ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

This isn't a comedy thread - - far from it. Could Toronto businessmen already have either an outright option to purchase the franchise or a right-of-first-refusal to match anybody else's offer to buy the franchise - - both triggered by Ralph's death? Could they have such rights either with or without having already purchased a minority ownership interest in Buffalo Bills, Inc.? I would actually LIKE people to shoot this theory down if they can - - I'm not claiming it's actually happened, but I'm having difficulty seeing why it's not plausible. It's easier to understand the rationale for this theory if I lay some facts out in roughly chronological order: 1. It's beyond dispute that the Buffalo NFL franchise is actually owned by Buffalo Bills, Inc. - - a New York Corporation. The Brady suit made ownership allegations that NFL court pleadings, including those filed in the 8th Circuit, have confirmed. I've previously posted a link to official New York State corporation records showing that Ralph Wilson is connected to that same company. If anybody wants proof I'll go back and dig up the links upon request. 2. The NFL Constitution and Bylaws (as amended through 2006 which is the most recent version I've been able to find online), establishes a few more facts: (a) The "Home Territory" of the Buffalo franchise, as that term is defined in Article IV, Section 4.1, at page 14/292 of the Constitution and Bylaws, extends for 75 miles in every direction from the corporate limits of the City of Buffalo. This "Home Territory" therefore includes Toronto. (b) The Constitution and Bylaws, at Article IV, section 4.2© at page 15/292, prohibits any other NFL club from playing a game within the home territory of the Buffalo franchise unless the Buffalo team is a participant in the game. © Notwithstanding the above, per Article III, section 3.1(B) at page 5/292, a new Toronto team could be admitted into the league if 24 of the 32 team owners vote in favor of doing so. http://static.nfl.com/static/content//public/static/html/careers/pdf/co_.pdf 3. On August 29, 2005 Hurricane Katrina hits New Orleans, damaging the Superdome and creating speculation about the future of the Saints franchise in New Orleans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Hurricane_Katrina 4. "Early in September 2006 Canada ’s two most important sports entities began the process that might one day create one of the largest sports ownership groups in North America ..." There are people with money, or access to money, in Toronto who have wanted, for a long time, to buy an NFL team and have it play games in Toronto. See this October 12, 2007 posting of an article apparently originally written by Howard Bloom for Sports Business News - it gives some background about several Toronto businessmen and their interest in bringing the NFL to Toronto: http://sportsbiznews.blogspot.com/2007/10/nfl-expansion-to-canada-will-not.html 5. According to SI's Peter King, an otherwise unidentified Canadian consortium made an offer to buy the Saints for a billion dollars that was turned down by the Saints' ownership. A Toronto newspaper speculates, in an article published on September 25, 2006, that the consortium was probably a group from Toronto. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/archives/article843833.ece 6. In an interview with the Buffalo Evening News that took place no later than June 17, 2007, Ralph Wilson confirmed for the umpteenth time that the team will be sold upon his death. He also said that he would not leave the team to his wife. Perhaps significantly in my view, this is the very last time that I can find any public comments by Ralph Wilson where he was willing to say much of anything specific about what would happen to the team after his death. I have seen lots of articles saying the team will be sold after Ralph's death to the highest bidder, but NEVER with quotation marks indicating that Ralph actually said the words "to the highest bidder." I think that's significant, because IF Toronto businessmen already own an option to purchase or a right-of-first-refusal the team WOULD be sold AFTER Ralph's death - - just not necessarily as the result of a bidding process. As far as I can tell, all the articles reporting that the team will be sold to the highest bidder are just assuming that there will be a bidding process because that's the most common way for assets to be sold after someone's death. But I don't see why an outstanding option to buy or right-of-first-refusal would be inconsistent with the exact phrasing of any statement RW has made at any time since the 5 year Toronto Series was announced. "Also out of the question, according to Wilson, is the prospect of selling part of the team to a Western New Yorker while he’s still alive in order to perhaps give that person an advantage in eventually taking over the club. “That’s absolutely out,” he said." http://www.nflgridirongab.com/2007/06/17/ralph-wilson-says-he-wont-sell-the-bills/ 7. "In October 2007, Bills owner Ralph Wilson petitioned NFL owners to allow his team to play one “home” game per year (over five years) in Canada." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bills_Toronto_Series [Editorial note - - I don't consider Wikipedia very authoritative but I could not immediately find anything else specifying this date in the chronology] 8. The 5 year Bills in Toronto Series deal was announced by Ralph Wilson and Ted Rogers on February 2, 2008. The deal runs through and includes the 2012 season. "The deal with the Bills wouldn't preclude Rogers and Tanenbaum from making bids to buy and relocate other NFL franchises if they go up for sale." http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/bills/2008-02-06-toronto_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip 9. Here's Erie County Executive Collins' press conference after the announcement: 10. Here's the Bills' stadium lease with Erie County. It expires on July 31, 2013. So the last regular season games it covers are the ones played in the 2012 NFL season. http://www.erie.gov/billslease/stadium.phtml 11. Whoever owns the Bills franchise (either before or after Ralph Wilson's death), can exercise an escape clause by paying a fee to buy out the remaining term of the stadium lease if they choose to do so. http://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/stories/2003/03/03/story2.html?page=1 12. On or about December 3, 2008, shortly before the Bills play the first regular season game in the Toronto Series, and shortly after the death of Ted Rogers, ESPN.com reports - - " Rogers Communications was the creation of Ted Rogers, who as a law student built his holdings in an FM radio station into a wireless and cable empire that employs 24,000 and is worth an estimated $18 billion. Rogers Communications already owns the Blue Jays, the Rogers Centre and the Argonauts of the Canadian Football League. The death of Rogers, at 75, on Tuesday -- five days before the first NFL regular-season game was to be played in his building -- might not have a big impact on a potential move by the Bills. Phil Lind, the Rogers vice chairman and a huge Cleveland Browns fan, is said to be the driving force behind the push for the NFL. Rogers has the diversity and the cash flow to spend the $1 billion it would take to buy the franchise. Certainly, the $78 million U.S. price tag to effectively lease those eight games is a powerful sign of interest." 13. The same December 3, 2008 ESPN.com report also stated: "Buffalo fans have been nervous since the Bills signed an offseason deal worth $78 million with Rogers Communications that will take the Bills to Toronto for eight games, three of them preseason contests, over a span of five years. There were rumors that the deal included a right-of-first-refusal clause when the team is sold, but that hasn't been confirmed." [Editorial note - - I would love to see somebody ask RW if anybody already has a right-of-first-refusal or option to buy the franchise and get a direct, responsive answer] 14. Although there are valid reasons to doubt his credibility, some time between January, 2011 and May 11, 2011 Doug Ford, a Toronto councilman, claimed in an interview, when discussing the seating limitations of the Rogers Center, that "he has spoken with officials at Rogers communication about digging down to add an additional 15,000 seats. The renovations wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime and furthermore, he added, thousands of jobs would be created. “(The NFL) can’t keep ignoring a market this size,” Ford said. And what about scarce turnout when the Buffalo Bills occasionally play in town? “If we had our own team,” Ford told the Score, “we’d treat it like it’s our own and build up a fan base.” There is a “big difference.” http://www.thestar.com/mobile/NEWS/article/987073 [editorial note - this guy might just be a shill but I included his comments here because I had not seen the idea to expand the Rogers Center posted here before - - maybe I just missed it and I don't know how plausible "digging down" is] 15. There is some precedent for an NFL owner granting someone an option to buy the franchise at a future date. There may be other examples, but it's undeniable that a former owner of the New England Patriots once did this. See paragraphs 71-74 (under the heading "The Murray Option") of this otherwise long and complex court opinion: http://openjurist.org/34/f3d/1091/sullivan-ii-v-national-football-league Somebody please convince me that there's no possible way that anyone in Toronto already has a right-of-first-refusal or outright option to buy the Buffalo NFL franchise upon Ralph Wilson's death, because I want the Bills to stay in Buffalo.

I know that I have the right to remain silent, but sometimes I just don't have the ability. From a larger perspective, we seem to agree that LA is not going to get an NFL team any time soon - - we just disagree about why. 1. We agree that the LA market has been open for at least 14 years. It's certainly possible that I simply missed it, but I cannot recall one time during those 14 years where an elected official called a press conference to point out that the lowlife owner of the city's NFL team had threatened to move the team to LA. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I'm guessing your position will be that no such press conference ever occurred because no such threat was ever made. I'm dubious, but admit that I cannot prove you wrong. BTW, you might actually get my vote if you ran for office, but I'm not sure you'd win. Maybe in Montana. 2. Glad to hear you considered the possibility that maybe the political climate got worse elsewhere while LA stayed the same - - that gives your arguments more weight in my view. It seems likely to me that, based on the "OC" in your screen name, a logical but not necessarily required reference to "Anaheim" in one of your above posts in this thread, and the right-of-center political leanings evidenced by your "signature" (if that's the right term) in each post, you've actually lived in Orange County. Admittedly, that makes you more of an expert on LA than most people who post here. FWIW, I concluded a long time ago that LA is simply a sucky football town where loons and dirtbags almost outnumber rational people. We only disagree about the ratio. I'd put it at about 49/51. But from an NFL owners' perspective, a dollar from the loons and dirtbags is worth the same as a dollar from you. 3. "Which LA judge is going to rule AGAINST the mandatory interpretive dance alternative for those people that demand the "equality" of being able to attend the football game, but don't want to watch football?" I've lived in several areas of the country, and spent significant amounts of time for work in a few more. Before he became a judge, I played poker and watched ESPN at presently undisclosed times and locations more than once with this guy - - From http://www.dgs.ca.gov/oah/About/OAHOffices.aspx "ALJ Howard W. Cohen has been an Administrative Law Judge with the Los Angeles regional office of the Office of Administrative Hearings since October 2009. ALJ Cohen received his bachelor's degree from UCLA in biology. ALJ Cohen received his juris doctorate degree from the University of Michigan Law School. ALJ Cohen has completed the required training necessary to conduct mediations and administrative hearings." I'm pretty confident I know how he would rule on the "mandatory interpretive dance alternative" issue. I agree with you that stadium approvals are likely to take longer in LA than most places, and freeway congestion is a consideration (though not insurmountable). Most of your remaining statements on point #3 exhibit more than just the usual satire of LA "culture" - - they border on vitriol. I'm big on personal privacy, so I won't criticize you if you choose not to answer, but when you were in Orange County did you lose a court case, get divorced, get laid off or get swindled by somebody? OC to Buffalo is a somewhat unusual move if I'm reading between the lines accurately (and I certainly might not be - - reading between the lines is always risky). 4. I can't force you to use google, but I know you can because the link you kindly provided in my "Reorganizing The Scouting Department" thread had some pretty funny stuff in it. 5. You make some good points here - - my only disagreement is how much the franchise would have to win to "have any chance." I think that's something about which reasonable minds can legitimately differ. 6. "Why should one team get special consideration in a league that is supposed to be about parity?" A London franchise could make a pretty forceful argument that special consideration was required to MAINTAIN parity. They simply argue that they are already at a competitive disadvantage because their team makes an international flight 8 times a season, whereas no other team has to do it more than once. They would argue that avoiding Sunday and Monday night games reduces the existing competitive disadvantage that is already forced on them by geography - - bringing them back closer to parity. 7. "In contrast to the rest of the country, WNY is also very laid back. ... You cannot develop the same intensity for your team as NY people have for theirs if you have already left the stadium by the 2nd quarter" This is internally inconsistent. LA sports fans do leave early, but that is evidence of how laid back they are compared to WNY. Ive been to football games in several places, but never in Miami. I also don't know anything about Cowherd, so I have no basis to comment about either of them.

At present, I only have access to data for the 2009 season. "Lurker" recently provided the link below, from Forbes magazine: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Income.html When you click on the above link, an annoying commercial runs first, but you eventually get a 32 team chart. When you get that, click on the blue column header in the upper right hand corner of the page labeled "Operating Income." That will sort the column. Scan down to the bottom of the column. According to Forbes, the Detroit Lions and Miami Dolphins both had negative "operating income" in 2009, and if you read the related footnotes, such "operating income" was BEFORE "interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization." If you want to see more details for those two franchises, click on the blue team hyperlinks in the far left column. I think the current CBA situation involves a lot more greed than stupidity, but I celebrate neither.

Some of your points I agree with - - some I don't. I don't claim to be an expert on why the Rams and Raiders left, and I'm not sure if anything significant has changed. 1. As I posted above in this thread, I think the NFL uses the open LA market as a way to get negotiating leverage for owners in other cities. Even if, for the sake of argument, you are 100% right about LA, that doesn't mean that the city mayors and county executives in those other cities share your point of view. If they don't, the NFL owners can still try to take advantage of such fears about losing their existing team, even if the fears are totally misguided. 2. With respect to whether anything significant has changed, I do have a question. Is it possible that although LA remains just as politically hostile to the NFL as ever, the thing that's changed is the political climate ELSEWHERE? It's hard to have a good sense of the political climate in places you don't actually live. But my impression is that maybe many cities were willing to pony up lots of public $ to get teams to move back in the days when the Rams and Raiders left LA, and LA essentially wouldn't match, so both teams moved. But what if ALL (or at least most) of the other major cities now have enough financial problems so that they are no more willing than LA to support an NFL team with public $? If the playing field for getting public $ is now more level in cities around the US, LA becomes relatively more attractive to NFL owners (compared to 15 - 20 years ago), not because things in LA got better, but because the political climate everywhere else got worse. I'm not claiming this is true, I'm just asking if you considered that possibility. 3. No question that LA has more than its share of assorted loons and nutjobs, but I'm not sure how signicant that is to sports issues. The SoCal baseball teams seem to draw pretty well. I suppose stadium approvals might be impacted because of environmental concerns or "Not-In-My-Back-Yard" Syndrome, so your point seems valid on that sub-issue. 4. There are people with money trying to get an NFL franchise in LA. See links above in this thread. 5. London may be a pipe dream, but not because of where free agents choose to sign. If the NFL owners think it will be profitable enough, they won't hesitate to go there. Whether a London franchise could attract quality free agents is a minor factor in any future London team's potential profitability, but not a major one. Ralph Wilson doesn't sign a lot of top $ free agents, and he's not going broke. 6. You're probably right about the general impact of the rigors of frequent flights. The "3 am" idea is way wrong, though. I don't know the exact number, but I think London is something like 5 hours ahead of the East Coast. So a 1 pm Eastern start time would be something like 6 pm back in London. Even a 1 pm west coast start time would only be something like 9 pm in London. Just avoid Sunday or Monday night games in the US, and there's no "3 am" problem. 7. SoCal football fans are WAAAAAY more laid back and less intense than WNY football fans, and there is lots more competition in SoCal for disposable sports fan income than in WNY. That tends to be offset, though, by the very large population in SoCal. Anyway, just my 2 cents.

Sorry K-9. I misinterpreted your post #64 above. I thought I read something between the lines that it turns out wasn't really there. Entirely my fault. I've enjoyed our discussions. Take a look at my post #57 above, where I was trying to make a light-hearted comparison of (1) your use of Southern colloquialisms to (2) Vanilla Ice's (a Caucasian feller) use of rap in his music. Does that make sense now? Apology accepted?

Gotta admit, that's a pretty insightful analysis. But if you truly believe that in most cases finding players isn't the key, I'm assuming you would have no objection to my proposal to reallocate some of our limited scouting resources from west coast colleges to high schools in the South and Southeast.

If you're just joining this thread, we've been discussing a suggestion I made to improve the team's long-term drafting results. The short version is that I think that over the long term the Bills would be better off if they stopped spending time and effort scouting prospects at west coast colleges, and reallocated some of their scouting resources to investigate high school prospects in the South and Southeast. After all, Buddy Nix is a pretty sharp guy, and he seems to draft mainly from the South and Southeast anyway. If we identify the best talent early, we will have more time to thoroughly evaluate it before it comes time to make draft decisions that shape the team's future for years. I think the Patriots might be doing this already. Some people disagree with my approach, but I'm open to any well reasoned point of view here.

Appropriate usage of "foghorn leghorns" (I always enjoyed that cartoon), but you're a little off on the "striped ass ape" part. I don't really have any brothers named "Darryl" or any sisters named "Darlene," and I don't really have any "Uncle-Brothers" at all. Mortons Corners (in a still unspecified part of the country), however, is a very real place, and I did spend quite a bit of time there when I was growing up. So maybe I can help you. The full expression is "She's faster than a striped ass ape." Because there are some posting standards here and I don't know exactly where the boundaries are (I may have pushed them a bit), let's just say that the sprinters on the U.S. Olympic women's track team aren't the only females who are "fast." In some ways that the word "fast" is used, you can be "fast" even if your time in the 40 yard dash is slower than Ryan Mallet's. It's been quite a while since I've been there, but I think you can probably still go to 300 Parkside Avenue in Buffalo. Ask them to put trousers on the monkeys - if they do, you'll be amazed at how quickly you hear the telltale huffin' and puffin' sounds alerting you to the fact that you are in the vicinity of a pant snake. Monkeys are known for being, shall we say, "active," even if they've just been introduced to each other. Hence, the expression in question. P.S. - I'm going to be expectin' a lot better effort from K-9 in the future. And I'm with 'ya on Seal Team 6.

