle necks all the time.

[KD in CA]

The AFL is a large part of the mythos of the NFL which is part of the league's appeal. Its why no team has been put in LA yet. Because LA is reserved for one of the Chargers, Rams, or Raiders depending on theor stadium situations. The Rams can leave after this season and need a new stadium. The Chargers and Raiders both need a new stadium as well and can leave at anytime. The Chargers specifically have stated that they won't be able to sustain a new franchise in LA without a new stadium. This is speculation but I would imagine that the Chargers have first dibs on the LA market if they cannot get a deal done in San Diego. They do not want to lose the Chargers brand being an original AFL team.

 

I think you're right; I'm hoping the Rams return to LA and the Chargers and Raider should stay put.

[McD]

...As to attendance, I wonder why our whiners don't look up the data. ( see http://espn.go.com/n...fl/attendance ). Buffalo is #19 out of 32 in attendance, while Jacksonville and Tampa are #28 and #29. Not to worry.

 

This is an amazing fact due to the fact that we've not had a winning record since the last millennium!

[Hplarrm]

The Bills will stay because the lease makes it extremely prohibitive to move. In addition, there are somee heavy duty power players in NYS that will make it even harder to try to move them and they will make it easier for an owner with local interest to operate them in Buffalo. Lastly, there appears to be enough wealthy guys that are willing to step up to buy them to keep them in Buffalo.

 

I think the key misunderstanding by most observers here is that they simply do not realize that beginning with Pete Rozelle forging a system which embraced the NFL as a social compact which rewarded poorer teams rather ideologic commitment to a traditional capitalist model which rewards better performing teams, the $ produced merely by the local market became secondary to larger amount of $ produced by the V networks.

 

Rozelle fostered an NFL where all teams share equally the TV money regardless of whether they win or lose on the field. He fostered an NfL where the worse teams get better draft picks.

 

This movement toward a more socialist perspective advanced rapidly when after the team owners destroyed the NFLPA in the mid-80s labor battle, they retaliated by threatening to decertify and thus force the owners into being true capitalists in how the NFL worked. The owners ran kicking and screaming to embrace the social compact embodied in the CBA.

 

This move was capped when Gene Upshaw announced the end of using designated gross to determine the cap and declared the player share of the total gross receipts needed to start at 60% (60.5 is what the owners and players finally agreed to).

 

In the end, the NFL will do what makes them more $ and there are more dollars to be made by team owners with the socialist based approach than the pure capitalist approach. Them is just the facts.

[Campy]

Feel free to add to the list, but here is a Sparks Notes version of why the Bills are staying put (in no particular order):

 

1. The Lease

2. The tradition of an AFL original

3. Intensely loyal, blue collar, and rabid fans that provide a college atmosphere.

4. The Commish is from WNY and he did admit to Berman that he is a Bills fan.

5. We can debate their worth, but having the politicos (Cuomo, Schumer, etc) on our side doesn't hurt.

6. Multiple options for a new stadium

7. Recent (current) renovations to RSW

8. Guys like Kraft have gone on record saying they want to keep the Bills in WNY

9. The Bills "unofficial" market, stretching east past Rochester to Syracuse, north and west into Ontario, and south to Erie, is Fuccillo huuuge.

10. There are people with Bflo ties who are monied.

11. The Buffalo Fan Alliance can't save the team on its own, but it does send a message about us, doesn't it?

12. ?

[CodeMonkey]

Feel free to add to the list, but here is a Sparks Notes version of why the Bills are staying put (in no particular order):

 

1. The Lease

2. The tradition of an AFL original

3. Intensely loyal, blue collar, and rabid fans that provide a college atmosphere.

4. The Commish is from WNY and he did admit to Berman that he is a Bills fan.

5. We can debate their worth, but having the politicos (Cuomo, Schumer, etc) on our side doesn't hurt.

6. Multiple options for a new stadium

7. Recent (current) renovations to RSW

8. Guys like Kraft have gone on record saying they want to keep the Bills in WNY

9. The Bills "unofficial" market, stretching east past Rochester to Syracuse, north and west into Ontario, and south to Erie, is Fuccillo huuuge.

