BuffaloBill Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 Jerruh and his friend, Kraft-y cheater, in Cheatriot land* have implied if not outright stated that small markets do not work in the current NFL economic model of TV, corporate and stadium driven revenue streams. Yet at the same time, the NFL is hardly a model of capitalism with it's anti-trust exemption and historic take in the form of publicly funded stadiums (not to mention other forms of public support through assistance with stadium operations and tax breaks). Will small market teams really remain viable as the pressure for more and more revenue from sources other than TV increase? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 They will remain viable if they are well run. Fortunately the Bills are. Teams are going to have to find creative ways to generate more non-shared revenue to keep the gap between the "have's and have-not's" close. That will mean a new stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 If small markets are not viable, what do you do? Cut the NFL to 24 teams? There are 53 metro statistical areas in the US with populations over 1 million. Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls is (barely) one of them. Most of the top 30 MSAs have teams within their MSA or nearby. If you moved the Bills, where would you move them to? Would that really make the NFL better? More profitable? Given it's history, traditions, and the loyalty of its fan base, I have to say the NFL is stronger with the Buffalo Bills than without them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 If small markets are not viable, what do you do? Cut the NFL to 24 teams? There are 53 metro statistical areas in the US with populations over 1 million. Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls is (barely) one of them. Most of the top 30 MSAs have teams within their MSA or nearby. If you moved the Bills, where would you move them to? Would that really make the NFL better? More profitable? Given it's history, traditions, and the loyalty of its fan base, I have to say the NFL is stronger with the Buffalo Bills than without them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas It's true Buffalo is barely over a million but there is over 10 million living within two hours. That makes a difference. You can't say the same of Green Bay or Jacksonville or many other mid-sized NFL markets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Horseheads Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 I don't disagree with you but 6 million of that is greater Toronto and I don't believe they give a **** about the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 I don't disagree with you but 6 million of that is greater Toronto and I don't believe they give a **** about the Bills. They care enough to put it in press even though they make the Buffalo News seem friendly to Bills at time; there are Bills fans in Toronto area although higher percentage of population of fans are in Southern Ontario region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted July 3, 2016 Share Posted July 3, 2016 It took the first two posts to cover a new stadium (yep, in time), and contraction (of course that's silly). So, the rest is just details smart owners will figure out, and our owners seem to be doing just fine there. I'm glad it wasn't MY $1.4 billion or I'd be more worried about it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted July 4, 2016 Author Share Posted July 4, 2016 It's true Buffalo is barely over a million but there is over 10 million living within two hours. That makes a difference. You can't say the same of Green Bay or Jacksonville or many other mid-sized NFL markets. The cities the Bills draw from Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse and Southern Ontario are not homes to big corporate money that is spent on Sports teams in a big way. There is that potential in Toronto. However, it just is not likely that corporate money is going to flow out of Toronto in support of the Bills, The Bills have been smart to make their fan base regional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Horseheads Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 The cities the Bills draw from Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse and Southern Ontario are not homes to big corporate money that is spent on Sports teams in a big way. There is that potential in Toronto. However, it just is not likely that corporate money is going to flow out of Toronto in support of the Bills, The Bills have been smart to make their fan base regional. I think they draw or have interest down here also. Last I knew Corning inc owned a box. But I agree Toronto is a big place with no interest in Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 They will remain viable if they are well run. Fortunately the Bills are. Teams are going to have to find creative ways to generate more non-shared revenue to keep the gap between the "have's and have-not's" close. That will mean a new stadium. True. How important the team is to the area and how well that area supports the team is incredibly important as well. That, of course, boils down to ticket sales, luxury box sales and financial assistance towards stadiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 Jerruh and his friend, Kraft-y cheater, in Cheatriot land* have implied if not outright stated that small markets do not work in the current NFL economic model of TV, corporate and stadium driven revenue streams. Yet at the same time, the NFL is hardly a model of capitalism with it's anti-trust exemption and historic take in the form of publicly funded stadiums (not to mention other forms of public support through assistance with stadium operations and tax breaks). Will small market teams really remain viable as the pressure for more and more revenue from sources other than TV increase? First, where have any of the owners implied that small markets do not work in the NFL? Second, "small market" teams are doing just fine in the NFL--the smallest market, GB, is in the top 10 in revenue--more than Miami, Pittsburgh, NO, Atlanta, Oakland, SD, etc.... Third, the teams that experienced the highest increase in valuation are not the largest market teams...they include Detroit, Jax, Cincy, Green bay. Fourth, there is nothing unique about the NFL's "antitrust exemption" nor is there anything "historic" in the way it seeks to get public funding for public stadiums (see the shameless fiasco the Braves have perpetrated on the taxpayers in Georgia). The "current NFL economic model" ensures that all teams make money. Having fewer teams would bring the NFL less money for the owners. How would losing the smaller market teams benefit anyone in the NFL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 If small markets are not viable, what do you do? Cut the NFL to 24 teams? There are 53 metro statistical areas in the US with populations over 1 million. Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls is (barely) one of them. Most of the top 30 MSAs have teams within their MSA or nearby. If you moved the Bills, where would you move them to? Would that really make the NFL better? More profitable? Given it's history, traditions, and the loyalty of its fan base, I have to say the NFL is stronger with the Buffalo Bills than without them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas I have to think that this is Jerruh and Kraft's way of signaling that they'd like to see migration from smaller markets to larger ones. The smaller markets today are clearly viable, but they aren't as profitable to the league as larger, untapped ones like Mexico City, London, etc. They can't come out and just stay that they want to see teams bail on their current cities though. So they're laying the foundation for moving some teams by saying they aren't viable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 The cities the Bills draw from Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse and Southern Ontario are not homes to big corporate money that is spent on Sports teams in a big way. There is that potential in Toronto. However, it just is not likely that corporate money is going to flow out of Toronto in support of the Bills, The Bills have been smart to make their fan base regional. Rochester has a large corporate presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 Rochester has a large corporate presence. No it doesn't. The largest employer, by far, is the U of R. Then there's Wegmans (Russ lost that account years ago), what's left of Xerox and, somewhere behind the city school district and Monroe County, is Paychex. The only big business left is in the 3 hospital systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 (edited) I have to think that this is Jerruh and Kraft's way of signaling that they'd like to see migration from smaller markets to larger ones. The smaller markets today are clearly viable, but they aren't as profitable to the league as larger, untapped ones like Mexico City, London, etc. They can't come out and just stay that they want to see teams bail on their current cities though. So they're laying the foundation for moving some teams by saying they aren't viable. Why do i find this so irritating? Manipulating the market via heavy weight players. ala Kraft and Jones. I am a simple Man.With simple needs, like Buffalo Bills football each year. I hope Pegula kicks one or both those basterds in the nards. Is this undue pressure happening now that Ralph is gone? And those senile old gluttons think a chink in the armour is ripe for prodding ? Just let us have our Buffalo Bills and STFU. Edited July 4, 2016 by 3rdand12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted July 4, 2016 Share Posted July 4, 2016 If football starts putting teams in Europe, NFL can shove football up .... It belongs in the US. Screw the over seas games. I hate them. Disruptive to all involved. Until Brady NE had a very hard time filling their stadium. Small markets teams do well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 They will remain viable if they are well run. Fortunately the Bills are. Teams are going to have to find creative ways to generate more non-shared revenue to keep the gap between the "have's and have-not's" close. That will mean a new stadium. Exactly. The Bills, Chiefs, Packers and Browns are all small market teams that are doing well financially. Also, it is not as if there is another 10 Los Angeles waiting to get a team. The next set of big cities that covet an NFL team are not much bigger for them to get their purported financial windfall....That is why this will all be just a LOT of talk to keep the public of these small cities always at Ransom. When the Bills dared to be acquired and moved, no one came forward. These small market teams (will) remain where they belong; right back where they have made history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Why do i find this so irritating? Manipulating the market via heavy weight players. ala Kraft and Jones. I am a simple Man.With simple needs, like Buffalo Bills football each year. I hope Pegula kicks one or both those basterds in the nards. Is this undue pressure happening now that Ralph is gone? And those senile old gluttons think a chink in the armour is ripe for prodding ? Just let us have our Buffalo Bills and STFU. It is irritating. Just some rich guys looking to get richer. The Bills look very safe for the foreseeable future with Pegula owning them. Some other teams less so. I'm looking at you, Jaguars. How are you guys enjoying those London trips? Do you know they pronounce the name "Jag-U-ars" there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 (edited) Exactly. The Bills, Chiefs, Packers and Browns are all small market teams that are doing well financially. Also, it is not as if there is another 10 Los Angeles waiting to get a team. The next set of big cities that covet an NFL team are not much bigger for them to get their purported financial windfall....That is why this will all be just a LOT of talk to keep the public of these small cities always at Ransom. When the Bills dared to be acquired and moved, no one came forward. These small market teams (will) remain where they belong; right back where they have made history. The Packers represent all of Wisconsin. The Chiefs represent all of Kansas. The Cleveland Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is nearly double the size of Buffalo's. I'm not sure comparing Buffalo to these other markets is a fair comparison. But I agree with Ganesh's main point. If the Bills moved to Sacramento or Austin or one of the other bigger MSAs, would the NFL really benefit? Would the attendance be as good? TV viewership? Merchandise sales? And how much would a move damage the 'good will' of the NFL? Edited July 5, 2016 by hondo in seattle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jr1 Posted July 5, 2016 Share Posted July 5, 2016 Toronto, Buffalo, Niagra Falls and Rochester combined should be able to support a team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts