NFL plans to settle with Saint Louis, terms to be made public(UPDATE settled for 790 million---UPDATE speculated Chargers/Raiders may have leaked internal documents to St Louis implicating Kroenke)

[Mr. WEO]

7 hours ago, Doc said:

 

STL was looking for around $1B in damages.  I'd say settling for a few hundred million less was worth it to them, as well as the NFL because they knew they would lose and owners' information would have been made public.  Not bad for STL when many thought they were foolish to even bring a lawsuit against the NFL because they thought they had no chance. 

 

What I would like to know is who pays for it (it better just be Kroenke, and at most the owners who approved the move) and if STL is interested in an expansion team in the future and whether the NFL has closed the door on that with the settlement, considering they appear to want to expand the league?

 

 

Eh, PSE just said the obvious part out loud.  Public funds will have to be used.  And in the end both will contribute, a new stadium will be built and the team will stay in Buffalo for my lifetime.

That settlement is on. Kroemke.  
 

The NFL, with this settlement, is never going back to STL.  They don’t have to and will turn their back in that town.  Zero chance 24 owners would EVER vote for a city that sued them.  Come on!

 

And you miss the point of PSE putting their statement on record..

[HardyBoy]

On 11/24/2021 at 12:21 PM, eSJayDee said:

A couple of things come to mind -

1) So if this is the value of losing an NFL franchise, this should influence how much NYS & Erie contribute to keeping the Bills in Buffalo.

2) I assume the St Louis area is (far?) more than 1M people.  Is less than $1000/head really worth losing your football team? (I realize govt cost/revenue doesn't get apportioned that way, but I live ~300 miles from Buffalo & I certainly don't want the Bills living & would consider that remuneration pittance.)

 

A $1 billion dollar stadium paid off over however many years the loans would be for is a whole lot more than $1 billion.

 

Check out how much the total cost of the Miami Marlins stadium is going to cost Miami. It's astounding.

[Big Turk]

15 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

That settlement is on. Kroemke.  
 

The NFL, with this settlement, is never going back to STL.  They don’t have to and will turn their back in that town.  Zero chance 24 owners would EVER vote for a city that sued them.  Come on!

 

And you miss the point of PSE putting their statement on record..

 

Not necessarily...read the previous post to yours

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

That settlement is on. Kroemke.  
 

The NFL, with this settlement, is never going back to STL.  They don’t have to and will turn their back in that town.  Zero chance 24 owners would EVER vote for a city that sued them.  Come on!

 

And you miss the point of PSE putting their statement on record..

 

Personally, as long as the teams that didn't vote for the move (the Bills are one) don't have to pay for it, I don't care who pays for it exactly.

 

And why not give STL a franchise in the future?  The expansion fee will be enormous and they can (and will) change the by-laws so they don't get burned next time.  Or maybe, just maybe, negotiate in good faith next time?  But eh, whatever.  Not my city and there are other markets.

 

What was the point other than reminding the county and state (and everyone else) what they should already know?

[Big Turk]

26 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Personally, as long as the teams that didn't vote for the move (the Bills are one) don't have to pay for it, I don't care who pays for it exactly.

 

And why not give STL a franchise in the future?  The expansion fee will be enormous and they can (and will) change the by-laws so they don't get burned next time.  Or maybe, just maybe, negotiate in good faith next time?  But eh, whatever.  Not my city and there are other markets.

 

What was the point other than reminding the county and state (and everyone else) what they should already know?

 

Kinda doesn't work that way...once teams votes, if they have enough votes, the whole NFL approved it.

 

[Doc]

3 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

Kinda doesn't work that way...once teams votes, if they have enough votes, the whole NFL approved it.

 

Who actually pays for the settlement is a decision to be made by the owners.  If Kroenke doesn't have to pay for it all, even though he said he would, I can see the owners who didn't vote yes to the move saying they shouldn't be on the hook for it.

