Maguire's Beer Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 In a big Washington Post story on the City of Industry initiative in LA, the writer notes that there are seven franchises that are "currently in insufficient stadiums or severe financial difficulty or rumored to be for sale." Buffalo's gotta be on that list, right? The only issue now, he said, is finding a team to buy and move to Los Angeles. While Majestic officials say the NFL has told them to work quietly, the list of teams in financial difficulty and perhaps available for purchase or a potential move is thought to include Jacksonville, St. Louis, Minnesota, San Diego, San Francisco and Oakland. Now that's only six, and the article does say there are seven teams that might be movable. So maybe we're the seventh. But it was pleasing to see an article listing a bunch of teams that could be moved (including some long shots -- I mean, SF??), and NOT see Buffalo on the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 San Francisco, San Diego and Oakland all have stadium issues supposedly. There was some talk about about San Francisco and Oakland sharing one stadium to solve that issue. I love how St. Louis wants a new stadium when their current stadium was built in the mid to late 90s. I still don't understand why the NFL can't expand. Because they have these clean divisions of four teams each? That is silly. Expanding not only could solve this LA issue but also help with CBA negotiations by providing more jobs to NFL players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthICE Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Buffalo is 12th in profit, they are going no where. Even with crap teams they still sell out. a New owner can increase ticket prices, sell naming rights and STILL sell out and make a decent profit. This team is going NO WHERE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpcolosi Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 San Francisco, San Diego and Oakland all have stadium issues supposedly. There was some talk about about San Francisco and Oakland sharing one stadium to solve that issue. I love how St. Louis wants a new stadium when their current stadium was built in the mid to late 90s. I still don't understand why the NFL can't expand. Because they have these clean divisions of four teams each? That is silly. Expanding not only could solve this LA issue but also help with CBA negotiations by providing more jobs to NFL players. have you seen the QB playi n the nfl? have you seen the disparity between good and bad teams? the pool of talented players is very low. they can't even think about expanding without further ruining parody which is why the nfl became so popular in the 80s and 90s... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 San Francisco, San Diego and Oakland all have stadium issues supposedly. There was some talk about about San Francisco and Oakland sharing one stadium to solve that issue. I love how St. Louis wants a new stadium when their current stadium was built in the mid to late 90s. I still don't understand why the NFL can't expand. Because they have these clean divisions of four teams each? That is silly. Expanding not only could solve this LA issue but also help with CBA negotiations by providing more jobs to NFL players. Right. And The Bills moving to LA would still play in the AFCE. That's about as ridiculous as Marv coming back to coach next year. IF The Bills moved to LA - how will they approach realignment? Would they move to the NFC? Heresy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maguire's Beer Posted November 1, 2009 Author Share Posted November 1, 2009 Right. And The Bills moving to LA would still play in the AFCE. That's about as ridiculous as Marv coming back to coach next year. IF The Bills moved to LA - how will they approach realignment? Would they move to the NFC? Heresy! Hmm. Here's one idea of what realignment would look like if the Bills moved to LA. Changes in bold. AFC EAST: NE, Jets, Mia, BALT AFC NORTH: Cin, Pit, Cle, IND AFC SOUTH: Hou, Jax, Ten, CAR AFC WEST: Unchanged NFC EAST: Unchanged NFC NORTH: Unchanged NFC SOUTH: NO, Atl, TB, STL NFC WEST: Sea, SF, Ari, LA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 have you seen the QB playi n the nfl? have you seen the disparity between good and bad teams? the pool of talented players is very low. they can't even think about expanding without further ruining parody which is why the nfl became so popular in the 80s and 90s... There's always been bad QB play. The league is never going to be full of Mannings. That doesn't mean that hurts the product. Our population has been increasing too. Suddenly we are no longer producing good football players at the same rate? I doubt it. I think the real reason that the NFL does not want to expand is that they don't think that an expansion fee can pay for the proportionate loss of TV revenue and the ability to blackmail towns into building new stadiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 I still don't understand why the NFL can't expand. Because they have these clean divisions of four teams each? That is silly. Expanding not only could solve this LA issue but also help with CBA negotiations by providing more jobs to NFL players. If anything, the NFL should be thinking about contraction. Its no coincidence that the quality of play has gone down the toilet since the expansion from 28 teams. Expansion has diluted the talent level past the breaking point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 If anything, the NFL should be thinking about contraction. Its no coincidence that the quality of play has