Bills unlikely to leave Buffalo if PSE doesn’t get public or state funding for stadium

[BuffaloBills1998]

58 minutes ago, Gen2 said:

 

Not WANTING to move the team, and being stupid for not moving the team are two different things. I want the Bills to stay in Buffalo (or at least western New York) as much as the next fan, but realistically, can the area's economy support an NFL franchise?

 

It would break my heart, but I suspect there is a city or two willing to foot SOME of the costs and able to support at least league mid level ticket prices, and PSLs. I just don't see the local fans willingly supporting a 100% rise in ticket prices along with thousands of dollars for PSLs for the right to buy those tickets.

 

As far as gov't $$$ to help and pay for the stadium, IMHO, the people of Erie county and NYS will feel the money is better spent elsewhere (and I can't say I blame them).

 

My biggest fear is someplace (maybe like St. Louis) wants a team and is willing to pay for it. I'm not 100% sure the team won't move and I think that anybody who claims they are positive this will play out one way or the other is just whistling in the graveyard to cover their fears.

St. Louis will never get another pro football team. They’ve now lost two pro football teams plus they’re suing the NFL over the Rams and it’s looking like they might win. That pretty much solidifies St. Louis never getting another NFL team

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

4 hours ago, Gugny said:

“If I want to make some money, I'll go drill another well.”  - TP

 

I know he sold East resources, and corresponding assets in like 14 and 2017.  But i think he still owns 2 other companies.  He's probably drilled a bunch of them 😆

[BuffaloBills1998]

7 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

 

 

similar to what i have heard as well. Both sides sounds like they agree public money will be spent, just a matter of how much and terms. Ive sold enterprise software for 35 years, all deals get to this point. You say you want my offering, i say i want your business...but now the evalution is over and the spending gets real. This is when the real work begins, and is usually the longest stage in the sales process

 

If both sides want to get the deal done, it will get done. But in no way do i think the Bills leaving is impossible, it can happen if NYS becomes dug in for political purposes.

 

 

BTW, not to get all political, but NYS got a little over $100B in the Rescue plan funds, i don't think 1% of that going to fund a stadium to keep an entire region moving forward is a bad use of funds.

While it may not be impossible it’s looking more and more like it’s unlikely to happen. NYS and Erie county both have the money to help support the new stadium. Plus if Pegula were to move the Bills then he’d have to move the Sabres as well due to angry fans refusing to show up to the games due to the Bills moving. So infact it would cost Pegula more money and a major headache to move then it would to stay, Pegula is not taking the team anywhere else. San Diego wouldn’t even build a stadium for the chargers plus they never showed up to the games, St. Louis is done and will never get another team, Toronto can’t afford an NFL team let alone building an NFL stadium, Oakland is broke and is a dump of a city, they’re most likely to never get another NFL team again like St Louis. So there’s really no where else for the Bills to go. The relocation talk was nothing more than empty threats

Edited September 15, 2021 by BuffaloBills1998

[HalftimeAdjustment]

The only way the Bills are moving is if the county/state take some unreasonable $0 position. I believe that is mainly the position of a vocal, passionate minority and will not be the actual government offer. Once they have gotten as much as they can from the county/state, the Bills will agree to a deal. 

 

Also, no matter what that deal is, some people will not be happy. 

[Gen2]

18 minutes ago, BuffaloBills1998 said:

St. Louis will never get another pro football team. They’ve now lost two pro football teams plus they’re suing the NFL over the Rams and it’s looking like they might win. That pretty much solidifies St. Louis never getting another NFL team

 

 

That's easy to type into a forum thread, but you have nothing supporting your statement. Let's paint a picture here;

 

As far as St Louis is concerned they didn't "lose" the Rams, they had the Rams unlawfully taken from them, they are currently suing the NFL because of the Rams move. Everything the NFL has done to squash the lawsuit so far has failed, and at this point it LOOKS like it will be going to trial (in St Louis). Let's just say, the NFL doesn't want their dirty laundry becoming public record through the trial process, and decides to settle out of court. I have no idea what kind of money would be involved, but for the sake of argument let's say 1.7 billion dollars. Now if St Louis would be willing to parlay that money into a new stadium and offer the Bills that new stadium for free, on what grounds would or could the NFL stop the move? Do you honestly think they would "black ball" St Louis to prevent the move knowing St Louis isn't shy about taking them to court?? 