[Big Turk]

Just now, Doc said:

 

Who actually pays for the settlement is a decision to be made by the owners.  If Kroenke doesn't have to pay for it all, even though he said he would, I can see the owners who didn't vote yes to the move saying they shouldn't be on the hook for it.

 

Did you not read the update as to WHY he doesn't think he should have to pay it?

 

Think he would have a pretty strong case if two of the other teams leaked documents and info to Saint Louis that incriminated him because they wanted to force him to stay so the NFL would approve their rival stadium bid

[Doc]

1 minute ago, Big Turk said:

Did you not read the update as to WHY he doesn't think he should have to pay it?

 

Think he would have a pretty strong case if two of the other teams leaked documents and info to Saint Louis that incriminated him because they wanted to force him to stay so the NFL would approve their rival stadium bid

 

It's speculation as of right now.  And regardless of who leaked the documents, Kroenke was still at-fault.  Kroenke might have cause to sue those teams.

[Big Turk]

14 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

It's speculation as of right now.  And regardless of who leaked the documents, Kroenke was still at-fault.  Kroenke might have cause to sue those teams.

 

It is but where there is smoke there usually is fire

[Mr. WEO]

9 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Personally, as long as the teams that didn't vote for the move (the Bills are one) don't have to pay for it, I don't care who pays for it exactly.

 

And why not give STL a franchise in the future?  The expansion fee will be enormous and they can (and will) change the by-laws so they don't get burned next time.  Or maybe, just maybe, negotiate in good faith next time?  But eh, whatever.  Not my city and there are other markets.

 

What was the point other than reminding the county and state (and everyone else) what they should already know?

 

Why do you "personally" care who pays?

 

Why would they reward a city that just cost them 800 million and will not fund a stadium for an NFL team...when there are other markets?

 

You already answered your question in your post.  Up front threats are part of an open negotiation (good faith).   "Get it done now or we're leaving".  

[LabattBlue]

Is the OP trying to set a Guinness book of world records for longest thread title? 
😂

[Arkady Renko]

9 hours ago, Doc said:

 

It's speculation as of right now.  And regardless of who leaked the documents, Kroenke was still at-fault.  Kroenke might have cause to sue those teams.

And the emails would have been discoverable in litigation anyway. 

[Doc]

4 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Why do you "personally" care who pays?

 

Why would they reward a city that just cost them 800 million and will not fund a stadium for an NFL team...when there are other markets?

 

You already answered your question in your post.  Up front threats are part of an open negotiation (good faith).   "Get it done now or we're leaving".  

 

Because those who didn't approve the move shouldn't have to pay for it.  It should be on Kroenke, but if he succeeds in weaseling out, it should next be the owners who approved the move.

 

Because STL is the 23rd largest TV market.  Only 2 (Portland and Sacramento/Modesto) are higher that don't have NFL teams and I doubt they want to put a 4th team in California.  More TV money to overcome what they lost, in time, can overcome spite.

 

So you're saying that by putting it on record, it made it "good faith"?  No, what will make it “good faith” is not negotiating with another city at the same time.  Again, it's something everyone should know because (we now agree) there are other markets out there.

Edited November 26, 2021 by Doc

[Big Turk]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Why do you "personally" care who pays?

 

Why would they reward a city that just cost them 800 million and will not fund a stadium for an NFL team...when there are other markets?

 

You already answered your question in your post.  Up front threats are part of an open negotiation (good faith).   "Get it done now or we're leaving".  

 

Except the opposite happened here...he was saying they were trying to work out a deal all along while actually working on getting out of there behind the scenes.  That's the opposite of good faith.  

 

[Doc]

14 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

Except the opposite happened here...he was saying they were trying to work out a deal all along while actually working on getting out of there behind the scenes.  That's the opposite of good faith. 

 

He was talking about the Bills. 

[Big Turk]

5 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

He was talking about the Bills. 