That snake would hafta be dumber'n my youngest sister Darlene, and she was born 6 weeks early and couldn't get 'nuff air. When she was born, the doctor slapped my Momma first for makin' bad choices. But back to your reckless snake. Only snake I ever heard of bein' that reckless was what we called a "pant" snake back home. Most people think they're rare, but they's really just pretty reclusive, and usually nocturnal, so you rarely see one out in the open. Lots a times you can hear a muffled huffin' and puffin' sound bein' made when you're in their vicinity without ever seein' the actual snake - that's how they got the name "pant" snake in the first place. You meet up with the kinda frog I'm talkin' 'bout, though, and he ain't just "happy to see" no snake, he's got a for real loaded pistol in each pocket. Your snake think he's invincible jus' cause he's wearing a bullet proof vest? What if the snake shot 'em in the foot? Well OK, bad example on my part - - snakes ain't got no feet. But even snakes got parts the vest don't protect. What if the frog shot 'em in the right eye? Then ya' got a whole passel a trouble. For starters, you gotta rush the snake to the vet. What if it happened in OT of a Bills game? Ya still gotta go - - your snake's down to only one good eye. The vet bill's gonna be astronomical. For starters, the vet's gonna have to remove the protective bullet proof vest so he can properly work on the snake to try to save his one good remaining eye - - but that ain't no sure thing. You wouldn't a had time to find no eye specialist snake veterinarian - - in that kind of sitcheeation you feel lucky just to make it the herpetological emergency room with a snake that's still movin.' So all things considered, there's a fair to middlin' chance that your snake not only loses his right eye, but goes blind in the left one, too. Then where are you? All you got is a blind, one-eyed pant snake slitherin' around out in public with no protection. If you think that's a good thing, you best have a chat with Travis Henry's accountant. And if you can't find him, try Willis McGahee. My Granny says this was a long walk for not much groceries. She's usually right. But speakin' of Travis Henry, I weren't no fan of his off-the-field choices, but he ran hard, he ran often, and he went to the Pro Bowl. He played his college ball at the University of Tennesse, and guess where he went to high school? Florida (big surprise). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travis_Henry We need to divert some of our scouting efforts from western colleges to Southeast high schools, so we can find more players as talented as Travis Henry ahead of the other 31 teams. I bet the Patriots are doin' stuff like this already but just not talkin' about it.

My youngest brother Darryl thought this was a fair criticism - how come Buddy drafted a guy from Texas if most of the best talent is in the South and Southeast? But then my oldest brother Darryl (he finished the 8th grade and has always had wisdom beyond his years) set my youngest brother Darryl straight. He pointed out that my Uncle-Brother Darryl growed up with Buddy in Talladega and knew him well. According to my Uncle-Brother Darryl, Buddy is as sly as they come, and when Buddy drafted Aaron Williams Buddy was just throwin' them other NFL GMs off the scent. Them other NFL GMs know that Buddy's been a-scoutin' fellers since afore they wuz born. Word gets around right quick when Buddy starts draftin' folks. Them other NFL GMs said to theyselves, "Looky here, it's only round two and Buddy has already done stopped draftin' players from the the South and Southeast and has commenced to draftin' players from Texas. We better start draftin' players elsewhere, too if we'uns is gonna keep up. But 'ol Buddy fooled 'em. He knew all along that he was goin' back to the South and the Southeast for the rest of the rounds. My middle brother Darryl says it's kinda like sacrificin' a pawn to take a queen, but he's always been uppity just cause he knows how to play chess.

I'm getting weary of explaining this, but I have never suggested taking scouting resources away from any of the colleges in the north. If you read my original post I think you can satisfy yourself that I'm not fibbin' about that. I can understand your confusion, though, because a lot of people have mischaracterized my suggestion to make it easier to criticize. And we haven't even talked about what an advantage we would have if we've identified the next Peyton Manning coming out of high school, and the courts modify the NFL signing rules so that you can draft a player right out of high school with the talent to develop into a league MVP. Some NBA GM with no more smarts than Buddy Nix drafted Kobe Bryant right out of high school. Look at Kobe now. I actually underestimated his value in an earlier post - - I think I said he has 3 championship rings but I actually think it's more like 5 (not absolutely sure). But to answer your question directly, the point is that Buddy Nix says that everybody in the NFL draft is tryin' to rob the same train, and we'll be better train robbers if we identify the best talent earlier than everybody else and evaluate it longer and more thoroughly.

You ever see a video of Vanilla Ice tryin' to be a rapper? That was a quickie - - still my turn.

Can you name two cities? If you try to sneak thru by picking a city that isn't really in the west, people will snicker.

When I was growin' up I spent some time in Mortons Corners in a presently unspecified part of the country, and my Granny used to say, "Don't wrestle with the pig - - you both get dirty and the pig likes it."

I've given your list and logic some more thought. Does it sound like a good plan, you asked? Well here's my answer - - Does a 1-legged duck swim in a circle? In case you've never been south of Cattaraugus Creek, that means "yes." Here's why. Most people have heard the saying - - "Garbage in, garbage out." It means that if you start with bad data, you will ultimately reach erroneous conclusions, even if your logic is as waterproof as a frog's butt. But in your example, you started out with a solid gold list of All-Pro players, but you still wound up with "garbage out" because your logic was faulty. Let me explain. Tom Brady was drafted in the 6th round. I'm not 100% positive, but I think there were already 32 teams in the league at the time (sadly, it seems like Brady's been killin' us forever). The way it works is that every team that hasn't traded its pick away gets a choice in each round. So all 32 teams passed on Brady in round 1. Then you repeat the process in round 2 the same way. The same 32 teams passed on drafting Brady again. Are you startin' to see the pattern? By the time you get to round 6, 32 teams passed on Brady five separate times (not accounting for any picks that had been traded to other teams - - but even then SOMEBODY used those picks and didn't take Brady). Let's say the Patriots passed in the first five rounds 'cause they think they're smarter than everybody else and could still get Brady in Round 6. That leaves 31 teams that passed on Brady in each of 5 rounds. You said - - "Anyone who wouldn't draft any of those players has no business running an NFL team." That's an exact quote. But Brady was passed at least 155 times in that draft by teams other than the Patriots, and the number would be higher if he was picked somewhere later than the very first pick of round 6. So by your logic, 31 out of 32 teams had war rooms being run by people who had no business being there? And that's just Brady. Care to review what round Drew Brees was drafted, and how many of the people who had no business running an NFL team passed on him? That's just the first 2 guys on your list. So to put it in football terms, it was All Pros in, training camp fodder out.

1. Pick any city you want that you consider to be in the West, and any city you want that you consider to be in the South. Then let's look up how far each is from Buffalo. 2. None of the 4 players you mentioned was taken in the last two drafts. Of the 4, only Levitre played both high school and college football in the west. He's a telented player, and yes my proposal would have made it more likely that we would have missed him. But we might have caught him at one his team's away or bowl (if any) games. If he played in the Senior Bowl we could certainly have caught him there, because I'm pretty sure it gets played in the South every year because that's where most of the best talent is anyway. Levitre is just 1 guy anyway. Just my opinion, but I think any scout we diverted to Southeast high schools could have identified at least 1 guy early. 3. As for Byrd, he played his high school ball in Missouri. I'm not entirely clear what part of the country Missouri is considered to be in. I suppose we could check to see if it was in the Confederacy in the Civil War. Again, we might have caught him in one or more of his college team's away or bowl games, or in an all-star game. We may not have needed to devote any scouting resources to him at all, because Perry Fewell knew him personally when Byrd was in high school and Fewell wasn't a scout. 4. Corner played his college ball at Akron, and Poz at Penn State. My proposal to reallocate scouting resources from west coast colleges to Southeast high schools would have had exactly ZERO impact on the way we scouted both Corner and Poz in college. You can get to Happy Valley by heading west, but it's about a 24,000 mile trip (for clarification, the earth is round and even if you start out in the wrong direction, you can still get there if you pack a lunch and bring a flashlight). 5. I'm no expert on the DSM4, but where I'm from there's only 1 kind of crazy - - it's like being pregnant - - either you is or you aint.

This is a little too weird, even for me. 1. Look at the content, date and time stamp on the post I am now replying to. 2. Go to Chris Brown's "Inside The Bills" blog at this link: http://blogs.buffalobills.com/ If you scroll down to the "Bills Daily Charge" heading for May 11, 2011, it says: "General Manager Buddy Nix will be available today at 3:45 pm in the Buffalo Bills Training Facility to discuss the process of re-evaluating and re-organizing the team’s personnel department." 3. Check out the article at this link: http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/article420763.ece Immediately below the Allen Wilson byline in the upper left hand corner of the first page it says "Published May 11, 2011, 10:58 P.M." Here's what the Buffalo Evening News reported about the 3:45 pm press conference earlier that same day: "If you keep doing the same thing the same way and get the same results every time," Nix said during Wednesday's news conference, "sometimes you need to make a change." 4. This stunning confluence of events allows only 3 possible conclusions. Either (a) Buddy Nix is on board with the idea of re-allocating some of our scouting resources from west coast colleges to Southeast high schools (after all, he was introducing a Southeast scout when he made the comments), (b) if you spout enough colloquialisms with enough enthusiasm you can actually channel Buddy Nix, or © they finally powered up that Large Hadron Super Collider gizmo in Switzerland till all the knobs read "11," came up with a unifying string theory of the cosmos, and created a black hole that ripped the fabric of the space-time continuum. If you think © is impossible, see http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/science/15risk.html As for me, I would prefer that the universe not implode just yet, because I want to see the Bills win a Super Bowl some day, and the idea that I may have actually channeled Buddy Nix just gives me the creeps. So I'm going with choice (a). Make fun of my idea all you want. Buddy's on board!!!!

1. The following paragraph is a direct quote from that 2008 article: "I've never been involved in a deal like this," said Mark Ridley-Thomas, a member of the state assembly from Los Angeles who used to represent Parks's district and is a longtime advocate of bringing football back to the coliseum. "Periodically they create competition -- Carson one day and Pasadena the next. They tell us Carson is the first choice and then it's Pasadena, they're constantly moving the ball on us. They're always trying to leverage one venue against the next. There's something about Los Angeles that makes them drive up the price and that impedes the deal." It's been 3 more years, and still no team in LA. Not even close. Ask yourself why. If you're a little cynical, it goes like this. The NFL is constantly talking about putting a team in LA, the NFL is making sure that there is media attention and frequent news reports about its supposed desire to put a team in LA, the NFL gets lots of fatcat potential owners interested enough in getting an LA franchise so that they start partnering up and getting tentative financing arrangements made. Now they've even gotten one fatcat group to sell naming rights to a stadium that hasn't even been approved by the City of LA yet, much less built. With all that media attention and activity, why is LA still so far from having an NFL team? Why does the NFL "keep moving the ball on us" according to Mark Ridley-Thomas? Maybe it's because the NFL wants to put its existing owners in the continual position of being able to extract maximum economic concessions from the communities where they're already located. Each individual owner votes his pocketbook. The "league" decisions are just the sum of 32 individualized decisions evaluating the same trade-off - - 3% of the post-move revenue DELTA vs. 100% of the no-move cost savings. Here's a more recent article about the possibility of a future NFL team in LA: http://www.ourweekly.com/los-angeles/public-hearing-nfl-stadium-set-wednesday 2. If you're interested in an overview of recent stadium building activity, check out the recent comments by NFL officals here [RG = Roger Goodell]: http://www.milehighreport.com/2011/3/18/2059463/a-few-good-minutes-with-nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell "On stadium issues facing both Oakland Raiders and San Francisco 49ers: RG: It's fairly recognized that both of those franchise as well as the San Diego Chargers, all three of our teams in California, are faced with stadium challenges that need to be addressed. We obviously recognize that there are challenges in each of those markets from a pure economy standpoint. But it also goes back to the collective bargaining agreement. It's not a surprise that there has not been a new stadium built since that agreement was structured in 2006. The stadiums that were completed was started prior to this deal being completed - Dallas, New York and Kansas City and maybe Indianapolis. There have been no projects that have been drawn up, approved and financed under this agreement. Part of what we need to do in getting this agreement done, is to get an agreement in place that allows us to finance these projects which are more and more challenging in today's environment. Certainly having two teams in one stadium does help address the economics as proven here in NY with the Jets and the Giants, but it is still filled with many challenges. I think the teams are willing to look at joint solutions, work towards joint solutions, but we have a long ways to go before we are going to settle on any of those." I'm not positive, but I think the NFL wants the players to let the owners take money dedicated to stadium building off the top of future league revenues, and then share the rest with the players in some percentage to be agreed upon in bargaining. The owners want to do that because the economic health of US cities isn't what it used to be, and they haven't had as much success as they are accustomed to in getting cities to pony up $ to keep them. 3. Buddy Nix may be the King of Colloquialisms, but even he doesn't use them all the time. If I had to guess, I reckon at some point they'll be back.

This only answers your first question, but one thing I rarely see mentioned on this issue is the impact that a large, open market like LA has on NFL owners who have no intention of moving, but want to threaten to move so they can squeeze as many dollars as possible from the cities they already are in. Put yourself in the shoes of Ralph Wilson or any other NFL owner. When it comes time to negotiate a new lease, a new stadium or anything else, it sure helps to be able to threaten to move to a big open market with no current team (as opposed to a smaller one). When Ralph and the County are negotiating the renewal of the Bills stadium lease deal, Ralph can squeeze more concessions out of the County if he can make a credible argument that economics will force him to move the team to a more profitable market. He can squeeze a lot harder and more credibly if the available open market is LA as opposed to East Bumf***, or whatever the 33rd biggest market is these days. Hypothetically, if JAX moves to LA, Ralph may get 1/32 of certain revenue increases because LA is more profitable than JAX. But that's only like 3% of the DELTA. Conversely, if the LA market stays open, Ralph can make a much more credible threat to move, and he keeps 100% of the cost savings the County will provide to keep him here.

Really nice find! For those who may not have noticed, you can sort each column by clicking on the blue hyper-linked column header. And if you click on the blue "Buffalo Bills" hyperlink you get this page: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_Buffalo-Bills_301765.html It contains a more detailed breakdown specific to the Bills' operations. They even break the estimated franchise value down into various components, and have a "player-costs-to-win" ratio that seems to measure how efficiently the team converts payroll expense into wins. I haven't had time to review it in detail, but the Bills' efficiency number looks pretty low. With respect to team debt and estimated franchise value, make sure you read the footnotes. If I'm reading the estimates of team value correctly, the footnotes state that the estimate doesn't include ANY debt except for stadium debt. If that's right, I'm not sure you can draw any conclusions about whether Ralph Wilson caused Buffalo Bills, Inc. to take out any loans. There could be huge loans that aren't reflected in the estimate of franchise value - - you just can't tell. Maybe the table is set up that way because even Forbes can't get info about non-stadium related debt incurred by the types of closely held, private corporations that own most NFL franchises.

Not saying it impacts the Bills at all, but you might want to read this: http://nfllabor.com/2010/10/29/commissioner-goodell-%E2%80%9Crestructured-season-would-allow-for-more-international-games%E2%80%9D/

I don't claim to be an expert about anything, but it's my opinion that it's certainly possible that Ralph caused the private, closely held New York corporation he owns and controls (Buffalo Bills, Inc.) to borrow money using the Buffalo Bills NFL franchise as collateral. As a private, closely held corporation, Buffalo Bills, Inc. is not required to disclose such borrowing (if there was any) to the public - - so there is no easy way to know if such borrowing was done. You can use all sorts of assets as collateral to borrow money. But the borrowing doesn't affect the amount of any taxes that might be due when you sell. In tax jargon, borrowing money against an asset doesn't change your tax "basis" in the asset. If Buffalo Bills, Inc. ever sells the Buffalo Bills franchise, the taxes due on the appreciated value of the franchise are totally unaffected by the earlier borrowing. If the company owes money to banks or other lenders at the time of sale, that's an obligation in addition to whatever tax obligation the sale causes. I sometimes use colloquialisms when I post, and I don't claim to have any particular expertise or education, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. For all you know, I'm two sandwiches shy of a full picnic and FOS. BTW, the most recent publicly available version of the NFL Constitution and Bylaws that I have been able to find (it often gets amended at annual league meetings) is dated 2006, and it contains what appear to be periodically increased debt ceiling limits for each franchise. See, for example page 167/292 at: http://static.nfl.com/static/content//public/static/html/careers/pdf/co_.pdf If you know how to search a pdf formatted doument, you can see a few other provisions in the Constitution and Bylaws document that involve limits on each team's debt by going to the top of the first page, typing "debt ceiling" in the search box, and hitting "enter." This will jump you to the first use of the term "debt ceiling" in the document. You can then hit the left or right arrow buttons next to the search box to jump forward or back to other places in the document where the same term is used.

Hey Coach - - do you need those exact words, or is an acknowledgement that my idea had at least some tiny element of "genius" to it enough? Ehh, probably not good enough. K-9's probably just layin' behind the log, as they say, and tryin' to get me to drop my guard. And I'm sure there are plenty of others who still don't see the value in re-allocating some of our scouting resources from west coast colleges to Southeast high schools. Anyway, I got a lawn that needs to be mowed before my neighbor grabs a flashlight and tries to do it for me. I'll try to holler back at y'all when I've got time. Go Bills!

If frogs had pockets they'd carry pistols and shoot snakes. Don't tell me which way my tracks run. I'm not the one who first said that we're all tryin' to rob the same train in the draft. Buddy knows what he's doin'. If you think robbin' a train leavin' a station in Buffalo Bills country is a good idea, all you're gonna wind up with is Jon Corto and Namaan Roosevelt. Players I like, but they ain't gettin' measured for a yellow jacket in Canton, Ohio any time soon. I don't understand why it's so hard to see the advantages of trying to find out as much as you can about the best future players a little earlier than the 31 other teams that are ultimately competing with the Bills to get the best college players - - especially when our publicly announced plan is to build the team through the draft. Why is locating the best talent later than everybody else a good idea?

You're makin' my point. Aaron Maybin is a 5 pound DE in a 10 pound sack. If I remember right he went to high school in the Washington DC area - - that's how he met LaVar Arrington of the Redskins. OK maybe not the deep South, but still in the South by most people's definition. If we had scouted him even a little bit in high school and become familiar with the flaws in his game, maybe we don't fall in love with his college stats as a 1 year wonder who left Penn State early. As for Pop Warner - - he was well before my time. I can't speak to his personality. For all I know, maybe he didn't have 'nuff branches in his family tree and weren't right.