GA BILLS FAN

Agree. But they would have 8 years to figure it out. Why do you think no potential owner with local ties made their interest in buying the team public ?

BTW, all this discussion on what Ralph could or couldn't do before he died and what the estate/trust can or can't do now is very compelling. Why hasn't our local media done an actual investigative piece on this ? Instead, I get to hear 2+ hours on GR of Jeremy White drooling over Mike Evans at 9 in the draft. What was amazing was listening to Jeremy and Howard dismiss all the rumors about the Bills ownership issue as "rumors and speculation" only to spend the next two hours on rumors and speculation on the draft ! Moronic. You really think a group of investors that has access to a billion dollars can't put together a bid and business plan in a few months ? I've watched first hand companies do the same in less than a month. Keep in mind, these groups have also had time to work behind the scenes and discuss with their investors, it's not like RW's death was a shock, he was 95. Don't hang your hopes on that. If the Toronto group is serious, they can have a well thought out business plan and a billion dollars in a few weeks.

They've said a new owner is likely to get approved by March next year or as early as October this year, that is a range of 6-11 months. That is the time line for this community (politicians, businesses, corporations, fans etc.) to have any influence over this process. After that, all the decisions will be in the hands of the other owners to approve the NEW owner and down the line (2022) approve or not approve a relocation. The lease is irrelevant, agree ? Second, are you completely dismissing the Toronto group from being a viable option for owning team ? Because that group has made it's intentions pretty clear on where they want the team longer term.

OK, so team can't be relocated outside of WNY until 2022. Does that change the long term if Bon Jovi's group buys team ? -- they have to wait 8 years instead of 5. My point is the same, what is standing in the way of this franchise moving (longer term) is not the lease, it is WHO the NEW owner is. The fact that person will be chosen in the next 6-9 months, that is the TIME we have to get this figured out. Let me say it another way. If it is announced tomorrow that the estate has reached a sale price with Bon Jovi's group to sell team for $950 million and on Monday the NFL owners approve the sale, who on this board thinks the team will be in Buffalo after this lease ?

The lease is only a speed bump to relocating the team. The lease that all our local politicians and naïve media are waving around with so much pride does virtually nothing to prevent this franchise from relocating. The lease does NOT buy the WNY community any time to figure the new stadium issue out. Why ? Good question. The reason why is that the decision to relocate or NOT relocate this team will be made by the next owner. That owner (by all reports) will be chosen and approved in the next 6-9 months. That 6-9 months is the proverbial CLOCK and it is ticking and that is the time this community has to figure out the stadium issue if we want a new stadium to factor into relocation talk. If a new owner is WNY friendly (Pegs, Jacobs Golisano etc.), the lease agreement and new stadium committee become very relevant and form the foundation of legal discussions on where the team will play within WNY for decades to come. BUT, and this is a huge BUT, if the new owner does NOT have ties to WNY or has intentions on relocating this team to Toronto, LA or somewhere else, that lease provides nothing more than a waiting period of 5 years (since a year will have passed before owner is approved) before they can move team. The key in that case is NOT the lease, but the NFL and the other 24 owners standing up and voting said owner DOWN BEFORE he/she buys team. Once the new owner is approved, it will be too late to stop a relocation. So, this lease is nice, but it is a lot more PR than anything when it comes to the longer term.

If he's in, why wouldn't he say he's in -- or why wouldn't one of his son's say they are in ? -- why the need to be secretive ?

I am fearful that WNY has been lulled into a false sense of security with this lease agreement. The lease agreement secures the short term location of where this team must play their home games, it does NOTHING to secure this team in Buffalo longer term (after another 6 years). In addition, it DOES NOT buy the community or it's politicians any TIME. If the new owner is identified over the next 6 months, as it has been rumored, the decision on who the trust sells the team to WILL determine where this franchise is longer term. If the buyer has local ties and wants to keep the team in WNY, I'm sure they will find a way to make it happen with local politicians, business people and the community, I firmly believe that. But, if that buyer doesn't have local ties or doesn't want to keep the team here long term, they will start down a path to move the team and wait the required 6 years (5 years from when the sale is approved) to make that happen, I firmly believe that as well. So, the lease buys NO TIME, the key decision point will happen over the next several months. WAKE UP WNY !! I'm sick of hearing the drones on GR, Poloncarcz and others talking about this lease, it's irrelevant to the longer term location of this team. I'm also very concerned a local buyer has not come out publicly about being interested in buying the team. Not sure what they would have to lose, certainly a lot to gain (i.e. public support)

Still too early. 10 games is not enough body of work to cast FINAL judgment. I'd would say I am less optimistic now than I was when we drafted him. Injuries are now a legit concern to go along with my original issues, accuracy and pocket presence. He is smart, has very good arm, mobile and natural leader. I'd say I am 60/40 against at this stage. My definition of pocket presence is the ability to make plays under duress, while I think EJ will stand in and take a hit and while I think he doesn't get rattled, he doesn't seem to have the natural intuition that so many great NFL QB's have.

The Bills of the early 90's were hardly choir boys -- they use to have some pretty epic parties in Jimbo's house -- I'm NOT comparing the two groups because I know a lot less about this team off the field than the one in the early 90s, but suffice it to say, the early 90's bunch knew how to party -- but they also knew when and how to work.

Agree -- Bills had good, potentially great 2013 draft --- only issue I have going OT at 9, especially if it's Matthews on the delicacy of keeping him at RT or potentially moving Glenn over time --- I also like Barr or Mack as rush ends -- but Mack will be long gone and Barr has a hint of Maybin in his upside. BTW, the Mike Williams trade is giving me more confidence in Brandon, but I'm not ready to come over to the dark side just yet :-)

I'll alter my comment as follows: The early round talent at OT in this draft is GREAT. After those Top 5, it is GOOD. 2013 was a weak OT draft by comparison. My thinking is, you can get a GREAT OT prospect at 9, but only get value at that position in rounds 2 and 3. I don't agree with Mayock's assessment of the 2nd round talent, I think outside the Top 5 OT's, it goes back to GOOD, not great. BTW, I love Moses and Thomas, but I doubt they last until Bills pick in 2nd round. The other guys, Bitonio projects more as a guard and Mewhort is good, but is no stud, more of an NFL backup, IMO.

Still not quite sure why anyone would be against a OT at #9. This draft is top heavy in OT and TE, meaning, you won't find quality in OT's after Rd 1 and probably won't find quality in TE's after Rd 2. At least the can't miss, and can start and contribute immediately type of players. I like going OT in round 1, TE in round 2 and rush end in round 3 and stop chasing WR's and see how this core develops around EJ. They have 2 proven vets (Stevie and Mike Williams); 2 young promising 2nd year players (woods and Goodwin) and a few long shots (Rasmus, Graham and Easley).

LOVE IT on several levels. One, big guy who can flat out play. Two, gave up very little (6th rd pick). Three, means Bills will most likely steer clear of Mike Evans and go with rush end, OT or LB with 1st pick. And four, shows propensity for Whaley/Marrone to take chances on guys with a bit of off-field issues.

Understand, but, the process for a new ownership group to take over this franchise goes through the NFL. The NFL is fully supportive of the lease agreement that was signed. I'm sure their due diligence on the new owner will include ensuring that owner will honor the contract the league supports. In other words, the likelihood of the scenario you discuss is very low to start. In addition, I believe all other franchise moves over the past 30 years involved established NFL owners (Balt->Indy; Clev->Balt, LA->Stl; Stl->Ariz, Oak->LA, LA->Oak etc). I don't recall a new owner buying and then moving a team within the first few years of ownership. I think this speaks more to the "NFL club" than anything, in that it takes 24/32 owners to approve a relocation and it will take time for that owner to build consensus.

A couple things to consider that are very different in the NFL. The NFL and the other owners MUST approve the sale. So, technically even if Mary Wilson wanted to sell the team to an LA businessman, she would need their approval. Now Mary and the potential buyer could sue the NFL if they denied the sale. Second, any relocation of a franchise must be separately approved. Why would the NFL void it's own contract ? I think there is ZERO possibility the team moves before the 7 year out clause. I think we are all wasting space considering a move before year 7 as a viable option. That doesn't mean this team won't be sold to a person, and that person will eventually move the team in year 7, it is just so unlikely that it would happen before that time, it's not worth talking about. Let's focus on who and when it will be sold and what that person's longer term intentions are for the team.

I agree with the majority here that things moving fast definitely favors the team staying in Buffalo. Mary Wilson as controlling owner implies that the trust won't be in full charge of the sale and maybe team won't be sold to highest bidder, another good sign, would love confirmation of that assumption from the Bills. Leaking an October date also implies a ownership group or two with inside track on purchase, which means major parameters must have been discussed, this is also good sign, would love to hear a name to cement this opinion. It also would all but eliminate an owner with eyes on moving the team. As for a new owner who wants to move team being able to break the lease, I'll take the word of at least 4 different lawyers who have looked at the agreement and stated emphatically that the lease cannot be broken before 7 years ahead of one poster who thinks otherwise. It's no small measure that NFL and NY State are on same side of that agreement.

Was he at Tempo, too ?

Agree. Well put. Our differences relate to whether it's fair to judge Brandon at this point or not.

Now I'm confused. I thought your defense of Brandon was support for what he has done and that he has indeed changed the organization for the better. If we are all aligned to the fact that nothing is accomplished until we see it on the field, then we are on the same page. In my mind, none of the changes matter until we see it on the field, until that time, Brandon has failed, albeit we can argue whether that failure started 8 years ago when he was appointed to a "high level executive position"; 5 years ago when he was named CEO, 1 year ago when he was "in complete control" or 1 week ago when Ralph passed.

In some ways, I envy the PRO-Brandon crowd. Still having hope in the face of 14 years of failure is amazing. To a lot of us, the proof, will be in the results on the field and nothing else suffices. I was excited when the Bills hired Gregg Williams and had an established player personnel guy in Tom Donahoe at the helm. I rode the wave of optimism up as high as I could when the Bills beat the Pats 31-0 on opening day, only to have my heart broken with another wasted season. Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat with Mularkey/Levy, Jauron/Brandon and Gailey/Nix with the same results, sell me hope and then pop my balloon. I want to get excited and be optimistic about Marrone/Whaley and buy the argument that all is better because now Russ is in charge. I just can't. My heart wants to believe, but my eyes and mind see too much of the same to be fooled by the self-proclaimed "marketing genius" and the guy the media dubs, "nobody sells hope like Russ Brandon". Sorry, Russ, I'm not buying. Show me something on the field, FIRST !!

I think you are injecting too much hope into your argument at this juncture. What I've seen over the past year looks no different than what we've all seen over the past 14 years -- new GM, new coach, new philosophy on players, missing playoffs --- you could be right, that this change is indeed different, but until it manifests itself on the field, it's more of the same, in my opinion.

Come on Bandit --- these will only be REAL changes if the guys he puts in those jobs perform -- you know as well as I that EVERY 3 years we hire a new coach and hire a new GM every 5 years -- those are hardly "changes" --- as for special assistants, draft philosophy and scouting -- jury is out on those changes --- meanwhile, same training staff (against coaches wishes); Byrd / Levitre walk; under spend CAP etc. ---- ---- I feel bad you have so little ammunition to defend Brandon --- I'm hoping he provides you a ton after next season --- this is one debate I want YOU to win !!

There is no way Brandon will survive an ownership change. I think he even realizes that. It's hard for successful executives to survive a new ownership group, let alone one with a dubious track record.

I've never worked for the Bills in any capacity and don't know any of the principals personally, so I am assuming. At a minimum, a CEO exerts great influence over the owner, if not, it says a lot about that CEO's capabilities and judgment. You paint a picture of certainty that I suspect is simply your assumptions of the situation. I guess the next we'll here is that Ralph under hospice care the past several months was still calling the shots and we shouldn't blame Brandon if the Marrone/Whaley hire doesn't work out, and that Ralph let Byrd walk and it was Ralph that drafted Manuel. This reminds me of an SNL skit about Ronald Regan, when, in his second term, people suspected he was "out of touch" and not in control, maybe Ralph was more like the Reagan portrayed in this skit !! -- if nothing else, enjoy a laugh https://screen.yahoo.com/president-reagan-mastermind-000000075.html

You say it's "well documented"; can you share where ? Not saying you are wrong, just saying that in my experience, CEO's are in charge of decision making or at a minimum strongly influencing it.