Gotcha

[Mr. WEO]

7 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Because those who didn't approve the move shouldn't have to pay for it.  It should be on Kroenke, but if he succeeds in weaseling out, it should next be the owners who approved the move.

 

Because STL is the 23rd largest TV market.  Only 2 (Portland and Sacramento/Modesto) are higher that don't have NFL teams and I doubt they want to put a 4th team in California.  More TV money to overcome what they lost, in time, can overcome spite.

 

So you're saying that by putting it on record, it made it "good faith"?  No, what will make it “good faith” is not negotiating with another city at the same time.  Again, it's something everyone should know because (we now agree) there are other markets out there.

if his  indemnification agreement holds up, Kroenke pays it all, otherwise they would all pay. 
 

Your repeated contention that only the teams that voted to approve the move should pay makes no sense whatsoever,  unless you are also saying the teams who voted against it should forfeit their split of the relocation fee.  Have you made that argument somewhere? 

[Arkady Renko]

20 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Personally, as long as the teams that didn't vote for the move (the Bills are one) don't have to pay for it, I don't care who pays for it exactly.

 

And why not give STL a franchise in the future?  The expansion fee will be enormous and they can (and will) change the by-laws so they don't get burned next time.  Or maybe, just maybe, negotiate in good faith next time?  But eh, whatever.  Not my city and there are other markets.

 

What was the point other than reminding the county and state (and everyone else) what they should already know?

Bills voted for it. 

[Doc]

51 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

if his  indemnification agreement holds up, Kroenke pays it all, otherwise they would all pay. 
 

Your repeated contention that only the teams that voted to approve the move should pay makes no sense whatsoever,  unless you are also saying the teams who voted against it should forfeit their split of the relocation fee.  Have you made that argument somewhere? 

5 minutes ago, Arkady Renko said:

Bills voted for it. 

 

You're right.  I was going of a (very) old article.  Never mind.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

You're right.  I was going of a (very) old article.  Never mind.

you may answer the question…

[Doc]

52 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

you may answer the question…

 

Why should teams that voted "no" have to give up their portion of the relocation fee?  Is Kroenke moving the team back to STL?  And they obviously wouldn't have encouraged him to act in bad faith.  Meanwhile Kroenke will still be making money hand over fist in LA, hence the reason for the fee.

 

Now tell answer this question from before: is Kroenke still a swell guy for paying for his own stadium, after ripping it away from its former home?

[Mr. WEO]

9 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Why should teams that voted "no" have to give up their portion of the relocation fee?  Is Kroenke moving the team back to STL?  And they obviously wouldn't have encouraged him to act in bad faith.  Meanwhile Kroenke will still be making money hand over fist in LA, hence the reason for the fee.

 

Now tell answer this question from before: is Kroenke still a swell guy for paying for his own stadium, after ripping it away from its former home?

 

So your logic is that the teams that voted against him should not be liable for his "bad faith", but should be allowed to profit from this same "bad faith" act?  That's rich.

 

 

 

And I've answered your question long ago...the fans (all NFL fans) in LA are certainly convinced he's a good guy for restoring their franchise.  Ripped away??  Unclutch your pearls doc-----STL fumbled it away.  Sure Kroenke wanted out--and he knew they wouldn't come through on their contract, so he burned them.

 

Anyway, this is easy: the relocation fees (free money) for the 2 LA teams and Vegas was reportedly in the range of about 1.5 billion.  Even if they all have to kick in for the STL hush money, they will still come out way ahead.  It would be as if they went to bed and woke with 3 teams in much better revenue markets....and an extra $25 million in their pockets

[Doc]

13 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

So your logic is that the teams that voted against him should not be liable for his "bad faith", but should be allowed to profit from this same "bad faith" act?  That's rich.