[nucci]

8 minutes ago, Gen2 said:

 

 

That's easy to type into a forum thread, but you have nothing supporting your statement. Let's paint a picture here;

 

As far as St Louis is concerned they didn't "lose" the Rams, they had the Rams unlawfully taken from them, they are currently suing the NFL because of the Rams move. Everything the NFL has done to squash the lawsuit so far has failed, and at this point it LOOKS like it will be going to trial (in St Louis). Let's just say, the NFL doesn't want their dirty laundry becoming public record through the trial process, and decides to settle out of court. I have no idea what kind of money would be involved, but for the sake of argument let's say 1.7 billion dollars. Now if St Louis would be willing to parlay that money into a new stadium and offer the Bills that new stadium for free, on what grounds would or could the NFL stop the move? Do you honestly think they would "black ball" St Louis to prevent the move knowing St Louis isn't shy about taking them to court?? 

I was thinking...."Drop the lawsuit and we'll give you another team"

[BuffaloBills1998]

28 minutes ago, Gen2 said:

 

 

That's easy to type into a forum thread, but you have nothing supporting your statement. Let's paint a picture here;

 

As far as St Louis is concerned they didn't "lose" the Rams, they had the Rams unlawfully taken from them, they are currently suing the NFL because of the Rams move. Everything the NFL has done to squash the lawsuit so far has failed, and at this point it LOOKS like it will be going to trial (in St Louis). Let's just say, the NFL doesn't want their dirty laundry becoming public record through the trial process, and decides to settle out of court. I have no idea what kind of money would be involved, but for the sake of argument let's say 1.7 billion dollars. Now if St Louis would be willing to parlay that money into a new stadium and offer the Bills that new stadium for free, on what grounds would or could the NFL stop the move? Do you honestly think they would "black ball" St Louis to prevent the move knowing St Louis isn't shy about taking them to court?? 

Yes I do, because again they’ve lost two NFL teams. Regardless how the Rams left, they still lost them. St. Louis is not a football town it’s a baseball town. St. Louis is not going to get another NFL team just like Oakland and San Diego

[Gen2]

1 minute ago, BuffaloBills1998 said:

Yes I do, because again they’ve lost two NFL teams. Regardless how the Rams left, they still lost them. St. Louis is not a football town it’s a baseball town. St. Louis is not going to get another NFL team just like Oakland and San Diego

 

 

For some reason I don't think the thought process of "Your honor we didn't allow the Bills to move to St Louis because it's a baseball town" would hold up in court if they would take the NFL to court for black balling them. I DO agree with you that Oakland and San Diego will never get another NFL team, but it's because of the lack of outside funding for new stadiums in their respective cities, the reasons for that belong on the political board and have nothing to do with which sport may or may not have been more popular.

[Mr. WEO]

23 minutes ago, Gen2 said:

 

 

That's easy to type into a forum thread, but you have nothing supporting your statement. Let's paint a picture here;

 

As far as St Louis is concerned they didn't "lose" the Rams, they had the Rams unlawfully taken from them, they are currently suing the NFL because of the Rams move. Everything the NFL has done to squash the lawsuit so far has failed, and at this point it LOOKS like it will be going to trial (in St Louis). Let's just say, the NFL doesn't want their dirty laundry becoming public record through the trial process, and decides to settle out of court. I have no idea what kind of money would be involved, but for the sake of argument let's say 1.7 billion dollars. Now if St Louis would be willing to parlay that money into a new stadium and offer the Bills that new stadium for free, on what grounds would or could the NFL stop the move? Do you honestly think they would "black ball" St Louis to prevent the move knowing St Louis isn't shy about taking them to court?? 

 

LOL--heck, why not 1.7 TRILLION!!??

 

Anyway, sure Kroenke is a scumbag, but St. Louis has only themselves to blame for signing such an idiotic lease agreement to "upgrade" the Dome for 700 mil to make it "1st tier" (whatever that means)----and then refused to do so.   That's all Stan the Man needed to initiate his LA Protocol.  "We were too stupid" isn't a convincing legal argument. 

 

Also, the Defense says that their guidelines for relocation are not rules and therefore obviously are not a contract with any city, least of all St Louis.  They are "unilateral" policies made expressly for the "benefit of the league and its members".  Nothing secret there. 

 

Also, he left St. Louis for the same reason you claim the Buffalo can't economically sustain the Bills (see the NFL's comments about this at the time).  No one is moving a team to St. Louis.   

 

The last time a city took the NFL to court over a move was Oakland.  The case got tossed.  Do you think the NFL wants to set a precedent that they will payoff cities that lose teams (settlements)?

 

 

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Gen2 said:

 

Not WANTING to move the team, and being stupid for not moving the team are two different things. I want the Bills to stay in Buffalo (or at least western New York) as much as the next fan, but realistically, can the area's economy support an NFL franchise?

 

It would break my heart, but I suspect there is a city or two willing to foot SOME of the costs and able to support at least league mid level ticket prices, and PSLs. I just don't see the local fans willingly supporting a 100% rise in ticket prices along with thousands of dollars for PSLs for the right to buy those tickets.

