JohnC

Jon Bon Jovi has no substative influence whatsoever within the Toronto group. He attached himself to a wealthy group that afforded him an opportunity to buy in as an NFL owner, a very small staked owner. Yet he is the one most targeted for criticism. He is a small fry in a group with big fishes. That was my point.

As you well know Tanenbaum and Rogers are the real mainstays in the Canadian bidding group. Bon Jovi is the high profile rocker who has little influence and little useable money (relatively) in this group. Yet he is the one most vilified by the local populace. Tanenbaum and Rogers slickly put their inconsequential American partner up front to take the heat that they would have been exposed to. I'm sure Bon Jovi never expected to be vilified to the extent he has been when all he ever wanted was to have a share of ownership in an NFL franchise, a long time dream of his. When Rogers and his family got involved with Ralph Wilson and the Toronto series they had it in the back of their minds that although it was an expensive entree into the NFL at least it was a way into opening the door into bringing a team to Toronto. The point I'm making is that Bon Jovi should not be where the arrows are targeted. He is simply someone who got on a horse that was offered to him and the end result was that he was taken for a ride.

Thanks for the link. Excellent read. Ralph Wilson was asked why Cookie wasn't on the Stadium Wall of Fame. He responded that no one could be sure that he would show up for his own ceremony and that he also demanded an appearance fee which was not an acceptable term. With respect to Lou Saban being placed on the Wall Ralph would not permit it because he felt that Saban twice walked away from the organization and betrayed him. Ed Kilgore, on WGR, told the story that Ralph Wilson told the committee involved with the selection process that although he would not approve Saban being on the Wall while he was alive he wasn't against Saban be selected after he passed. Althouogh the owner had his own personal honor code and value system and he could be tough he wasn't mean-spirited.

The county, state and taxpayers will not be primarily bearing the burden of the cost of an upgraded stadium or a new stadium. It is a political impossibility. If a new stadium is built a "significant" portion of the cost will be incurred by the new owner. The politcal and fiscal environment has changed where billionaires will no longer be dictating the terms of their own subsidy. Both the county executive and the governor have already expressed reluctance to pay for a costly new stadium. Both seemed to suggest that the current stadium, with upgrades, would be a good alternative to a new stadium project. My preference is for a new stadium mostly financed by the beneficiaries of the facility. I'm an avid football fan but I understand and generally agree with the sentiment that public money should be sparingly used to promote the businesses of billionaires. The NFL doesn't care how new stadiums get built as long as they get built. Although it does or did (not sure if the program stil exists) offer attractive financing for new stadium projects. Once the ownership issue is resolved the next major hurdle is addressing the feasibility of a new facility. That is going to be a much tougher and intense issue than the sale of the franchise. Settling on a site is not going to be an easy matter to come to an agreement on. I understand that your original question was hypothetical. I was just trying to answer it in a way that relates to the current ownership issue. Sometimes I get carried away and become too verbose. Sorry about that.

Anyone bidding on the Bills has excellent access to the "financials" associated with the franchise, including the lease situation. If someone buys into a situation with full knowledge of the situation then there is no basis to challenge the situation that one was willing to enter. (Cumbersome wording but accurate in the sequencing.) Is a Billionaire businessman/(group) who has a history of makiing many complicated and large business deals going to make an after the fact claim that he was "hoodwinked" in a deal that he had full knowledge of? If you fail in executing "due diligence" then it is your failure. If you get involved in a bad deal for you then it is your bad deal that you signed on to. There is a non-legal term for hustling yourself: It's called stupidity. What it comes down to is if you buy a house with a roof that has a large hole in it then don't complain when the rain drenches you when you are in your comfortable chair watching a repeat of Seinfeld. As you smartly noted the County and State did an excellenct job in protecting their interest in the lease deal. It was a fair deal for them and it was a fair deal for Ralph Wilson, a known tough negotiator. He got what he wanted out of the deal and so did the public authorities. They should be commended.

What is not being emphasized in these discussions and should be is that the future owner will also be expected to assume a sign ificant finacial responsibility in upgrading the current facility or more likely contributing to the building of a new facility. It seems to me that Pegula, especially compared to the Toronto group, is the most liquid bidder. He recently sold some assets in order to have a large amount of cash on hand. That makes him not only an appealing suitor to the Wilson trustee but also to the NFL. As stated in the referenced story Rogers would have to contend with trustees to tap into the family trust and JBJ, who does have assets, but would have to liguidate most of his portfolio to have cash on hand. As the article indicates there is a breaking point from a finacial perspective that will be a bridge too far for the Canadian group. When the price tag is in the $1 B plus range then it becomes a risky business venture for them. The Canadian stadium exploration may not really be a jeopordizing act because it happened some time ago. But from a "perception" standpoint it certainly doesn't enhance their standing with the Wilson trustees or the market they intend to enter. What is encouraging is that the auction process "seems" to be steadily moving forward. It hasn't become a fiasco like the NBA Clipper sale with Donald Sterling engaged in legal sabotaging warfare. As stated in the article by August or a little later a new owner will be selected and the league will be ready to sanction the sale. I for one will be glad that this enormous transaction will be over and the focus will be mostly on the field.

Jouralism at its best. JW brought to light that which was in the dark. Hiding the truth doesn't alter the truth. Truth trumping power ($$$). He deserves an exotic foreign beer. Put it on my tab.

I'm restating a point that has been made by K-9 and that you are pointing out in your post. A few years ago Tom Golisano was asked about what he thinks Ralph Wilson's estate plans are. He chuckled and said no one has to worry about how he will manage his estate. He said not knowing what his plans are he is confident that it will be structured in such a way that it will be proven to be beneficial for his interests yet will be fair to the region. What's "apparently" happening is that the competing bids are raising the stakes giving the estate a fair-market value for its asset while also allowing the bidder who wants to keep the team local an advantage in the auction. That is done throught the terms of the lease and through the composition of the trustees involved in the sale (noted by K-9). While the Toronto group may be maneuvering (conniving) to find a way to eventually bring the team to Canada Wilson's estate has used their participation in the auction to raise the value of their asset. The end result is that he has used them as leverage to enhance the value of his asset while affording the local bidders to stay in the game. Ralph Wilson is more than a tactical thinker when it comes to business, he is a wise strategic thinker in business and family affairs.

If the previous owner signed an onerous deal (for whom?) the bidders would be fully aware of the terms before they submitted their bids. So no one can make the claim that a lease deal is too onerous because the solution is simple: Don't bid on a project you can't handle. As you are well aware the Wilson trustees are allowing serious bidders to examine their financial books on a limited basis for the first screening of serious bidders, and then when the list is culled a more detailed examination of the books will be allowed to the top remaining bidders. Thus from a legal standpoint no one has a standing that the terms of the deal are unfair and should be altered. As you know I have been a harsh critic of Ralph Wilson as an owner from a football standpoint. But from a business and estate planning perspective he is brilliant. Most of the terms of his estate are privately held. But as the process moves forward and as it unfolds even a harsh critic like myself can't complain that he hasn't been loyal to the region. There are no guarantees in the outcome but he has been more than fair (generous) towards western NY. Ralph Wilson has passed away. But in a sense he is the one determining who will be the next owner. Very impressive!

My understanding is that he could not sell to anyone who would move the the team. There were no time frame parameters. It simply stipulated that if he sold the team it had to be to someone who is going to keep the team in Buffalo. I'm only referring to what Pegula was bound to do. I'm not commenting on what the next owner is bound to do if he sold it. So in essence we are not necessarily disagreeing.

When you take over an entity, including property, you are taking over the responsibilities and liabilities associated with it by contract. That doesn't preclude you from negotiating a different deal, but it does preclude you from walking away from that which legally bounds you to the property or entity. As Bandit indicated if you take over a building that has a lease you are obligated to live up to that lease, unless it is renegotiated. My understanding is that anyone who buys the team is subjected to the terms of the lease. One of the terms is that the new owner can not sign a deal with an intention to move. The intention to move and any act demonstrating it would be cause for litigation by the county and state. At least that is how I understand it after listening to the County Executive on a couple of radio interviews. That is why there is so much commotion from the stadium study in Toronto. .

Of course he would sign such an agrrement, and he did! When Golisano sold the Sabres to him he put a clause in the contract that if Pegula sold the team it had to be to someone who would keep the team in Buffalo. Pegula gladly signed the purchase agreement with that particular clause.

JW, Hasn't Hasiotis, the developer promoting the outer harbor site, contacted the Toronto group to see if they are interested in his stadium project? What's the general attitude from the public authorities regarding Hasiotis's stadium proposal? Is he being taking seriously? Or is he simply a self-promoter who is pursuing his individual interests? If I am not mistaken he has made claims that his outer harbor stadium proposal can be privately funded without much public funding. Is he credible or fanciful?

The Bills used to be a franchise that was noted for its lack of playmakers. Now they have an abundance of speed burners (Spiller, Williams, Watkins and Goodwin) who are also good football players. EJ doesn't have to be a precise type of passer with multiple reads. He just has to get the ball in their hands and allow them to make plays. With a surplus of offensive options the defense will have to spread out which will help the running game. Whaley has openly stated that he is constructing an offense that will allow EJ to be a success. He has executed his plan. Now it is up to Manuel to play within himself and allow the playmakers to exhibit their talents. The best strategy is to keep the offense relatively simple and allow Manuel to grow as he gains experience.

Why do you think that he is such a good teammate? He has a history of being late for meetings, sleeping in meetings and not working hard at his job. He came to camp out of shape and was unable to pass a basic physcial test that would allow him to participate in the training camp. In the offseason he was involved in two legal complications related to irresponsible behavior, one of which could have killed innocent bystanders. I'm not suggesting that he is a criminal or a thug. But I am comfortable in saying that he is very immature and irresponsible, and from a work ethic standpoint he is a slacker. His teammates might consider him a likeable fellow but he is not a good teammate as indicated by his juvenile behavior. I want to see him get on the right path, as do his teammates. He has been subjected to numerous in-house discipline with little effect on his attitude. From my standpoint that's not an indication that he is a good teammate.

If a person would have been standing by the tree he crashed into the charge would have been vehicular manslaughter. By the grace of god no innocent bystander got smashed due to the irresponsible way he was driving. The point I was making was that because of his own gross negligence (not legal term but descriptive term) he put himself in a situation where the chances for a major tragedy exponentially increased. I'm not accepting that his driving episode is a trivial matter. On the day he got in an accident he was literally a menance to the public at large. This is a situation where the commissioner's office should step in and mete out an appropriate punishment. Regardless if he is the best player on the home team or he is an unlikeable neighborhood loser he should be held accountable for his brazen behavior.

You are astute and perspicacious.

Tell that to the tree he crashed into!

What makes this incident really stupid is that he was already involved in another legal action in another jurisdiction before his ignominious crash. He didn't have an iota of consideration that his reckless behavior could have affected others. This is a guy who was disciplined by his team last year for multiple infractions. So what does he do in the offseason?: He comes in out of shape and is involved in multiple criminal actions. I want to see him get on the right path. It's obvious that he needs help. But that doesn't mean that he shouldn't be held accountable for his outlandish behavior. If he isn't suspended by the league he should be suspended by the team.

He was speeding/racing in an urban setting and crashed into a tree. If you don't see the potential for killing an innocent pedestrian or crashing his car into another car then you are not thinking this through. You don't think that the manner in which this crash was caused could have also severely injured or even killed himslef?

I have little criticism of the trading for RJ or the drafting of Losman. At least this organization attempted to address the critical qb position. More often than not qbs don't work out. There is nothing unusual about that. It seemed that because their selected qbs didn't work out that this organization was frightened to seriously address the position again. Levy/Jauron's problems with respect to the draft were more associated with inept drafting in general and their antiquated football philosophy (which you made reference to). The light and quick approach to team building when the direction of the league was moving toward big and strong approach. Marv Levy was ill-suited for his GM position and the results were predictable. Following up that regime with the Nix regime (admittedly he did better) didn't help this organization get out of its rut of mediocrity.

I'm not advocating that he gets cut. But I find his string of bad behavior troubling. His racing in an ubran setting was not merely reckless, it was dangerous. Someone I worked went to California to watch his son start his first major league game. The end result was the pollice knocking on his hotel door to tell him that his son, and only child, was killed in a car crash along with another person or two. The only survivior in their car was permanently mained and will not be able to live a normal life. The killing driver was not hurt. He was drunk and recklessly speeding, going through red lights. After the accident his response was to run. My harsh criticisms of Dareus is that his irresponsible behavior stretches over an extended period of time. He has been disciplined and talked to, yet the bad behavior continued. I wish him well but I'm not going to give him the benefit of the doubt.

He made a more meaningful statement when he came into camp out of shape. A PR person can write an impeccable statement for you. Working out and coming into camp is something that no one else can do for you.

With EJ you can at least say that you are drafting on potential. Troup was an undersized nose tackle who had back problems in college. There were plenty of bulky NTs in the draft available in the lower rounds who could have adequately filled the role of space eater. If Nix was so inexplicably enamored with Troup he could have been available in a lower round. The best part of the Nix era is that it is over. He was an adequate scout who was in over his head as a GM. The transition to Whaley represents an archaic organization coming into the modern era. By no means am I giving up on Manuel. He was never going to be an immediate finished product. He was a raw prospect who needed some time to develop. In my view the best approach is to keep the offense relatively simple and have a good running game. He has explosive players in Watkins, Williams, Goodwin and Spiller. If he can get the ball in their hands that will put him in a better position to succeed.

How about having a meaningful game in December? You don't think that not making the playoffs in a generation isn't a factor in customers not shelling out money for an outside December game and approaching holiday season? There are many reasons why the Toronto series was a disaster. The biggest reason was due to the garbage product. It's about the quality of the product, not the quality of the market.