dwight in philly Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 until he threatens the packers like this.. wish he would stop.. mara before him.. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/06/06/roger-goodell-sends-buffalo-some-pretty-strong-stadium-hints/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 We really need to stop being so sensitive about this. Goodell works for the owners. If the Bills build a new stadium and make more money, those same owners make more money. This is not some threat. The ownership has no desire to move the team. It isn't a big deal at all. In terms of a stadium, GB doesn't need one because they are generating the revenue as it is. In the most recent Forbes valuation article they were the 10th most valuable franchise. They probably aren't the best example. The best example is probably Oakland and they are clearly being threatened (as is SD). Those teams come in at 31 and 22 respectively. The Bills are at 32. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 In the immortal words of someone "meh" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahnyc Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 With new owners with deep pockets who are committed to keeping the Bills in Buffalo, it seems really disingenuous for Goodell to be questioning the long-term viability/success of the Bills in Buffalo without a new stadium. At some point it would be great to have a new downtown stadium (easy for me to say not living in Buffalo), but Goodell is just coming across as pushing the narrow agenda of the greedy NFL owners who only care about maximizing league revenue. I don't like what happened with the Rams and what is happening with the Raiders possibly moving to Las Vegas. The NFL eventually will lose its base of support if it continues down this path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Boring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 You know what it feels like a little but is a group project in school. You may have a group of 5 people and the responsibilities are divided up. Someone always ends up doing the most and someone else the least. At the end of the day all 5 people get the same grade. You can try to make sure that the workload is more evenly distributed but even still it will never be that way. The Bills are the lazy kid right now. The rest of the group is not trying to get them to catch up to the overachiever doing the most but to the guy that is doing the 4th most. The owners want them to close the gap with the people above them. That isn't an unreasonable request at all. With new owners with deep pockets who are committed to keeping the Bills in Buffalo, it seems really disingenuous for Goodell to be questioning the long-term viability/success of the Bills in Buffalo without a new stadium. At some point it would be great to have a new downtown stadium (easy for me to say not living in Buffalo), but Goodell is just coming across as pushing the narrow agenda of the greedy NFL owners who only care about maximizing league revenue. I don't like what happened with the Rams and what is happening with the Raiders possibly moving to Las Vegas. The NFL eventually will lose its base of support if it continues down this path. This ^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 We really need to stop being so sensitive about this. Goodell works for the owners. If the Bills build a new stadium and make more money, those same owners make more money. This is not some threat. The ownership has no desire to move the team. It isn't a big deal at all. In terms of a stadium, GB doesn't need one because they are generating the revenue as it is. In the most recent Forbes valuation article they were the 10th most valuable franchise. They probably aren't the best example. The best example is probably Oakland and they are clearly being threatened (as is SD). Those teams come in at 31 and 22 respectively. The Bills are at 32. In the immortal words of someone "meh" These 2 posts perfectly demonstrate the range of emotions contained in my reaction to his statements. He can say whatever he wants now. It is no longer a real "threat". We probably do need a new stadium, we probably will get a new stadium, but we certainly shouldnt be worried about losing the team either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 I have experience in the restaurant industry. And there the franchisor is continually putting pressure on the franchisees to update their physical assets. It's the same thing. The NFL is interested in top line dollars and image. The franchise is interested in those but more interested in bottom line profit. Goodell is just doing his job to protect the NFL brand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 By the end of the lease, our stadium is 50 years old. To think it does not need to be replaced or completely gutted and re-built (similar to what they did in GB), is simply ignoring common sense. The question is not if, it is when. They will have a new stadium within 10 years. The only thing left to debate (and its probably already decided by the Pegulas) is where. If they build it in OP, not much additional infrastructure needs to change. If they build it downtown, they will need probably about a Billion dollars in infrastructure updates first. On the plus side, this whole thing will create a ton of construction jobs in WNY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 We really need to stop being so sensitive about this. Goodell works for the owners. If the Bills build a new stadium and make more money, those same owners make more money. This is not some threat. The ownership has no desire to move the team. It isn't a big deal at all. In terms of a stadium, GB doesn't need one because they are generating the revenue as it is. In the most recent Forbes valuation article they were the 10th most valuable franchise. They probably aren't the best example. The best example is probably Oakland and they are clearly being threatened (as is SD). Those teams come in at 31 and 22 respectively. The Bills are at 32. incredibly practical evaluation, but theres bound to be an element of ego feeling bruised by some here. saying that we produce the least revenue isnt an insult to the city, and other owners would be crazy not to want to see that number grow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted June 6, 2016 Author Share Posted June 6, 2016 i agree with poloncarz. open up the books(which they wont do) or just stop.. let pegula decide.. if it is proven that the Bills are fiscally viable,let it alone.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 (edited) i agree with poloncarz. open up the books(which they wont do) or just stop.. let pegula decide.. if it is proven that the Bills are fiscally viable,let it alone.. I don't think that anyone is debating that they are viable or even incredibly profitable. I will use another analogy that may work. If we all go to a party and are asked to bring beer, someone will bring 24 Founders All Day IPA's, others will bring a 12 pack of Bud Light and then someone will bring a 6 pack of Natty Ice. Everyone is going to have plenty of beer to drink and have a good time. The other guys at the party are just saying, "we aren't going to kick you out or anything but do you think that next time you can do better than that 6 pack of Natty Ice?" Edited June 6, 2016 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted June 6, 2016 Author Share Posted June 6, 2016 I don't think that anyone is debating that they are viable or even incredibly profitable. I will use another analogy that may work. If we all go to a party and are asked to bring beer, someone will bring 24 Founders All Day IPA's, others will bring a 12 pack of Bud Light and then someone will bring a 6 pack of Natty Ice. Everyone is going to have plenty of beer to drink and have a good time. The other guys at the party are just saying, "we aren't going to kick you out or anything but do you think that next time you can do better than that 6 pack of Natty Ice?" i agree, and know where you are coming from and you are totally correct as it pertains to the Bills and the league. IMHO, it will sort itself out i am sure, just wish it would go away. myself and great many of the older guys since following them from 1960 just got freed from the ever present noose that was hanging there . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 i agree with poloncarz. open up the books(which they wont do) or just stop.. let pegula decide.. if it is proven that the Bills are fiscally viable,let it alone..The problem for Poloncarz is that he has no leverage. It is irrelevant how profitable the Bills are. Just as it is irrelevant how profitable any business is when asking a city, town or state is trying to lure that company to their area. If the State and County won't partner with the Bills to build a new stadium, there are other cities that will. Do we want to be the next Cleveland? Not to mention that Erie County is really the inconsequential third wheel in this situation. The State and the Bills (and Chuck Shumer) will come to an agreement and they will tell Mark to STFU and sign off on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 i agree, and know where you are coming from and you are totally correct as it pertains to the Bills and the league. IMHO, it will sort itself out i am sure, just wish it would go away. myself and great many of the older guys since following them from 1960 just got freed from the ever present noose that was hanging there . Oh I hear you and understand. Thankfully, the Pegula's buying the team eliminated that threat. They are known to run 1st class operations and I would expect nothing less on this matter. The stadium will be really well done but on their terms and not the NFL's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 RWS will be replaced by the end of the lease. (2022?) In the meantime tell Goodell to chill and enjoy what we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted June 6, 2016 Author Share Posted June 6, 2016 Oh I hear you and understand. Thankfully, the Pegula's buying the team eliminated that threat. They are known to run 1st class operations and I would expect nothing less on this matter. The stadium will be really well done but on their terms and not the NFL's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 (edited) Oh I hear you and understand. Thankfully, the Pegula's buying the team eliminated that threat. They are known to run 1st class operations and I would expect nothing less on this matter. The stadium will be really well done but on their terms and not the NFL's. If the NFL never said anything about the open sewer the Raiders play in, they should STFU about RWS. Edited June 6, 2016 by PromoTheRobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 If the NFL never said anything about the open sewer the Raiders play in, they should STFU about RWS. hes called it out before. earlier this offseason he referred to it (and a few others) as "inadequate and unsatisfactory" i believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WotAGuy Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Pegula already made the other 31 owners a ton of money by paying $1.4 billion for the 32nd most valuable franchise. Let him play with his new toy for a couple years, before expecting another handout, will ya? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.722aeba127c7cb0fa5732d105ed7f1a3.jpg)
Recommended Posts