 

As far as gov't $$$ to help and pay for the stadium, IMHO, the people of Erie county and NYS will feel the money is better spent elsewhere (and I can't say I blame them).

 

My biggest fear is someplace (maybe like St. Louis) wants a team and is willing to pay for it. I'm not 100% sure the team won't move and I think that anybody who claims they are positive this will play out one way or the other is just whistling in the graveyard to cover their fears.

 

I don't think the Pegulas want to move. Now could they be inclined to sell if something doesn't give, to someone who might want to move? Sure. My point was actually they are not in a great negotiating position because they don't have a lot of obvious leverage. 

[TXBILLSFAN]

1 hour ago, BuffaloBills1998 said:

While it may not be impossible it’s looking more and more like it’s unlikely to happen. NYS and Erie county both have the money to help support the new stadium. Plus if Pegula were to move the Bills then he’d have to move the Sabres as well due to angry fans refusing to show up to the games due to the Bills moving. So infact it would cost Pegula more money and a major headache to move then it would to stay, Pegula is not taking the team anywhere else. San Diego wouldn’t even build a stadium for the chargers plus they never showed up to the games, St. Louis is done and will never get another team, Toronto can’t afford an NFL team let alone building an NFL stadium, Oakland is broke and is a dump of a city, they’re most likely to never get another NFL team again like St Louis. So there’s really no where else for the Bills to go. The relocation talk was nothing more than empty threats

 

Relocation is not an empty threat, in the past decade . . . .

Chargers moved to LA

Rams moved to LA

Raiders moved to Vegas

 

There are larger and more economically viable markets for an NFL team than Buffalo.

 

What I am urging is for all of us to support NY State to provide partial funding similar to what they did for NY metro teams for a new stadium.  This is an investment in the Western NY community for an asset that has tangible value.

 

 

 

[Gen2]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

LOL--heck, why not 1.7 TRILLION!!??

 

 

 

 

I thought I was pretty upfront in saying I had no idea what the dollar figures were or would be, I just analy extracted 1.7 billion for the sake of the discussion.

[Gen2]

The following is a cut and past from a prior post that no one responded to, I REALLY am interested in discussion with local fans as to their feelings. I'm not looking for a "they won't leave" or "yes they will" kind of responses, just looking for what the local "level of pain" the fans are willing to endure to keep the team.

 

 

All of this talk has me wondering what everybody's thoughts are in supporting a new stadium. Some discussion points as I see them are:

 

1) The elephant in the room is city/county/state support. I understand peoples reluctance in supporting a stadium with taxpayers money, but the fact of the matter is there are locations out there who would be willing to give at least SOME level of support to a stadium, how do you feel 0% - 100% government support or something in between?

 

2) Ticket prices. According to my research, the Bills currently have the lowest average ticket price @ $74.95 with the NFL average @ $104.73 and the highest for the LV Raiders @ $153.47. What level of a ticket price would you support, up to the NFL average, up to Raider levels, somewhere in between?

 

3) PSLs. Personally, I find the mere concept of PSLs distasteful, but the fact of the matter is over half of the NFL charge them to help finance their stadium, how much would you think someone should pay for the "right" to buy a season ticket?

 

 

Since I don't live in western N.Y. anymore I don't feel like I have a dog in this fight, but here are my thoughts anyway.

 

1) I left N.Y. many years ago, and haven't returned to live for a number of reasons, taxes being one of them. With that being said, I don't really care if the city/county/state pick up 100% of the tab, however I AM sensitive that there are a number of better areas that tax dollars can and should be spent. However, I am sure that there are a few cities willing to support at least a portion of a new stadium, St Louis and maybe San Diego or Oakland ... and maybe there are one or two out there hiding in the wood work.

 

2) As I said in item one, I don't live in the area and fly in for a game or two per season. When piled on to airfare, hotel, and food costs, raising ticket prices to even the Raider level would only be a "background noise level" of added expense. I would still be flying in for a game or two per season.

 

3) Once again, I'll never be a season ticket holder so even though I cringe at the thought of PSLs, I really don't care.

 

 

I'm really interested in the western N.Y. Bills fans feelings on the topic, it's just too easy for us expats to spend the locals money. 

[PromoTheRobot]

I don't buy this either. There has to be some public money going into the project.

[Jauronimo]

1 hour ago, TXBILLSFAN said:

 

Relocation is not an empty threat, in the past decade . . . .

Chargers moved to LA

Rams moved to LA

Raiders moved to Vegas

 

There are larger and more economically viable markets for an NFL team than Buffalo.

 

What I am urging is for all of us to support NY State to provide partial funding similar to what they did for NY metro teams for a new stadium.  This is an investment in the Western NY community for an asset that has tangible value.

 

 

 

There really aren't that many cities in the U.S. who can sustain an NFL team.  Buffalo has proven to be a viable market.

[SoCal Deek]

8 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

There really aren't that many cities in the U.S. who can sustain an NFL team.  Buffalo has proven to be a viable market.

If you google the Top 50 Metro areas in the United States, the WNY area comes in at #49.

Here's the list in descending order of population that do not have an NFL Team:

 

13 Riverside/San Bernardino

17 San Diego

22 Orlando

24 San Antonio

28 Austin

32 Columbus

35 San Jose

37 Virginia Beach

38 Providence

40 Milwaukee

41 Oklahoma City

44 Richmond

47 Salt Lake City

48 Hartford

[Greg S]

19 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I don't buy this either. There has to be some public money going into the project.

 

I am sure there will be. Also having Kathy Hochul (a native WNY girl and Bills fan) makes this is the perfect time to get a deal done so shovels can go into the ground. You know she doesn't want the Bills to move on her watch as the most powerful person in NY. 

[Jauronimo]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

If you google the Top 50 Metro areas in the United States, the WNY area comes in at #49.

Here's the list in descending order of population that do not have an NFL Team:

 

13 Riverside/San Bernardino - Putting a 3rd team in Los Angeles?

17 San Diego - just lost a team due to lack of support and financing for a stadium.

22 Orlando - right in the middle of three rabid fanbases Tampa, Jville, and Miami.  Florida probably needs one less team more than they need 4 teams.

24 San Antonio - transient military town, everyone is from somewhere else.  Cowboys country, and Jerry will never allow it.

28 Austin - city has zero professional sports.  UT Football is king, Cowboys country, and Jerry will never allow it.

32 Columbus - Buckeye town, any other football team is a distant second favorite.  Let them worry about supporting one professional franchise before a 3rd professional team in Ohio competes with Browns and Bengals.

35 San Jose - Bay Area, 49ers country.  Also formerly Raider territory until the Bay Area could no longer support 2 teams.

37 Virginia Beach - Military town, everyone is from somewhere else. Transient.

38 Providence - Patriots country, no way.

40 Milwaukee - Green Bay territory.  Two teams in Wisconsin is crazy talk.

41 Oklahoma City - Sooner town.   Any pro team would be a distant 2nd favorite in that football market.

44 Richmond - i dont know anything about Richmond.

47 Salt Lake City - there is nothing within hundreds of miles of SLC but maybe that would work?

48 Hartford - Patriots Country, no way.

Buffalo as football market includes southern Ontario and WNY over to Syracuse which needs to be factored in.  There are some cities that are bigger but as football markets few make any real sense.  

 

See above.

[The Frankish Reich]

2 hours ago, Gen2 said:

 

 

That's easy to type into a forum thread, but you have nothing supporting your statement. Let's paint a picture here;

 

As far as St Louis is concerned they didn't "lose" the Rams, they had the Rams unlawfully taken from them, they are currently suing the NFL because of the Rams move. Everything the NFL has done to squash the lawsuit so far has failed, and at this point it LOOKS like it will be going to trial (in St Louis). Let's just say, the NFL doesn't want their dirty laundry becoming public record through the trial process, and decides to settle out of court. I have no idea what kind of money would be involved, but for the sake of argument let's say 1.7 billion dollars. Now if St Louis would be willing to parlay that money into a new stadium and offer the Bills that new stadium for free, on what grounds would or could the NFL stop the move? Do you honestly think they would "black ball" St Louis to prevent the move knowing St Louis isn't shy about taking them to court?? 

this ^ is making too much sense for my fragile disposition.

I have this sneaking suspicion that when things no longer make sense - having one of just 32 NFL teams in Buffalo, with Buffalo being roughly the 52nd largest market - they tend to get "corrected." And the correction here would be moving a team. Thankfully the vast majority of larger markets are taken, or they face obstacles like NFL owners and their territorial claims (Cowboys and Austin or San Antonio, Orlando and Jax or Tampa), or there's logistical problems (Canadian cities seemed a no-brainer until COVID hit). But there's money to be made by some group somewhere, and there's more of it outside of Buffalo than inside. Pegulas, don't give in to temptation!

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

Buffalo as football market includes southern Ontario and WNY over to Syracuse which needs to be factored in.  There are some cities that are bigger but as football markets few make any real sense.  

 

See above.

Not arguing that. Just thought the list was interesting.  For example, Riverside/San Bernardino, otherwise known as the Inland Empire here is SoCal is huge with 4.5 Million people. It lies about an hour east of Los Angeles.