 

And I've answered your question long ago...the fans (all NFL fans) in LA are certainly convinced he's a good guy for restoring their franchise.  Ripped away??  Unclutch your pearls doc-----STL fumbled it away.  Sure Kroenke wanted out--and he knew they wouldn't come through on their contract, so he burned them.

 

Anyway, this is easy: the relocation fees (free money) for the 2 LA teams and Vegas was reportedly in the range of about 1.5 billion.  Even if they all have to kick in for the STL hush money, they will still come out way ahead.  It would be as if they went to bed and woke with 3 teams in much better revenue markets....and an extra $25 million in their pockets

 

Yes that's what I'm saying.  The relocation fee is for the huge increase in local money he'll get moving from the 23rd market to the 2nd market, which will be ongoing, not just a one-time settlement/payment for being dumb (Spanos and Davis aren't being sued, are they?).  Again he should have to pay it, but if he's able to weasel out of it, I'd have no problem excusing the 2 teams who voted "no," who may or may not have known he was going to get sued and thus voted that way.

 

Oh yeah, you answered before, with your lame "...the fans in LA..."  Who cares about them?  Does Kroenke even?  LOL!  That's like saying "he was a great father to/built a great home for...his 2nd family."  Then you gave another lame answer to "why didn't he just build a new stadium with his own money in STL when he easily could have afforded to do so?" 

 

As for STL fumbling it away, assuming we ignore that Kroenke never really had any plans to stay there (the answer to the question above), why do you supposed they did?  That right, because they thought there was nowhere for him to go.  Which gets us back to the original point I made WRT to the Bills: Buffalo better not "fumble it away" thinking the Bills have nowhere else to go, when we all (now) know what I've been saying: there is always another market.

[Big Turk]

On 11/26/2021 at 9:38 AM, Arkady Renko said:

And the emails would have been discoverable in litigation anyway. 

 

There wouldn't have been litigation until those documents got leaked...up until then they had no knowledge of any shadiness that was going on behind the scenes

[Malazan]

On 11/24/2021 at 10:34 AM, BuffaloRebound said:

Kroenke paid the NFL $645m to re-locate to LA.  So did the Chargers owner.  And Rams and Chargers probably quadrupled their franchise valuation.  NFL still wins in the end.  Hopefully the city of St Louis can put that money to good use.  

 

Well, 276.5 million (then "costs" on top of that) are going to their lawyers so off to a good start on that 'put it to good use' thing. 

[Mr. WEO]

51 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Yes that's what I'm saying.  The relocation fee is for the huge increase in local money he'll get moving from the 23rd market to the 2nd market, which will be ongoing, not just a one-time settlement/payment for being dumb (Spanos and Davis aren't being sued, are they?).  Again he should have to pay it, but if he's able to weasel out of it, I'd have no problem excusing the 2 teams who voted "no," who may or may not have known he was going to get sued and thus voted that way.

 

Oh yeah, you answered before, with your lame "...the fans in LA..."  Who cares about them?  Does Kroenke even?  LOL!  That's like saying "he was a great father to/built a great home for...his 2nd family."  Then you gave another lame answer to "why didn't he just build a new stadium with his own money in STL when he easily could have afforded to do so?" 

 

As for STL fumbling it away, assuming we ignore that Kroenke never really had any plans to stay there (the answer to the question above), why do you supposed they did?  That right, because they thought there was nowhere for him to go.  Which gets us back to the original point I made WRT to the Bills: Buffalo better not "fumble it away" thinking the Bills have nowhere else to go, when we all (now) know what I've been saying: there is always another market.

 

No.  Because they refused to fund a stadium.  

 

LA isn't getting a 3rd team.

 

There's no logic to say all those who voted who benefited from the move shouldn't be liable for a settlement against it.  They can't have it both ways.  The relocation fee is one time.  They all were sued, they are all liable.  As a group, they let it happen...a few token "protest" votes (by guys who happliy pocketed the unearned cash) not withstanding.

 

Does Kreonke care about the fans?  Who knows?  Do all owners really care about their fans--or their local citizenry?  It's a business based on exploitation of fan devotion (how else do you get away with putting the worst product on the field/ice year after year?).   Who cares if they care.  They are in town to make money.  They all will threaten to move if they don't get that new stadium. 

 

"(City name) needs to decide if they want a team"......Is that a special way of saying "I care"?  lol.  

[Doc]

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

No.  Because they refused to fund a stadium.  

 

LA isn't getting a 3rd team.

 

There's no logic to say all those who voted who benefited from the move shouldn't be liable for a settlement against it.  They can't have it both ways.  The relocation fee is one time.  They all were sued, they are all liable.  As a group, they let it happen...a few token "protest" votes (by guys who happliy pocketed the unearned cash) not withstanding.

 

Does Kreonke care about the fans?  Who knows?  Do all owners really care about their fans--or their local citizenry?  It's a business based on exploitation of fan devotion (how else do you get away with putting the worst product on the field/ice year after year?).   Who cares if they care.  They are in town to make money.  They all will threaten to move if they don't get that new stadium. 

 

"(City name) needs to decide if they want a team"......Is that a special way of saying "I care"?  lol.  

 

Yup.  They should have kicked-in money for a new stadium.  Even though Kroenke easily had the money to pay for it himself and from which he still would have made money hand over fist.  You've come around, WEO!

 

True, LA likely isn't getting a 3rd team.  There are other markets besides LA and STL.  Hence the talk of the league expanding (we had a whole thread on it).

 

I don't know if every owner cares about every fan.  I'm fairly certain though that Kim at least cares about Bills fans given she grew up in Fairport.  But everyone has their limits, not only when it comes to sports ownership but even actual family members. 

[Mr. WEO]

48 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Yup.  They should have kicked-in money for a new stadium.  Even though Kroenke easily had the money to pay for it himself and from which he still would have made money hand over fist.  You've come around, WEO!

 

True, LA likely isn't getting a 3rd team.  There are other markets besides LA and STL.  Hence the talk of the league expanding (we had a whole thread on it).

 

I don't know if every owner cares about every fan.  I'm fairly certain though that Kim at least cares about Bills fans given she grew up in Fairport.  But everyone has their limits, not only when it comes to sports ownership but even actual family members. 

 

 

Yes!  The NFL is expanding to 40 teams by Florio thread lol.  

 

No STL was right  to refuse to pay for a stadium when the owner can afford it.  I've never been off that position, so I'm not the one who has come around to it doc.  But, having refused to pick up the tab, STL had to know the consequence.  It's a decades long pattern of the NFL, after all...

 

 

Kim acts like there are no Sabres fans in Fairport...

[Doc]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Yes!  The NFL is expanding to 40 teams by Florio thread lol.  

 

No STL was right  to refuse to pay for a stadium when the owner can afford it.  I've never been off that position, so I'm not the one who has come around to it doc.  But, having refused to pick up the tab, STL had to know the consequence.  It's a decades long pattern of the NFL, after all...

 

 

Kim acts like there are no Sabres fans in Fairport...

 

Nice feint.  

 

Great that you've stuck to that position that almost no owner/city takes.  Only to be undone by your last 2 sentences...

 

Ah yes, the Sabres, your old standby.  It would mean more if a) the Pegulas weren't spending money on the team, b) they were demanding a new arena and c) the Bills weren't very successful.  But as I said before, if it's true that Kim wants to be rid of them, they're sold and they move...

 

 

[BuffaloBills1998]

36 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Nice feint.  

 

Great that you've stuck to that position that almost no owner/city takes.  Only to be undone by your last 2 sentences...

 

Ah yes, the Sabres, your old standby.  It would mean more if a) the Pegulas weren't spending money on the team, b) they were demanding a new arena and c) the Bills weren't very successful.  But as I said before, if it's true that Kim wants to be rid of them, they're sold and they move...

 

 

They’re not selling the Sabres lol. And if they did the Sabres aren’t moving.

[billsfan89]

Seems like this was more money than the NFL or Kronke wanted to give up but not as much as St. Louis wanted. I hope that St. Louis puts the money to good use.  

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

Nice feint  

 

Great that you've stuck to that position that almost no owner/city takes.  Only to be undone by your last 2 sentences...

 

Ah yes, the Sabres, your old standby.  It would mean more if a) the Pegulas weren't spending money on the team, b) they were demanding a new arena and c) the Bills weren't very successful.  But as I said before, if it's true that Kim wants to be rid of them, they're sold and they move...

 

 

 

 

Feint?  lol.  It was literally the title of the thread you cited;  "40 teams in the NFL ?" 

 

Well....both Kroenke and STL "took that position"...and here we are.  So did cities of SD, Oakland, Baltimore years ago, LA before STL, Cleveland.....

 

Old standby?  The went straight to the toilet as soon as they were bought.  Money can't by competence. 

[Doc]

3 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Feint?  lol.  It was literally the title of the thread you cited;  "40 teams in the NFL ?" 

 

Well....both Kroenke and STL "took that position"...and here we are.  So did cities of SD, Oakland, Baltimore years ago, LA before STL, Cleveland.....

 

Old standby?  The went straight to the toilet as soon as they were bought.  Money can't by competence. 

 

I said "thread" not "thread title."  In the thread, there was discussion and we all pretty much agreed that 40 was speculation/too many.  It could be as little as 4 more (meaning 6 divisions of 6 teams).  But in reality, all that's needed is one more.

 

Yeah those cities took that position...and then lost their teams.  Some got them back...after giving the new owners what the old ones had demanded.  Buffalo would not get a replacement team.  So not sure what your point is here.

 

Yeah the team went into the toilet despite retaining the same GM, HC and giving them blank checks to get the players they wanted, upgrading facilities and expanding the scouting department.  The horror!  But the Sabres are a footnote between the two professional teams and all you have when you display your dislike (no wait, it's the "hero worship" ) for the owners of your team.  It's odd. 

[Mr. WEO]

5 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

I said "thread" not "thread title."  In the thread, there was discussion and we all pretty much agreed that 40 was speculation/too many.  It could be as little as 4 more (meaning 6 divisions of 6 teams).  But in reality, all that's needed is one more.

 

Yeah those cities took that position...and then lost their teams.  Some got them back...after giving the new owners what the old ones had demanded.  Buffalo would not get a replacement team.  So not sure what your point is here.

 

Yeah the team went into the toilet despite retaining the same GM, HC and giving them blank checks to get the players they wanted, upgrading facilities and expanding the scouting department.  The horror!  But the Sabres are a footnote between the two professional teams and all you have when you display your dislike (no wait, it's the "hero worship" ) for the owners of your team.  It's odd. 

 

The genesis of the thread was a fever dream by Florio saying 40.  That WAS the thread.  Otherwise, yeah, there has been talk of expansion (London for example) for years.  What's you point (that wasn't what that thread was about at all)?  The won't have an odd number of teams so it won't be "one more".

 

You said that no other cities stuck to the position that they weren't going to fund/build a new stadium when the untruth in that statement lies in the obvious--it is the reason nearly every team has relocated.  That is the point here..... lol.

 

A footnote between the 2 teams they own?  I don't know what that means.  Anyway.  Money (and squandering it) doesn't make you a competent major sports franchise owner.  Luckily for the Bills/PSE,  McD happened along and then brought his friend Beane.  Without such a fortuitous event, see how PSE has gone about even putting a coach on the bench for the Sabres.  Hiring the  soccer administrator as coach was the icing on that towering cake of cluelessness.

[Royale with Cheese]

This is how I'm viewing the exchange above.

 

[Buffalo716]

4 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

This is how I'm viewing the exchange above.

 

Everybody was Kung Fu Fighting!

[Doc]

3 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

The genesis of the thread was a fever dream by Florio saying 40.  That WAS the thread.  Otherwise, yeah, there has been talk of expansion (London for example) for years.  What's you point (that wasn't what that thread was about at all)?  The won't have an odd number of teams so it won't be "one more".

 

You said that no other cities stuck to the position that they weren't going to fund/build a new stadium when the untruth in that statement lies in the obvious--it is the reason nearly every team has relocated.  That is the point here..... lol.

 

A footnote between the 2 teams they own?  I don't know what that means.  Anyway.  Money (and squandering it) doesn't make you a competent major sports franchise owner.  Luckily for the Bills/PSE,  McD happened along and then brought his friend Beane.  Without such a fortuitous event, see how PSE has gone about even putting a coach on the bench for the Sabres.  Hiring the  soccer administrator as coach was the icing on that towering cake of cluelessness.

 

Never said it would be 1 or that there would be 8, just that 1 market was all that was/has ever been needed...for a team to threaten their current city with a move.  You've been saying all along there were none and then came around in that thread.  LOL!

 

And no, the point was that any team will move if they don't get what they want from their city, the Bills included.  Why you had some wacky idea that the Bills could never move or that they should pay for their own stadium is anyone's guess, but I realize it was just another way for you to take a swipe at the Pegulas because, the fact is, you don't like them (spare me the indignation or lame excuses).

 

And sorry but their ownership of the Bills makes them a competent major sports owner...of the premier league in the country.  The NHL is a distant 4th in revenue and now is 5th to soccer (soccer!) in viewership among the pro sports, and probably even ranks behind college football.  And if it was luck with the Bills, it's lack of luck with the Sabres.  Take your pick but you can't have it both ways just because you don't like them.

[major]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/st-louis-settlement-agreement-requires-003417153.html

Just now, major said:

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/st-louis-settlement-agreement-requires-003417153.html

Why does the league want all paperwork destroyed🤔?

[Doc]

5 minutes ago, major said:

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/st-louis-settlement-agreement-requires-003417153.html

Why does the league want all paperwork destroyed🤔?

 

More Jon Gruden emails!

[Mr. WEO]

21 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

 

No STL was right  to refuse to pay for a stadium when the owner can afford it. 

 

21 hours ago, Doc said:

 

 

 

Great that you've stuck to that position that almost no owner/city takes.  ..

 

 

 

You wrote that despite knowing the fact that every team that has moved in the SB era has done so because their city took that exact position.

 

11 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Never said it would be 1 or that there would be 8, just that 1 market was all that was/has ever been needed...for a team to threaten their current city with a move.  You've been saying all along there were none and then came around in that thread.  LOL!

 

And no, the point was that any team will move if they don't get what they want from their city, the Bills included.  Why you had some wacky idea that the Bills could never move or that they should pay for their own stadium is anyone's guess, but I realize it was just another way for you to take a swipe at the Pegulas because, the fact is, you don't like them (spare me the indignation or lame excuses).

 

And sorry but their ownership of the Bills makes them a competent major sports owner...of the premier league in the country.  The NHL is a distant 4th in revenue and now is 5th to soccer (soccer!) in viewership among the pro sports, and probably even ranks behind college football.  And if it was luck with the Bills, it's lack of luck with the Sabres.  Take your pick but you can't have it both ways just because you don't like them.

 

So...mere ownership (i.e. money) of an NFL team defines competence??  So, Dan Snyder: competent owner?  Mark Davis--he's a competent too, right?  Woody Johnson? How about multiple generations of the Ford family?

 

This should be good!

 

 

Luck buy definition is a rare/random event.  Lucky once with the Bills.  "Unlucky" (7 HC's, 4 GM's since 2010) with the Sabres over and over?  No.  That's a pattern of mismanagement.