gone down the toilet since the expansion from 28 teams. Expansion has diluted the talent level past the breaking point. Bills would be one of the first to go. I still don't buy that expansion is to blame. There were plenty of doormats and dominant teams 15 years ago too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agilen Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Buffalo is 12th in profit, they are going no where. Even with crap teams they still sell out. a New owner can increase ticket prices, sell naming rights and STILL sell out and make a decent profit. This team is going NO WHERE! The Bills are profitable because Ralph has no debt to service on the team. Its not likely a new owner is going to write a check for $1 billion, so he'll have to sink several million a year in interest. Still might be profitable, but not 12th in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Bills would be one of the first to go. I still don't buy that expansion is to blame. There were plenty of doormats and dominant teams 15 years ago too. They'd be mentioned as a candidate, but the Bills are reasonably profitable and the fans do attend the games. If I had to guess, the Bills would stand a high chance of surviving even a four team contraction. Jacksonville and Detroit would probably 1-2 on the list, the former because of its inability to draw fans, the latter because of the horrid local economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 They'd be mentioned as a candidate, but the Bills are reasonably profitable and the fans do attend the games. If I had to guess, the Bills would stand a high chance of surviving even a four team contraction. Jacksonville and Detroit would probably 1-2 on the list, the former because of its inability to draw fans, the latter because of the horrid local economy. Detroit? The team moved into brand new Ford Field in 2002. The stadium was built almost entirely from public money. The NFL owners would not approve moving the Lions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lv-Bills Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Bills would be one of the first to go. I still don't buy that expansion is to blame. There were plenty of doormats and dominant teams 15 years ago too. I agree 100%. There were some god awful teams in the era before expansion. Matter of fact, there were some HORRIBLE teams and the NFL was full of haves and have nots in terms of talent in the 70's and 80's. This, not enough talent for expansion is a myth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChimp Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 In a big Washington Post story on the City of Industry initiative in LA, the writer notes that there are seven franchises that are "currently in insufficient stadiums or severe financial difficulty or rumored to be for sale." Buffalo's gotta be on that list, right? Now that's only six, and the article does say there are seven teams that might be movable. So maybe we're the seventh. But it was pleasing to see an article listing a bunch of teams that could be moved (including some long shots -- I mean, SF??), and NOT see Buffalo on the list. Maybe the sale was finalized at Halftime. Was that a ring they gave the old coot or a contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Hmm. Here's one idea of what realignment would look like if the Bills moved to LA. Changes in bold. AFC EAST: NE, Jets, Mia, BALT AFC NORTH: Cin, Pit, Cle, IND AFC SOUTH: Hou, Jax, Ten, CAR AFC WEST: Unchanged NFC EAST: Unchanged NFC NORTH: Unchanged NFC SOUTH: NO, Atl, TB, STL NFC WEST: Sea, SF, Ari, LA It would make more sense to leave Carolina in the NFC South & Move StL to the AFC South. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Right. And The Bills moving to LA would still play in the AFCE. That's about as ridiculous as Marv coming back to coach next year. IF The Bills moved to LA - how will they approach realignment? Would they move to the NFC? Heresy! Cardinals played in the NFC East for years after they moved to Arizona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Now that's only six, and the article does say there are seven teams An error or inconsistency in the Washington Post? Whoda thunk that was possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMan Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Contains the following quote on the Roski group; "the NFL has told them to work quietly, the list of teams in financial difficulty and perhaps available for purchase or a potential move is thought to include Jacksonville, St.Louis, Minnesota, San Diego, San Fransisco and Oakland." Even the Washington Post's near zero credibility can explain the missing names on this list. Post away, Bills universe.... GO BILLS ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Jax is the obvious troubled franchise but SD is an attractive candidate as well. The Chargers started in L.A. way back when. They want a new stadium in SD but they ain/t getting one. And even if they leave asny diehard Chargers fan can make the drive, At least it's still SoCal. But this does not save the Bills. There will be other cities: Las Vegas, San Antonio, London England. Toronto is still the likely destination. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Buffalo is 12th in profit, they are going no where. Even with crap teams they still sell out. a New owner can increase ticket prices, sell naming rights and STILL sell out and make a decent profit. This team is going NO WHERE! Only because Ralph owns them debt-free. Add a loan payment on $1B and you are drowning in red ink. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts