JohnC

Downtown and the waterfront understandably get a lot of attention for the development in those areas. But to buttress the points you made in your excellent commentary I have included these two Buffalo News articles that show that positive activity is happening in all areas of the city. Without a doubt the momentum for the city has shifted upward. Talk has turned into action. It's good to see. http://www.buffalonews.com/columns/donn-esmonde/a-buffalo-guys-faith-is-finally-rewarded-20140614 http://www.buffalonews.com/business/real-estate/bidding-wars-and-big-prices-buffalo-real-estate-is-red-hot-20140614

Is George Hasiotis's stadium proposal on the outer harbor a serious proposal? Or is he just trying to influence the process to benefit his particular development proposal? He claims to be talking to a variety of money groups that might be interested in buying the team. Needless to say Mr. Hasiotis is very ubiquitous. There hasn't been a radio show that he hasn't appeared on. It's my impression that he more than anyone else has a comprehensive plan to work with. http://audio.wben.com/a/91956089/outer-harbor-stadium-proposal-george-hasiotis.htm

The owner was in the last stages of his life. He was both mentally and physically frail at the time the deal was being negotiated. Do you honestly believe that he was concerned with the next CBA deal that would apply to the next owner? Wilson's faction clearly didn't want an onerous opt-out clause because it was going to hinder potential bidders. For the most part the people negotiating for the public got their way on the price for an opt-out. You have this habit of taking a simple issue and making it into one enormous ball of confusion in order to rationalize a perplexing position. The stances that the negotiating parties took as explained by the CE on multiple WGR appearances were very simple: The public authorities wanted a high bar for the opt out and the Wilson faction wanted a low bar for the opt out in order to improve their sale position when the time came to that. I don't know what else I can say?????

You got the story correct. The response from Doc is misinterpreting what happened. He is making something very simple and obvious andturning it on its head. The County Executive has been on WGR multiple times explaining the terms of the lease. On one of the appearances (maybe more) he clearly stated that the Wilson faction (understandably) wanted a weaker opt out clause. The County Executive made it clear that from his side of the negotiating table if there wasn't strong language in the deal protecting the interets of the taxpayers via a punitive opt out clause then a deal was not going to be done. The County Executive wasn't concerned with the next CBA. His focus was on getting a lease deal that protected the taxpayers' investment in the stadium upgrade. It's as simple as that. Overall he did a good job and the Wilson faction was very reasonable and fair in the approach they took.

The County Executive has been on WGR a number of times post lease deal. I don't disagree that the league didn't favor the clause. No one is saying otherwise. But in comments he has made to the radio station he pointed out that the other side of the negotiating table preferred not having such punishing opt out clause. No one is saying that the Wilson group wasn't amenable to some form of an opt out clause. According to the County Executive they strenuously argued for a much weaker clause. Let's use some common sense here. Why would the Wilson faction prefer an onerous opt out clause? It would hurt their selling position. The public authorities insisted, rightly so, that in order to protect their public investment in updating the facility they needed strong guarantees that they wouldn't be left holding the bag if a new owner wanted to move the franchise. The bottom line is simple: No public money was going to be used for a stadium upgrade unless there was a near ironclad guarantee that the team would remain at the Ralph during the 7 year term of the lease.

The County Executive was on WGR talking about the lease negotiations and explaining the terms of the deal. He made the point that the only way that he and the negotiators representing the public authorities could justify the expenditure of public funs on the stadium upgrade was to place conditions on the lease. He stated that the Wilson negotiators resisted the conditions but eventually agreed to the terms. Without a doubt the Wilson side would favor a less punishing opt out clause when the team was put on the market.

As you are suggesting the new lease bought all sides additioinal time to keep the franchise in the region while it was working on a more permanent stadium solution. When the lease was written it was my understanding that the Wilson side of the negotiation strenuously argued for a lenient buy out clause. The negotiators representing the county and state authorities insisted on a more financially punitive approach to anyone who bought the team and wanted to move. Ultimately, the public authorities won out in having an expensive buyout clause for the price of paying for stadium upgrades. If one puts things in perspective both sides acted responsibly in protecting their interests yet compromising in order to get a deal done. In essence the Wilson side of the negotiating table agreed to terms that almost guaranteed the franchise would remain in the region for the short term. If the public authorities are not able to take advantage of this interlude then they can't complain that they weren't afforded the opportunity to keep the franchise in the region.

