Bill Polian: Bills need new stadium with roof north in Buffalo/Niagara

[Ronin]

Perhaps someone could go to the library and find some old articles and post them about the discussions of where to put the stadium, and how it ended up in O.P.

 

In an enormous hole that will be there forever.

 

Buffalo is 51 as a TV market that is part of the problem when the talk of small market teams only Green Bay and New Orleans are smaller.

 

http://www.stationin...m/tv/tv-markets

 

And Green Bay is one of the more profitable franchises, the Bills are one of the least profitable.

 

In 2012 the Packers had then again over a third of the revenue that the Bills had and over 4 times the profit.

 

The owners do not want this to happen again. It is one thing for Jax, San Diego, etc. these are good teams, but they do not have the fan base and traditions like Buffalo. The NFL owners know this point. It is more than Buffalo as they get the regionalization of most of upstate NY, which is still one of the most populated states in the Nation.

 

The owners want money, and most will screw over their own mother to get it. Every last dime that they can.

 

This overemphasis on the sentimentalization of the fan base and traditions like Buffalo are irrelevant.

 

I'm sure they don't want Cleveland all over again, but Cleveland happened, and once again, it was all about the money and a new stadium.

 

If it can happen to LA and Baltimore, it can happen to Buffalo. To think otherwise is foolish.

[Shoto]

Winning will make you profitable!

[Ronin]

Orchard Park is in a "snow belt"?

 

The US government will do nothing if the NFL wants to put a team out of the US. To suggest they would is laughable. So is the needless repeating of the possibility of altering the anti-trust status of the NFL. Also, Tim Graham's article said nothing about any politician challenging the anti-trust status of the league.

 

Common sense should inform everyone that if every NFL team was allowed to make it's own uniform/TV/etc deals there would be no profit sharing and a team like Buffalo would would be gone in a flash. Why posters keep repeating that Schumer or Cuomo would ever try to make this happen?

 

This nonsense has to stop. It's magical thinking.

 

We rarely seem to agree, but thank you! We agree here.

 

I'll add to that, Buffalo is dragging the rest of the league down in that way. We're talking about owners that would stop to pick up the proverbial dime. When talking tens of millions it only gives them more incentive to "cut the cord" to Buffalo.

 

Winning will make you profitable!

 

Winning will make you more profitable. The Bills are profitable, they make money.

 

You, and many others, keep missing the point. The point is where can the most money be made?

 

Hint: It's not Buffalo.

 

Isn't the Buffalo TV market the 9th largest in the league? Didn't they pull some of the highest shares in the NFL even last year, at 6-10?

 

Perhaps i'm wrong, but I seem to remember this being tweeted more than a few times last season.

 

You're wrong. Can't you just do a 30-second google to find out?

 

 

That piece even mentions two of the spots that I mentioned in another thread that have bigger TV markets and which, IMO, would be ripe for and NFL team. Oklahoma City and Portand.

 

By the way, Buffalo ranks 28th.

Edited June 1, 2014 by TaskersGhost

[BuffaloBill]

I'm on record hoping for a Niagara Falls super dome and complete agree with BP that Orchard Park was a very poor choice.

 

I agree as this is a boost for the entire region and can help to cement ties to the Canadian market.

[Ronin]

Isn't the Buffalo TV market the 9th largest in the league? Didn't they pull some of the highest shares in the NFL even last year, at 6-10?

 

Perhaps i'm wrong, but I seem to remember this being tweeted more than a few times last season.

 

By the way, here's an interesing piece.

 

http://forums.colts....tv-market-size/

 

I don't see Orlando as an option because there are obviously three other FL teams. But I do think that Portland wouldn't surprise me. Nor would Oklahoma City which isn't far down from that list. Hartford will never happen, it infringes too much on the NY and NE teams. Also not sure about Raleigh, although that wouldn't surprise me either.

 

I agree as this is a boost for the entire region and can help to cement ties to the Canadian market.

 

I don't think it would make a difference, especially since the Toronto series was a complete flop. The only thing that's going to "cement ties to the Canadian market" is moving the team there.

 

If anything the state, if it's truly interested in keeping the team, needs to cement ties to the CNY market. Putting the team in NF doesn't do a thing for CNY-ers except make the drive longer and extend the blackout radius slightly eastward.

Edited June 1, 2014 by TaskersGhost

[ET1062]

I've never understood why Canada doesn't count in our TV ratings for market size. the Buffalo TV stations are on their cable. Canadians drink beer, eat chips and drive cars just like Americans do, you would think the NFL and networks would promote this reach to advertisers.

[RussellDopeland]

It's amazing how every one of these "new ownership- new stadium" threads are taken over by the gloom and doom crowd. Not only do they hijack these threads, but also love to talk down to anyone who doubts their "expertise" when it comes to these subject matters. We've heard it all before: "Buffalo is a rust-belt city with a declining population"; "WNY cannot support an NFL team long-term and cannot possibly fund or facilitate the construction of a new stadium"- we've been beaten over the collective heads with these same talking points for quite a while now. Frankly I wonder to myself why the hell I even bother to come to this site and subject myself to these miserable cynics and their repetitive, sepulchral drivel. When the Bills are sold to local interests, and the announcement of plans for a new stadium are made public, I hope all of these folks will finally give it a rest and focus their attention instead on telling us why Manuel is a bust, or how Mario Williams should be traded for Charlie Whitehurst.

Edited June 1, 2014 by RussellDopeland

[Greg F]

Oh please!

 

For a few bucks the NFL can buy off all the right people. Gimme a break. The politicians are nothing but dogs on a leash with the uber wealthy holding the leash.

 

You have it backwards, its a popular myth. In reality the government is more like the mafia, you got to pay to play. It's a tried and true routine that goes something like this. 'that is a nice business you got there ... hate to have anything bad happen to it'. That is exactly what happened to Microsoft in the 90's as they were pretty much apolitical until the anti-trust suit.

 

 

With two months to go, Microsoft Corp., its employees and Microsoft's political action committee, MSPAC, have spent a combined $2.5 million on 2012 federal campaigns, on pace to beat their 2008 spending. Contributions total $1.76 million to Democrats and $782,000 to Republicans. In addition, current and former Microsoft employees are directly involved in fundraising efforts for some of the election's biggest races.

 

 

The company that was barely on anyone's political radar before its landmark antitrust case in the late 1990s has grown into one of the heavyweights of corporate political donations, outspending some of America's biggest companies, including Bank of America and General Electric, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

 

 

The other thing that drive me crazy is the myth that the 2 parties in Washington are significantly different. They are not. It is the same extortion game.

[PromoTheRobot]

The other thing that drive me crazy is the myth that the 2 parties in Washington are significantly different. They are not. It is the same extortion game.

 

Same game, different constituencies, but yeah.

[Wayne Cubed]

We rarely seem to agree, but thank you! We agree here.

 

I'll add to that, Buffalo is dragging the rest of the league down in that way. We're talking about owners that would stop to pick up the proverbial dime. When talking tens of millions it only gives them more incentive to "cut the cord" to Buffalo.

 

 

 

Winning will make you more profitable. The Bills are profitable, they make money.

 

You, and many others, keep missing the point. The point is where can the most money be made?

 

Hint: It's not Buffalo.

 

 

 

You're wrong. Can't you just do a 30-second google to find out?

 

http://www.reddit.co...ia_market_size/

 

That piece even mentions two of the spots that I mentioned in another thread that have bigger TV markets and which, IMO, would be ripe for and NFL team. Oklahoma City and Portand.

 

By the way, Buffalo ranks 28th.

 

Actually what I think the poster was trying to say was that Bills had the 11th best TV rating in the NFL last season, despite being the 4th smallest market. In 2012 they ranked 9th.

 

http://www.bizjourna...gs.html?ana=twt

 

And as much as these other places might be "ripe" as you say, it's hard to argue with the fact they finished 11th last season and top 10 the season before. People watch the Bills.

Edited June 1, 2014 by Wayne Cubed

[Shoto]

 

 

We rarely seem to agree, but thank you! We agree here.

 

I'll add to that, Buffalo is dragging the rest of the league down in that way. We're talking about owners that would stop to pick up the proverbial dime. When talking tens of millions it only gives them more incentive to "cut the cord" to Buffalo.

 

 

 

Winning will make you more profitable. The Bills are profitable, they make money.

 

You, and many others, keep missing the point. The point is where can the most money be made?

 

Hint: It's not Buffalo.

 

 

 

You're wrong. Can't you just do a 30-second google to find out?

 

 

That piece even mentions two of the spots that I mentioned in another thread that have bigger TV markets and which, IMO, would be ripe for and NFL team. Oklahoma City and Portand.

 

By the way, Buffalo ranks 28th.

 

Your source only addresses NFL City's there are many larger TV markets that do not have NFL Teams in the country. Toronto's is the largest untapped market in the NFL. Due to geography the Bills are landlocked for other TV markets East NYC, South Pittsburg and West Cleveland. The reason Toronto and most of the country doesn't support the Bills is largely due to their pathetic performance over the past 14 years. If we win, we will generate more support it's just the way it works. Winning brings prime time games and national audience, which equal more merchandise purchased. Currently the Bills are irrelevant outside western NY.

 

The other major source is the lack of major corporate sponsors thanks to NY taxes chasing them away. That's another discussion for another day.

 

Just win baby

[Mr. WEO]

Do you even read the comments before you post?? There are MULTIPLE threats against the NFL - antitrust is ONE - but there is also the tax exempt status that can be taken away by politicians, Polian indicates this is a huge threat.

Is your argument that politicians have no influence on the NFL? or is it so narrow that its the anti trust law is a threat that they will never use? If so - so what?? the pols then can threaten with the tax exempt law = or don't you wish to address this?

 

My position is that congress will never alter the anti-trust status of the NFL. If you understood the implications (which i have tried to explain) of removing the NFL's protected status, you would never want them to do it.

 

Also, congress as a whole will not change the entire tax status of the NFL just to keep the Bills in Buffalo. Schumer perhaps would propose such a bill for political purposes, knowing it would have know chance ever of passing--or even making it out of committee.

 

It really doesn't matter what Polian says. No politician is going to commit political suicide to save the Bills (and ruin the NFL in the process).

 

This is common sense.

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

Actually what I think the poster was trying to say was that Bills had the 11th best TV rating in the NFL last season, despite being the 4th smallest market. In 2012 they ranked 9th.

 

http://www.bizjourna...gs.html?ana=twt

 

And as much as these other places might be "ripe" as you say, it's hard to argue with the fact they finished 11th last season and top 10 the season before. People watch the Bills.

Well, people in WNY watch the Bills. It's my understanding that "TV ratings" are usually defined (roughly) as the PERCENTAGE of televisions in a given area (be it national or local) that are tuned to a particular program. The link you posted listed the Bills' 2013 TV rating as being over 30. I'm pretty sure that 30% of the TVs in the USA were not tuned in to Bills games last year.

 

Point being, that a 30 rating in WNY probably involves less eyeballs than a 15 rating in a broadcast TV market that has more than twice the population.

 

The TV revenue stream received by the NFL is roughly based on the advertising revenues that the TV broadcasters expect to receive. Do you think advertisers pay for air time based on (1) the total number of eyeballs that will see their ads, or (2) the percentage of local eyeballs that will see their ads, even if the total number of people living in a broadcast area is relatively small?

[jahbonas]

My position is that congress will never alter the anti-trust status of the NFL. If you understood the implications (which i have tried to explain) of removing the NFL's protected status, you would never want them to do it.

 

Also, congress as a whole will not change the entire tax status of the NFL just to keep the Bills in Buffalo. Schumer perhaps would propose such a bill for political purposes, knowing it would have know chance ever of passing--or even making it out of committee.

 

It really doesn't matter what Polian says. No politician is going to commit political suicide to save the Bills (and ruin the NFL in the process).

 

This is common sense.

 

Dont listen to Bill Polian or 4 highly placed sources in BEN article....,,,listen to you on a message board???? ,,,,,brilliant idea....

[Mr. WEO]

Dont listen to Bill Polian or 4 highly placed sources in BEN article....,,,listen to you on a message board???? ,,,,,brilliant idea....

 

Show me exactly where any source says that congress is considering altering the anti-trust status of the NFL. We aren't talking about "hearings" into concussion coverups or narcotic dispensing--I'm specifically talking about one thing here.

 

Why don't you tell us all exactly what you think would happen if the NFL lost its antitrust protection. You seem very well informed. Tell us why Schumer and a majority of the House and Senate and the President would pass such a bill.

 

Come on, inform us...

[jahbonas]

Show me exactly where any source says that congress is considering altering the anti-trust status of the NFL. We aren't talking about "hearings" into concussion coverups or narcotic dispensing--I'm specifically talking about one thing here.

 

Why don't you tell us all exactly what you think would happen if the NFL lost its antitrust protection. You seem very well informed. Tell us why Schumer and a majority of the House and Senate and the President would pass such a bill.

 

Come on, inform us...

 

The overall point is - that the Politicians of Cuomo and Schumer can very well make a HUGE difference because they can threaten to change/impact laws that are very favorable to the NFL - and the NFL does not want to do things (like move a team out of NY state or out of USA) that these politicians do not like.

It is you who have clung to this anti-trust rule as if its the ONLY thing the politicians can use to threaten the NFL and influence the NFL to vote in a way to keep key politicians happy.

I would think in this growing era of populism it would not be a stretch that many in congress would not like the fact the NFL billionaires get a tax exemption very favorable to them - EVERYONE seems to understand this but YOU - and you cling to this antitrust argument over and over

Cuomo and Schumur can have a huge impact on keeping the Bills right where they are now, - because they have bullets in their holsters that the NFL is very very sensitive to.

[Mr. WEO]

Cuomo, as Governor of New York, has ZERO influence over the NFL or Congress. To suggest others is...nuts.

 

So is the idea that Schumer would be able to convince a majority of those in the House and Senate to write a Bill that would change the way the NFL does business (pick the tax free status if you like, since you are incapable of answering the anti-trust issue)---all to keep the Bills from leaving Buffalo??

 

There is no way you actually think this could happen. You're just making an argument. I mean, come on--no other legislator would give two dumps about what happened to the Bills and you can bet that the NFL would have an army of lobbyists who would lean on Harry Reid so that even if Schumer was dumb enough (he's not) or cynical enough (he might be) to write such a bill removing the tax exempt status, it would never even come to the floor for debate.

 

There is no way what you are proposing will happen. Schumer by himself (and he would be alone) cannot make this happen. In fact, he would only propose it as a bluff, and the NFL would never take it seriously.

 

You can't articulate any convincing scenario where any such law would ever be passed. Tell us why Congress would go to this extreme just to keep the Bills in Buffalo.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Mr. WEO

[Heitz]

Cuomo, as Governor of New York, has ZERO influence over the NFL or Congress. To suggest others is...nuts.

 

The league is headquartered in NYC, so he probably has *some* influence...

 

Not that I think they would go as far as antitrust, but I do bet NYS politicians will fight like heck to keep it's one New York State based team!

[Greg F]

Cuomo, as Governor of New York, has ZERO influence over the NFL or Congress. To suggest others is...nuts.

 

Are you suggesting that Andrew Cuomo (son of former New York Governor Mario Cuomo) has no influence in Washington? The same Andrew Cuomo who, with no experience other then having been an assistant district attorney in NYC, was appointed as assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (1993-97) and then as secretary of HUD (1997-2001) under President Bill Clinton. Really? You think Cuomo has no pull?

 

So is the idea that Schumer would be able to convince a majority of those in the House and Senate ...

 

False dichotomy. You think that Schumer couldn't make life miserable for some of the owners? What is a few committee hearings investigating drug use (both legal and illegal) in the NFL. The NFL would love that kind of attention. I am sure they could find a few disgruntled former players to testify. Maybe a few IRS audits are in order, you know, with the NFL's not for profit status and all. Oh yea, those convicted felons that play in Canada or London might have to fill out some extra paperwork before getting let back in. Don't worry it will only take a couple of weeks. Schumer doesn't have to give the NFL cement shoes and drop them in the East river when breaking a few knee caps will get the desired results.

[Nitro]

I do remember that, as well as the stadium was to be roofed and in Lancaster. The dome in NOLA is the one that was to be built in Buffalo or so I was told. BTW, the anecdote about the Buffalo Evening News is a perfect metaphor for the parochialism that once (still?) contributed mightily to the decline of the city. Lots and lots of short-sighted decisions made to preserve the status/interests of this group or that, something we are now starting to see on a national scale.

I recall Mayor Sedita wanted the stadium to built at the foot of main street which is the current site of the First Niagara Center. The Lancaster site option and the corruption/kick back charges. OP was a compromise location that no one really wanted. Short sighted and foolishness are Buffalo government and business trademarks.