ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

Are you sure you didn't inadvertently hit the "back" button on your browser and wind up here?

I realize that the above calculations are intended to be just a "rough" look at the numbers, but I think you've made several assumptions that make even the $1.11 million figure too high. If we limit the analysis to just income taxes, and use this week's game against the Redskins as a concrete example, then there are three categories of player salaries involved: 1. Bills players who are considered residents of NY state for tax purposes; 2. Bills players who are considered residents of some other state for tax purposes; and 3. Redskins players, all of whom I will assume are residents of some state other than NY for tax purposes. For each category, how much income tax will NY state lose this year because the Redskins game is being played in Toronto rather than in Orchard Park? Category 1: Any Bills player who makes his "permanent" home in NY state falls in this category. But so does any Bills player who rents a house or apartment in NY state and spends more than 183 days in NY state during the calendar year: http://www.hodgsonruss.com/Home/Practice_Areas/Alphabetical_Listing/State_Local_Tax/NoonansNotes/TheMultistateTaxQuandaryForProfessionalAthletes So how are the NY state income taxes of Bills players who fall in category 1 affected by moving the Redskins game to Toronto? Arguably, not at all. http://www.hodgsonruss.com/Home/Practice_Areas/Alphabetical_Listing/State_Local_Tax/NoonansNotes/TheInsandOutsofNewYorkNonresidentAllocationIssues So the category 1 guys may see no change in the NY state income taxes they are required to pay, even though the game is played in Canada. Hypothetically, if the Redskins game had been moved to Erie, PA, the category 1 Bills players would have to pay some income tax to PA and would then get a dollar-for-dollar credit for such PA taxes on their NY returns. Is there a similar dollar-for-dollar credit for Canadian taxes? I don't know, but maybe not. Uniformity of tax treatment between NY and Ontario seems less likely than unformity of tax treatment between 2 US states. And does the province of Ontario (as opposed to the Canadian national government) even have an income tax? I don't know. If the extra Canadian tax mentioned by George Wilson is imposed at the Canadian federal level, I could see how NY state might tell George Wilson (if he falls in Category 1) to seek a dollar-for-dollar credit on his US federal taxes, not his NY state taxes. Category 2: The Bills players in this category pay NY state income taxes based on how many "duty days" they spend in NY state. The total number of duty days for the year remains unchanged at let's say 180 days. Moving the Redskins game from Orchard Park to Toronto means these players will spend maybe 2 "duty days" in Canada that they would otherwise have spent in NY. So these players will have to report 2/180 or just over 1% less income to NY. Category 3: Redskins players will avoid paying NY state income tax at all, because they will have no "duty days" in NY state. But even if the game was played in Orchard Park, the Redskins players would probably have no more than 3 duty days in NY, so they only would have had to report 3/180 or less than 2% of their annual salary as NY income anyway.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/highschool/blog/prep_rally/post/Chicago-coaches-players-charged-with-battery-fo?urn=highschool-wp7703 Your thoughts on the situation? - - would it make a difference if positional instruction was being simultaneously provided?

I think you may be on to something here. Take a close look at this recent Kyle Williams video interview about his current "injury:" http://www.buffalobills.com/media-center/videos/Kyle-Williams-on-His-Injury-Situation/9010ea88-0d32-481b-b286-130f338e1f30 If you look over his right shoulder you can see that he has a dollar bill prominently displayed on the wall of his locker. This raises some interesting questions. Did he have any money on his locker wall BEFORE he signed the big contract extension? Or did it show up around the same time as his current streak of games missed due to injury? Since it's only a one dollar bill, maybe it's a reminder that Ralph is cheap and Kyle needs to make as much as he can in every contract. There's too much of this crying about "Ralph is cheap" on this board - - we don't need it in the locker room, too. Anyway, I'd sure like to know if Fitz and Stevie and Freddie have any currency tacked up on the walls of their lockers, and if so, in what denominations. If they do, it's a red flag. We don't want any of them to get a big money contract extension and turn into the next Kyle Williams.

Based on the following December 13, 2010 article (written by a tax partner in a Buffalo law firm) that gives specific examples under NY state tax law, I think you're correct about the 2/181 - - although my off-the-cuff guess is that total "duty days" for an NFL player might be closer to 210 than 181: http://www.hodgsonruss.com/Home/Practice_Areas/Alphabetical_Listing/State_Local_Tax/NoonansNotes/TheMultistateTaxQuandaryForProfessionalAthletes So if a "visiting" NFL player gets good tax advice, (1) he may not have to pay NY state income tax on any of his signing bonus if he maintains his domicile in FL, TX, TN, WA or NV, and (2) he may need to pay NY state income tax on about 1% of his base salary. So even though 2 teams play each game at RWS, players on the visiting team pay a lot less in NY state income taxes than the Bills players do for the same game.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/12/sports/sp-jock-tax12 http://zzrllp.com/28.htm

Well, at least we know who bought a Supercolloquial Mundane Adjectival And Onomatopoeic Accentuator: http://www.theonion.com/articles/amazing-new-hyperbolic-chamber-greatest-invention,1321/#

I was going to suggest that maybe you meant a hyperbaric chamber, but after considering the reference to TO and thinking about how TO claims to be the most dominant force in football, I decided you were right and I was wrong. With so much public money invested in the development of the single most revolutionary invention in the history of not only mankind but all other intelligent lifeforms anywhere in the universe, the Bills definitely absolutely must be the very first sports team to buy their own hyperbolic chamber. http://www.theonion.com/articles/amazing-new-hyperbolic-chamber-greatest-invention,1321/# Uhh, wait a minute, I think Chris Brown already has one of these things to promote the Bills, and Roger Goodell has one to promote the NFL in general. The above quote is just a taste, and I can't do it justice. If you want a good laugh, read the whole link!

The previously posted link to the official 2010 NFL rulebook confirms that no tee can be used on any field goal attempt, including the "fair catch kick" variety.

Technically, I think a "free kick" is one where either team can recover it after it goes 10 yards - - i.e., after 10 yards, either team is free to grab it and try to advance it, resulting in offensive possession for the next play from scrimmage. In any event, the official 2010 NFL rulebook describes a "fair catch kick" as a type of field goal, and specifically states that it is not a "free kick." See Rule 11, Section 4, article 3 near the bottom of page 72 here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_uI2zLhGzaRMWMyZjkzYjUtZjRiYy00MTU5LWE5OWQtMjc1ZDEzNTFlM2E4&hl=en_US Among other things, it states:

Not sure how some people have concluded that KW's problem is a bone spur or a problem with his heel - - although I suppose it could have been reported somewhere. Here's info about Schobel's foot problem: http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2008/11/05/the-nature-of-a-lis-franc-foot-injury/ We don't have much info to go on, but based on the treatment options KW talked about in the interview, it seems at least possible that KW has a Lisfranc injury. But immobilization followed by surgery if necessary is probably recommended treatment for a whole host of other possible injuries, too.

With this year's game in Toronto coming up, here are some updates: 1. The Ford brothers' power grab designed to reshape the development efforts of Waterfront Toronto failed: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/doug-fords-quashed-toronto-waterfront-plan-reveals-rift-with-mayor/article2177167/page2/ 2. The annually published Canadian "Rich 100" list for 2011 recently came out - - Larry Tanenbaum's net worth went up an estimated 6.4% - - he is now listed as having a net worth just over $1 billion: http://list.canadianbusiness.com/rankings/rich100/2011/Default.aspx?sp2=2&sc1=0&d1=a 3. The sale of MLSE is still pending but moving slowly. Tanenbaum is an existing 20.5% minority owner but has a right of first refusal to buy the shares being sold by the 79.5% majority owner: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/09/27/grange_mlse_sale/ 4. One reason why Rogers Communications and BCE, Inc. (Bell) were rumored to be interested in buying MLSE was the fact that making the purchase would allow either company to be the exclusive provider of certain popular sports broadcasts to their existing mobile device subscriber base - - a very profitable endeavor. But the Canadian regulatory body that governs such things has decided that at least some types of program content must be made available to competing companies. Maybe this will decrease the value of owning MLSE to both Rogers Communications and BCE - - because they may not be able to charge monopoly prices to those who want to see sporting events controlled by MLSE: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/crtc-lays-down-new-rules-for-tv-industry/article2174847/ http://www.wizatbusiness.com/what-crtc-decision-means-for-mlse-sale/2011/09/

http://people.howstuffworks.com/witness-protection.htm Must be tough having to look over your shoulder all the time. Why should we believe a guy who rats out his friends?