I doubt there is a sizeable parcel of land he can buy within 90 days. Whether you are referring to the outer harbor or Lackawana or land located in the city proper you are taling about complicated deals that will take quite some time to get a deal consumated. An outer harbor land acquisition would make a lot of sense that would enhance his current holdings and development projects near the arena and in the vicinity of Canalside. I'm not adding much to what you already know (impressed with your financing and tax knowledge) but transferring the proceeds from his land sales to another land purchase is a very long and complicated process that is going to take time. My suspicion is that he made the land sales to become more liquid to be in a good position to buy the Bills. Then later down the line he will plan on the next step to use the franchise acquisition to enhance his already in place projects. The main point I am makingis there is a longer road to how this franchise and stadium issues materialize.

The ominous issue isn't what do you do if EJ gets hurt so much (part of the environment every team has to deal with)it is what do you do if EJ is ineffective. Do you continue to invest in him at the expense of the offense built to play now or do you pursue other options? Do I believe that EJ is ready to be a starter? At this point I simply don't know. No one does. The one issue that bothers me the most is that I am not sure that he has the level of accuracy for the pro game. Having all the physical tools means little if one doesn't have the degree of accuracy for the pro passing game with very tight spaces. As you stated you go with what you got. There is nothing else you can do. Maybe a veteran like a Cassel type qb would have been a good option to get temporarily by if the young qb doesn't progress at the pace he should. Whaley and the organization believe in him and are invested in him. Although I am queasy about him I think he will work out????

LOL! Proofreading should be mandatory. At times I am a dope. But Guido is proficient with the bat. He leaves the school kids alone. But he takes out his aggression on the parents.

You are creating a standard that no other new stadium can live up to. Will a new western NY facility get a return on the dollars spent to get it built? Probably not. So what? The revenue generated by the current convention including its multiple upgrades will not be enough to solely pay off its construction costs. But that doesn't mean that it wasn't worth building. If a reasonably priced covered facility could be built for the Bills and the facility could be used for an updated and larger sized convention facility then it would be a reasonable expenditure. If the new facility in conjunction to other waterfront development stimulate additional investment in that area of town then it would be worth the investment. Do the events in the arena that the Sabres play in generate enough revenue to totally pay off the building bonds for its construction? I doubt it. But if the facility didn't exhist then the Sabres would be relocated. There comes a time where one has to make tough choices. If a new facility is not built then the viability of the franchise will in the not too distant future will be an issue again. Is it worth spending another $350-450 M for another Orchard Park facility upgrade that will be used less than a dozen times a year? Or is it better to spend in the $1 B range for a multi-purpose facility that will include a new convention center and have a greater economic spill-over effect for area?

Your $800 M figure for a multi-purpose facility sounds reasonable. But I still believe you are understating the cost. It probably will be in the $1.2 B plus range. If you consider that the facility will be ready after the current lease in Orchard Park runs out then you have to factor in that building costs usually go up every year. So now we are talking $1.5 plus for a new facility. Through no one's fault the public authorities had to contend with the timing of the owner's death and the subsequent estate issues and future ownership. The $130 M spent for the current upgrade could have been more wisely spent on a new facility. Instead now we are looking at the cost of a new stadium on top of the previous expenditure for renovating an outdated facility. When the fast approaching time comes up to act on the stadium issue don't be surprised if a large segment of the population says there are too many other more important areas to spend public money on. Just something to consider.

For the most part we are on the same page. I don't consider myself a homer for this troubled franchise. With respect to EJ I don't believe that he is ever going to be a prolific passer. For me he lacks the natural passing motion and mechanics. There is no doubt that he can improve his mechanics but it will never be at an elite level. Where I disagree with you (somewhat) is that I don't want EJ to be a mostly read option qb. There is simply too much physical hazard to playing that type of college ball. There is too much invested in a franchise qb to expose him to such an elevated risk level. In his rookie year Robert Griffin III was an elite read/option qb. His style of play took such a physical toll that it jeopardized his career. The pro game is simply too punishing for a franchise qb to be exposed to that style of play. Last year Aaron Williams and McKelvin both had good seasons. I'm not so enamored with Searcy as you are. If Byrd would have stayed with the team the Bills could make a valid claim of having one of the best defensive backfields in the game. No doubt Seattle had the best backfield unit. Bill, trust me on my lofty evaluation of Gilmore. He was severely impaired with his injury to his wrist. He was courageously playing with one arm. In my view he is not only our best defender in the backfield but he will demonsterate, even to the skeptics, that he is one of the best DBs in the game. Trust me on this issue.

What a lot of people fail to consider is that Dalton is still a very young qb who has some room to get better. (As you noted.) As a very young player he got early playing time and acquitted himself very well. Is he an all-star caliber qb? No. But I believe that with a good roster (which he has) he is capable enough to lead his team to some playoff wins. Many people consider Dalton to be lackluster. Maybe so or maybe not so. To put things in perspective he has played better than any qb we have had since the Jim Kelly era. If the Bills can get Dalton like performances from its starting qb then it will be a playoff contending team. If not, then the team will be stuck in its longterm muck of mediocrity. The player I believe who is going to make a major leap forward is Gilmore. He was playing with one arm last year. Contrary to what NYC Bill thinks I believe that Gilmore is going to be an all-star caliber CB for us.

I just voted for you. Wire your payment to my Cayman Island account #365678j934. If payment is not made wihin 72 hours my business associate, Guido, who works in the accounts receivable department will be paying you a visit. One of his tools is a metal baseball bat. He likes to hit homerooms off the kneecaps of delinquent customers. Good luck!

I understand your sentiments in your discussion with Kirby Jackson. It seems to me that your position relates to EJ's maximum upside compared to Dalton's upside. But as it stands if EJ plays at a Dalton like level i.e. simply competetently he will be making a quantum leap forward in his sophomore season and so will the team. I'll gladly take that upward trajectory. As it stands it is fair to say we know what type of qb Dalton is. He is a manager type qb who will never be mistaken for an elite dynamic qb. Although he will never be considered an elite caliber of qb he is in my opinion a legitimate franchise qb. With respect to EJ it is still too early to make a fair assessment as to whether he is capable of being a legitimate franchise qb. To a large degree his rookie year was squandered from a developmental standpoint because he was hurt. Again, if he plays at a Dalton-like level this season I will be satisfied.

If Dareus was a fringe player he would be gone. That is not the case with him because he is an instrumental player for the team. The problem I have with his immaturity and recklessness is not so much what it does for him but how it could impact others. He could have killedsome innocent bystanders during his racing endeavors. It's obvious that Dareus has some serious issues to deal with. Is it simply maturity and entitlement issues or does he have some serious mental health issues that need to be addressed? I don't know. There is a good chance that the league is going to take some severe punitive action against him under the code of conduct clause. When you are involved in a drug arrest and then shortly after are involved with a serious driving infraction then the commisioner's office is not going to be too sympathetic when considering an appropriate punishment. I don't believe that Dareus is a criminal type of person. That doesn't mean that he isn't fool enough to jeopardize his career and life with immature behavior.

I'm a strong advocate that a new multi-purpose stadium in Buffalo can be feasible. It's obvious that you have a good working knowledge of the complexity and challenge of building a new facility in the region. But let's be fair. More than 50% of the experts of sports finance and economics have a negative view on the franchise's viability after the auction. The funds used for the current stadium renovation bought the franchise some time to sort things out once a new owner was in place. But on the other hand the money used for the renovation could have been applied to a new facility if the prior owner was willing go along with that transition. He didn't. I'm not making a criticism but simply stating a fact. In life you deal with the hand you are dealt. Nothing much could be done until the ownership issue played out. Once we are at the stage where a new owner is in place the stadium process has to move in a steady forward direction. If this region gets caught up in another interminable "Peace Bridge" stalemate or another lingering "Pro Bass" situation then the viability of the franchise will be in serious trouble.