10. There are people with Bflo ties who are monied.

11. The Buffalo Fan Alliance can't save the team on its own, but it does send a message about us, doesn't it?

12. ?

Number one makes it very inconvenient (and probably expensive) to move, at least during the period of the lease.

The other 10 reasons listed really amount to nothing IMO.

 

Probably could have added

12) Mary Wilson's desire to keep the team in Buffalo if at all possible.

Edited May 16, 2014 by CodeMonkey

[Rocky Landing]

The OP has made some good points here. A few thoughts:

1) There is certainly a balance that has to be met between the profitability of the franchise vs. the profitability of the NFL. But, I'm not entirely sure that plays in Buffalo's favor. The league must look at the size of each fan base, as well as how the participation of the team affects the NFL brand. The OP makes the point that the participation of the Bills, an original AFL team, helps maintain the brand and lend weight to the leagues traditional roots. That certainly is true, and a good point, but the overall fan base is small. So, what would present a net benefit to the league? Keeping a small, original franchise, or turning that franchise into a much larger fan base, e.g. Los Angeles?

2) If the sale of the Bills drags on (which, hopefully won't happen), seven years may actually time out perfectly for the Bills to be moved.

3) I'm not convinced that hockey is an apt comparison. The NFL has a much larger market, and having two teams that close together in a far less dense market than NY, could present too much overlap.

4) If the NFL sees a move out of Buffalo as financially beneficial, I don't think it will be hard to get that 75% vote.

5) Nothing against Upstate NY (I was born and raised there!) but, It's cold up there! (...and, kinda boring...) It may not be too hard to convince the players to move!

 

Good points, though from the OP.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Rocky Landing

[dwight in philly]

Number one makes it very inconvenient (and probably expensive) to move, at least during the period of the lease.

The other 10 reasons listed really amount to nothing IMO.

 

Probably could have added

12) Mary Wilson's desire to keep the team in Buffalo if at all possible.

i think most of the points are valid. why cavalierly dismiss them other than the lease ?

[Hplarrm]

Feel free to add to the list, but here is a Sparks Notes version of why the Bills are staying put (in no particular order):

 

1. The Lease

2. The tradition of an AFL original

3. Intensely loyal, blue collar, and rabid fans that provide a college atmosphere.

4. The Commish is from WNY and he did admit to Berman that he is a Bills fan.

5. We can debate their worth, but having the politicos (Cuomo, Schumer, etc) on our side doesn't hurt.

6. Multiple options for a new stadium

7. Recent (current) renovations to RSW

8. Guys like Kraft have gone on record saying they want to keep the Bills in WNY

9. The Bills "unofficial" market, stretching east past Rochester to Syracuse, north and west into Ontario, and south to Erie, is Fuccillo huuuge.

10. There are people with Bflo ties who are monied.

11. The Buffalo Fan Alliance can't save the team on its own, but it does send a message about us, doesn't it?

12. ?

 

Thanks fer pointin' out the role of politicos. Part of the story of Cleveland politicos bating the NFl when owner Modell simply went for bigger bucks was that the Cleve and state of OH politicos bulldozed the NFL to restore a franchise to Cleveland. I agree that Buff and NYS political leaders are generally idiots, but if you talk to most Clevelanders there politicos are pretty stupid as well.

If the Bills were to move, my sense is that a federal attack on the limited antitrust exemptions enjoyed by the NFL would be under attack.

 

The key here is that while such a move might not (or probably would not) succeed the mere threat creates market uncertainty the NFL would not like.

 

I think the team owners make a deal to stay in Buffalo.

[e2gsports]

As a New England fan I see no way you guys move. You've got a great fan base that stretches to Toronto to the north and Syracuse to the east. I know Bob Kraft spoke recently saying he wants the Bills as an original afl team to stay in WNY and in the AFC East. I personally go to Buffalo every year when the Patriots come to town and find it refreshing to see a fan base and city like yours. The passion is always there win or lose and its a great gameday experience. The Bills are a huge part of the NFL and moving them to a place like LA doesn't help the league but hurt it.

[CodeMonkey]

i think most of the points are valid. why cavalierly dismiss them other than the lease ?

None of them except for the lease, in my opinion, will factor into the Bills relocating or not. They are simply not important.