Actually, I prefer to howl at the wrong moon. But until we know exactly how Collins calculated his $20 million/yr figure, none of us know which tree to bark at. Have you seen anything that shows how Collins came up with his number?

Agreed. If the Bills left Buffalo, there would be a net loss of sales tax money - - but some portion of it would be collected anyway based on substitutue purchases. If you had the data about where the game day fans live, you could make some reasonable estimates about what % might actually be lost on a net basis. Sounds reasonable - - but there's a chance that the money that's "talking" to the political decision-makers is private developer money. For example, if the AEG backed stadium gets built in downtown LA, the value of nearby AEG-owned downtown properties will go up. If the AEG money is what's talking to the SoCal politicians, it's not so clear to me that the public as a whole benefits financially. OTOH, if you're a football fan in SoCal who likes to attend NFL games in person, quality of life is worth something, too, even if you can't put an exact dollar figure on it. And I admit that I tend to be cynical about government spending in general.

At least so far, I haven't seen any explanation of just how Collins came up with his $20 million figure. So at present, we simply don't know if, from a purely financial perspective, any proposed stadium renovations would be a good investment of public funds. As just one example of how politicians create biased studies, they sometimes estimate the amount of sales tax that fans will pay at the stadium. Even if they don't pad that figure, it's only an estimate of a "gross" economic impact. It ignores the "net" economic impact created by related changes in consumer spending. Think of it this way - - if the Bills moved to another state, would every dollar that NY State residents would have spent on Bills-related tickets and merchandise (thereby creating sales tax revenue) be saved instead? Obviously not. Some of those dollars would get spent on other merchandise and entertainment within Erie County and/or NY State, thereby generating sales tax revenue anyway. Do you have any idea if the "study" Collins mentioned took this into account? Until you do, you have no idea if the conclusions of the study make any sense at all. "Garbage in - - Garbage out" applies just as much to economic estimates as it does to computer programming. Personally, I would like to see the stadium renovated, as I suspect most of us would prefer. But in a society where everybody thinks they are somehow entitled to their slice of the pie and then some, I'm not yet convinced that the public funds that get spent on stadium improvements will ever be recouped on a net basis. Let's see the actual "study," and critically examine the assumptions it makes. Just my 2 lira.

Seems there's a lot of that goin' around these days. I hope CJ aint Irish: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ireland/8783929/Irish-pensioner-died-of-spontaneous-human-combustion.html

Although I did read your article that the OP posted a link to, I somehow missed the part about the Collins $20 million estimate. In hindsight, I can see how you interpreted my posting a separate link to an article by other sportswriters to confirm that fact as a jab at you - - but that wasn't my intent.

Sadly, even the Taliban found them useful: http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/09/13/us-afghan-stadium-idUSSP12564220080913 http://www.rawa.org/murder-w.htm

If anybody wants to read a thought-provoking article about the impact of public stadium spending on local economies, try this: http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1997/summer_taxes_noll.aspx Although the article is almost 15 years old, I think it makes some interesting points.

Why do you have a problem with a link to the article about the 1997 study? It's obviously out-of-date, and not directly applicable to today's calculation of costs and benefits. But unlike Collins' comments, it gives some insight into how the older study arrived at its conclusions.

Confirming what Collins said: http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/article601613.ece For comparison, here's what a study found the last time around, in 1997, before the current lease was signed: http://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/stories/1997/06/09/story4.html

Not sure how authoritative this site is, but FWIW: http://sportsfeens.com/nfl-quarterback-salaries/nfl-quarterback-salaries/

Thanks for the info. Pulled up a couple old but interesting articles on Pellman: http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3644940 http://www.braininjurylawblog.com/brain-injury-news-nfl-sacks-elliot-pellman.html For those who may not have seen it, there was also a pretty informative segment on "60 Minutes" about this topic: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/09/60minutes/main5371686.shtml

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_19155864 Some of the suits allege that the NFL concealed dangers it knew about - - will be interesting to see if there is any evidence to support that contention.