Just a snippet how having a multi-purpose facility will result in increased revenue can be related to the naming rights of the facility that will help to pay off the bonds. The selected sponsor certainly will pay more if the facility is used for more events than if it were for only eight home football games. The western NY facility will never garner the amount of naming rights $$$ that Jerry Jones got for his facility in Texas. What enhanced the value for the naming rights was that his facility had plenty of other events (especially big college football games) that increased the exposure for the sponsor. Lucas Oil paid more for the naming rights of the multi-purpose facility because there are numerous events held at the facility, including some college football games and National Championship college basketball games. Terry Pegula as a developer has figured it out and is executing his imaginative plan around his hockey passion. He is creating a new destination market for amateur hockey development with the addition of his new facilities (including rinks and hotels etc.) With a little imagination and through a thoughtful vetting process a similar development can occur with a new fooball plus facility located in Buffalo.

Excellent post. The mistake that many people make when considering the high cost of building a stadium is only focusing it on being solely a football facility. The model that should be used when discussing this stadium topic is the Lucas Oil facility in Indianapolis. It is a multi-purpose facility used not only for a variety of sporting events but also serves as a convention center. Because the facility is downtown rather than isolated in the suburbs there has been a greater degree of economic spill-over effect. I used to be an advocate for a full makeover of the current facility in Orchard Park. I have changed my view. It makes little sense to spend close to half a billion $$$$ to upgrade a facility that is going to be used less than a dozen times a year. I would rather spend close to a billion $$$ to build a multi-purpose facility that not only for pro football games but also used for other events such as soccer, lacross, track etc. This region has for a long time considered building a larger covention center to attract larger events. Incorporating a larger convention center with the multi-purpose sporting center makes a lot of financial and economic sense.

Whether Hogan barely makes the roster or not his impact will be insignificant. Another receiver who is going to have trouble hanging on to his roster spot is Graham. Moving slightly up to select him never made sense. The receiver I am eager to watch this year is Goodwin. Graham is more of a track athlete than a football player. Goodwin is a track athlete who is also a tough football player. He had a proclivity in getting open on deep routes. The problem was the ball was rarely thrown near him. Our receiver corps is taking shape. Watkins, Williams, Woods and Goodwin. If EJ can take the sophomore leap then there is a reasonable expectation for having a serious team. If he continues to struggle with his accuracy and reads then the talents of the receivers will be squandered.

The new stadium's naming rights should be sold. The money accrued should be used to help retire the stadium bonds. There are plenty of ways to honor Kelly. Naming the stadium after him is not the right approach to take.

The train terminal site has been mentioned as a location to be considered. As with every prospective site there are liabilities associated to the location regarding space, infrastructure and ingress and egress issues. There is no perfect location. Although the cheapest approach is to thoroughly remodel the current stadium, as it was done in KC, there is a major problem with that strategy. How can you justify spending $400-500 M for an upgrade when the facility is going to be used for less then a dozen times a year? It seems that a consensus is building for a multi-puropose facility that will cost in the range of $! Billion and will be located in an area that will have spill-over economic effect for the downtown area. The model that keeps getting mentioned is Indianapolis. One of the most developed proposals argues for an outer harbor location. http://www.wkbw.com/news/New-Proposal-Unveiled-for-Bills-Waterfront-Stadium-259154161.html

http://www.wgr550.com/Is-Golisano-owning-the-Bills-all-that-bad-/19068210 The above link written by Paul Hamilton for WGR explains both the Drury and Briery situations. It presents a more favorable or at least a context for how and why both of these players left the organization. If players whose contracts have expired want to leave a franchise then that is their prerogative. In addition, when Golisano sold the team to Pegula he inserted a clause in the deal that if Pegula ever sold the team that it can only be sold to someone who would keep the team in Buffalo. Pegula was agreeable to that clause. Golisano needs to be commended for paying off vendors he wasn't legally obligated to pay off in the bankruptcy takeover. He did so because it was the right thing to do.

He's not obligated to go to any event, even at the White House. What caused a reaction from his owner, Jacobs, was not that he didn't attend so much as he felt compelled to give his reason for not attending which were political. There is a time and place for expressing one's political views. That wasn't the time and place. Mr. Jacobs was the most upset about his absence and commentary. At the event the president made some nice comments about Thomas and his play that helped his team win the Cup. Mr Jacobs felt that Thomas embarrassed the organization. It's not surprising that he was not retained by the team.