Sisyphean Bills Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 funny thing is that it is in the scheme of things, indirectly its not ralph's money that is being spent, it's tv money that the nfl earns and the teams get as "dividend" so to speak. so what does ralph actually spend on his baby to make it better? next to nothing. he spends little to nothing in nfl terms on coaching. we dont have a gm thats woth anything. we pay the stadium upkeep. the guy could hire a good coach if he'd sell naming rights to the stadium. i'd say he's not scrooge, but his isnt generous george either. He has to spend a minimum floor according to the CBA. Why the applause? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyal2dagame Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 He has to spend a minimum floor according to the CBA. Why the applause? i'm not understanding the "why the applause" part Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve In Atlanta 2008 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Let’s bring some facts to the table rather than unsupported words. You can argue the source (Forbes and USA Today) or that the information is inaccurate but here is how the Bills stack up as a business (all based on 2007 data - 2008 is not available yet): The Bills had the seventh highest operating profit among the 32 teams. They made $34.6MM only $300K less than the 19-0 superbowl losing Cheatriots. Not surprisingly Washington and Dallas were numbers one and two respectively. In 2007 - the Bills were actually had the 4th highest player payroll in the league (you are reading that correctly). This stat is perhaps a bit misleading as teams often go up and down dramatically from one year to the next. Over an extended period of years the Bills payroll tends to be in the lower 3rd quartile or the better paying end of the final quartile of the league. Keep in mind this is somewhat influenced by player incentives (probowls, playing time, individual achievements, etc) arguably much of this type of money was left on the table given that the Bills do not have superstars on their roster. The Bills are the 27th most valuable franchise in the NFL. Ralph chooses not to sell naming rights to the stadium - let's be conservative and say this leaves a million in op profit on the table each year. This money would have made them the 5th most profitable team in the league in 2007. If they received a really good (but realistic) deal and got $3mm per year deal they would have jumped up to 4th. Also keep in mind that all of the above are numbers that were recorded before the Bills inked the Toronto deal. I cannot deny that the Bills profit is favorably influenced because they have no stadium debt. However, I believe the NFL may look twice at the practice of taking on this kind of burden given the problems it is causing with other teams. Perhaps the recent economy has caused them to realize there is a limit to the size of the pot of gold at the end of the sponsorship rainbow. I also cannot deny that one year of data does not make a trend. However, having looked at this issue before to determine if I wanted to put a post out there about it I am confident when I say by NFL standards the Bills are a financially sound team. Not spectacular but steady in terms of their ability to turn a profit. One might say that the Bills can not only afford a Superbowl roster but the brain trust at One Bills Drive might be better business people than they get credit for. Selection of coaches is another issue altogether. Nice post... I motion to the board that ALL posts of speculation be backed up with "verifiable collateral" (stats, numbers, actual quotes ect) as this poster has done. All who agree say yea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyal2dagame Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Nice post... I motion to the board that ALL posts of speculation be backed up with "verifiable collateral" (stats, numbers, actual quotes ect) as this poster has done. All who agree say yea! but all stats and data can be twisted to back up any point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve In Atlanta 2008 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 This data shows the fallacy of the cries of "poverty". The Bills are neck and neck in terms of revenue with the New York Giants and Jets (and those teams just took on big debt). It's by design as the NFL shares revenue across all members. The Cardinals, Colts, Chargers, and Falcons all made the playoffs on similar revenue streams. The biggest inequity comes with 3 franchises: Washington, Dallas, and New England. Only one of those teams has had success in spite of this disparity - indeed, in the Patriots case their success on the field has lead to success on the business side. From the owner's perspective, the Bills are on the low end of operating income, so the franchise isn't as profitable as other franchises. And, to a seller, the franchise is on the lower end in terms of value. The Bills problems are many, but they've placed many financial barriers upon themselves, such as "cash to cap", not selling the naming rights to the stadium, pocketing the Toronto deal money. A quick note on the naming rights of the stadium... If you were "Proud Ralph," Would you sell the rights of a stadium u dont own, pay 0 toward, that has "your name" attached to it? I wouldnt. This brings up another point... what gives Ralph the right to name that stadium? shouldnt it be up to county, state or taxpayers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve In Atlanta 2008 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 but all stats and data can be twisted to back up any point! Id rather that then speculation... an example of speculation to me is "Jim Kelly is going to buy the buffalo bills and move them to Niagara Falls" Wheres the facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostsOfTheRockpile Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 A quick note on the naming rights of the stadium... If you were "Proud Ralph," Would you sell the rights of a stadium u dont own, pay 0 toward, that has "your name" attached to it? I wouldnt. This brings up another point... what gives Ralph the right to name that stadium? shouldnt it be up to county, state or taxpayers? It should be, but it isn't. The last lease with Erie County gave the Bills exclusive rights to negotiate the sale of the stadium's naming rights. Ralph isn't cheap and I personally don't think he's senile... I just think he's a bad businessman. "Dumb" is more apropos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 This data shows the fallacy of the cries of "poverty". The Bills are neck and neck in terms of revenue with the New York Giants and Jets (and those teams just took on big debt). It's by design as the NFL shares revenue across all members. The Cardinals, Colts, Chargers, and Falcons all made the playoffs on similar revenue streams. The biggest inequity comes with 3 franchises: Washington, Dallas, and New England. Only one of those teams has had success in spite of this disparity - indeed, in the Patriots case their success on the field has lead to success on the business side. From the owner's perspective, the Bills are on the low end of operating income, so the franchise isn't as profitable as other franchises. And, to a seller, the franchise is on the lower end in terms of value. The Bills problems are many, but they've placed many financial barriers upon themselves, such as "cash to cap", not selling the naming rights to the stadium, pocketing the Toronto deal money. When the Jets/Giants stadiums opens , the revenue gap between the teams will be huge. The big problem with this is the money generated from boxes/suites is not shared but does raise the cap. So the cap can be raised by $10-$15M without any extra revenue for the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 i'm not understanding the "why the applause" part Sorry, not directed at you specifically. Some want to make out that he handed out fat contracts to average players like Dockery and below average players like Walker and Kelsay as evidence he's not a skinflint. But, according to the CBA he has to spend a minimum on players. So, I'm wondering where that leaves that argument. (I'm not making blanket statements such as "Ralph is cheap" or "Ralph is generous", fwiw.) When the Jets/Giants stadiums opens , the revenue gap between the teams will be huge. The big problem with this is the money generated from boxes/suites is not shared but does raise the cap. So the cap can be raised by $10-$15M without any extra revenue for the Bills. I never said there were not inequities in the formula. I've never denied the data. The claim was that the Bills are stuck in sucking/mediocrity because of their revenue stream. The data just doesn't support that as Pittsburgh, San Diego, and Indianapolis are similar markets and all they've done is win. FWIW, the Patriots are a high roller these days, but for much of their history they were not and struggled for community support. Now they are very successful financially. On the other end, the Lions operated at a net loss in 2007. Is that mere coincidence? Does anyone else remember a game in the 90s when the announcer was talking about his chat with Ralph Wilson and that Ralph had said something like he had discovered that paying to bring in premier talent was actually a good business decision and that the franchise was doing better and staying in Buffalo seemed like a viable business plan, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Sorry, not directed at you specifically. Some want to make out that he handed out fat contracts to average players like Dockery and below average players like Walker and Kelsay as evidence he's not a skinflint. But, according to the CBA he has to spend a minimum on players. So, I'm wondering where that leaves that argument. (I'm not making blanket statements such as "Ralph is cheap" or "Ralph is generous", fwiw.) I never said there were not inequities in the formula. I've never denied the data. The claim was that the Bills are stuck in sucking/mediocrity because of their revenue stream. The data just doesn't support that as Pittsburgh, San Diego, and Indianapolis are similar markets and all they've done is win. FWIW, the Patriots are a high roller these days, but for much of their history they were not and struggled for community support. Now they are very successful financially. On the other end, the Lions operated at a net loss in 2007. Is that mere coincidence? Does anyone else remember a game in the 90s when the announcer was talking about his chat with Ralph Wilson and that Ralph had said something like he had discovered that paying to bring in premier talent was actually a good business decision and that the franchise was doing better and staying in Buffalo seemed like a viable business plan, etc. I wasn't trying to make excuses. We need a quality GM to draft better players and a better coach. He has the money and he does spend. Just on the wrong people. He has a big advantage because of no stadium to pay off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Ralph will spend where he must, and in areas where he isn't required to, won't. There is no salary cap for coaches and front office personnel. As much as Danny Snyder struck out when he tried to assemble coaching staffs who made big dollars, RW accomplishes the same thing by spending less. If he could humble himself and admit he has no idea how to find a good football man, it'd be monumental. Unfortunately, he's acting as GM and negotiating contracts with poor HC's who show their stripes. That one move put this franchise back at least one more season from competing. If RW had a real GM with personnel control, that issue with DJ doesn't happen. It's true that RW is mandated by the cap to pay a certain amount for players. IIRC, the salary cap floor will be 86.4% of 123M for next season. This has nothing to do with C2C, which the NFL doesn't care about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 It should be, but it isn't. The last lease with Erie County gave the Bills exclusive rights to negotiate the sale of the stadium's naming rights. Ralph isn't cheap and I personally don't think he's senile... I just think he's a bad businessman. "Dumb" is more apropos. Ralph may have diminished mental capacity at age 90, but the man is not "Dumb", he can hear just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 I'll gladly take all your emotional responses! Go ahead and fire away. But in a quieter time, when the anger and frustration we all feel subsides, when we dare to let logic enter the conversation, the bottom line is that the Buffalo Bills do not bring in enough money to fund a Super Bowl winner. We are unhappy when Winfield, Williams, Clements and others are due for a big contract and our team let's them leave. We hate it when top free agents are never signed by the Bills, especially when they end up as opponents in our division. The top GMs and coaches are never hired by Mr. Wilson and that often means we cannnot win games where coaching is the deciding factor. So each year we hope and dream that the planets will line up and we will be one of those one year wonder teams who win games they shouldn't, get more than their share of lucky calls and bounces, and overachieves in their play. When it doesn't happen. we start blaming owners, staff and players. Yes, they fail to realize the success we hope for, but the culprit is the bottom line. How can we be so deluded to think that we can spend the bucks that the Patriots, Cowboys and other rich organizations do, when Ralph doesn't have anything close to their revenue coming in? Of course, it's easy to be a fan and say he should do it for the community and people who support his team. But while it is easy to say, there are very few business people who would actually spend more than what is financially expedient of the money received from their (cash cow) NFL franchise. I'll bet I have accused Mr. Wilson of being cheap a hundred times over the years. But deep down, I know he is not the problem. The decline of major corporations, population and economic prosperity in Buffalo is the reason behind it all. I have spent thousands on season and game tickets, team gear, etc. but the Bills don't "owe me" anything. Each year I get to decide whether I want to pay for the product or not. Whether I want to be frustrated or not. I am still going to be a fan of the Bills next year, even though I'll hate it if they have a bad season. But when I think it through logically, there are no villains involved; just the economics in my beloved city. http://content.usatoday.com/sports/footbal....aspx?year=2007 NY Giants had the lowest payroll and won the Superbowl. http://content.usatoday.com/sports/footbal....aspx?year=2008 NY Giants only spent two million more on player salaries than did the Buffalo Bills. How much more are they spending on player personnel departments and coaching per year? I'm sure that number is less than ten million. Which is a drop in the bucket for a guy like Ralph. The problem is that Ralph has spent his money on jackasses to run his football team. But you just keep on telling yourself that location is the reason we stink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bufcomments Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 AS I said in any earlier post Ralph spent money during the late 80's and early 90's when the Bills had a legit chance to win it all. It cost him serious money to keep Kelly, Thomas , Bruce, Andre, and the rest of the core players together all those years. So he has not always been cheap. The worst decision he made was letting Tom Donahoe run the team. I think it made him leary in hiring name people to run his ship. Its a shame because Pioli from the Patriots is still out there, he would be a Polian part 2 But having said that there is money out there if he lets the Senecas pay for the naming rights at the Ralph. But that leads to another question....... if he declines money from the naming rights of the stadium, that tells me he doesn't need it. So the Bills have plenty of cap room this year. You can pay Pioli his salary just off the naming Rights on the Stadium. Ralph just needs somebody (GM Piloi) do make better decisions with his money like Polian did. Ralph being a tightwad when you have to sell a product to Toronto is not a smart business decision. Time is now to spend to improve the team because he will get the money back in playoffs. The really question is................does Ralph care enough now???? To me and many fans the answer is NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPDontletthedoorhityourars Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 You have nothing to back up your statements about Ralph. Are you his f'n doctor? I am so sick of the Ralph is senile posts. He is not senile. If you don't undrestand this then, YOU are the one with the mental problem, not Ralph. Ralph has been a cheap bastard his whole life. Earlier he was a middle aged cheap bastard. Now he is an old cheap bastard. It has nothing to do with his mental capacities, which put against the "Ralph is senile" posters are superior to every one of them. I agree with you. Maybe if Ralph was senile then he would spend all his money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Money got dallas and washington far . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Money got dallas and washington far . In what sense? neither has fared much better than the Bills in the past decade (at least on the field) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 In what sense? neither has fared much better than the Bills in the past decade (at least on the field) No ring . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Anyone ever see the move "Transformers"? Near the beginning of the movie the father takes the son to buy him his first car because he had gotten good grades. The father drives into a Porsche dealership and the son freaks out because he thinks he is getting a Porsche.The father laughs at him and says you really think I'm buying you a Porsche... Then they drive into a used car lot and he buys his kid a PoS used car for 4 grand. Later at the home the kid gets into his car and drives away while his mother and father are working in the yard. The used PoS car belches a huge black cloud of exhaust and the mother turns to the father and says... WOW, you are so cheap. All I can think at that moment is,that father has nothing on Ralph Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts