jumbalaya Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 So you say that you don't know that it happened and ask why it's not plausible. Then you build a theoretical case trying to prove your thesis with no actual proof. Sounds like you are building a conspiracy theory like ..bin Laden has been dead for 8 years; Obama's family planted the notice in the Hawaii papers after he was born in Kenya; Johnson had Kennedy shot; we never landed on the moon; Obama is a Muslim even though he says he is a Christian; did Monica Lewinski swallow the evidence?
mousetrap08 Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 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: youtube.com/watch?v=jB14wCG6KxM 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. You need to get a life you have way to much time on your hand
BUFFALOTONE Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 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: youtube.com/watch?v=jB14wCG6KxM 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. Dude, get a hobby.
BuffaloBill Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 the truth is that we as fans are not likely to find out until Ralph passes. IMO the odds are very much stacked against the Bills remaining in Buffalo. League owners want a team(s) in LA very badly and if Toronto is willing to build a NFL caliber stadium may be will look to have the team there. The issue is simply that there are very few people with the financial ability to buy a team. Whoever does is going to look to maximize their investment by being in a location that can increase revenue flow over time. The single largest advantage that Buffalo has is a stadium that is not debt burdened however, it is not of the mold the current NFL is looking for.
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted May 16, 2011 Author Posted May 16, 2011 If I recall correctly, an individual must be the majority owner of an NFL football team. As you mentioned, Ted Rogers passed away in 2008… although I suppose one of the other senior officers or directors for Rogers Communications could hypothetically buy the team. But at the time of the Toronto deal, a right of first refusal would probably be given to an individual… and the individual most likely granted right of first refusal has passed away. This is from a March 29, 2011 article published by The Sporting News - - "BiggieScooby" was kind enough to provide it in another thread: "The league at one time required the control owner to have 51 percent of the team. That percentage fell to 30 percent, and in 2004, the number was changed to 20 percent for family-owned teams, with the family needing to cumulatively stay at 30 percent. In the wake of the difficulties of the Pittsburgh Steelers’ keeping the team in the Rooney family, the control portion percentage in 2009 was dropped to 10 percent. For non-family situations, the control portion remains at 30 percent." http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2011-03-29/nfl-business-dish-owners-discuss-easing-equity-rule-for-heirs By the time of the Toronto deal, the requirement for a controiling owner to have 51% of the team had already changed. Although Ted Rogers got a lot of publicity, as I understand it the "Bills-In-Toronto Series" deal was not made with Ted Rogers individually, so IF an option to buy or right-of-first refusal was granted when the deal was made, it seems likely it would have been granted to the same business entity that signed the Toronto end of that deal. Just my 2 cents, could be wrong.
Captain Caveman Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 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. Dude, the world is gonna end this Saturday, don't sweat it. Or at least, nobody has convinced me that there is no possible way that the world will end this Saturday.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 Dude, the world is gonna end this Saturday, don't sweat it. Or at least, nobody has convinced me that there is no possible way that the world will end this Saturday. You mean…we're all gonna die?
Captain Caveman Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 You mean…we're all gonna die? We're all gonna die anyway, it's just a question of when. The important thing is that the Bills will not move to Toronto as a result.
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted May 16, 2011 Author Posted May 16, 2011 (edited) How do any of the well known points you cite suggest that RW sold any Toronto business a right of first refusal or future option? In decreasing order of importance: 1. Ralph Wilson is a sharp guy. He knows that Bills fans (his customers) fervently want the Bills to stay in Buffalo. Yet after he announces the "Bills-In-Toronto Series" deal, at a time when he must have expected to be asked how the deal would impact the team's future in Buffalo, he gave no long term assurances. If there is some sort of plan to keep the Bills in Buffalo, why not re-assure your customers by saying so? On the other hand, I can think of lots of reasons why Ralph would not want to publicize the grant of an option to buy or right-of-first-refusal to buy the team. These facts are far from proof that it happened, but it makes me wonder why it played out that way. From http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/bills/2008-02-06-toronto_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip "Ralph Wilson is convinced Toronto is ready to support an NFL franchise. The Buffalo Bills owner wouldn't say whether that team might one day be his. Wilson steered clear from discussing whether the Bills would ever relocate north of the border. "Don't worry right now," was the best answer he could provide at a news conference Wednesday announcing the Bills would begin playing an annual regular-season game in Toronto beginning this season through 2012." 2. There are strong indications that the Toronto group was actively seeking to outright buy a franchise before the "Bills-In-Toronto Series" was announced (fact #5 in the OP), and planned to continue their efforts to outright buy an NFL franchise after the deal was announced (fact #8 in the OP). They were in the process of making a deal with RW, an NFL owner who was already on record as saying that the team would be sold after his death, and it just so happens that Toronto is already in what the NFL Constitution and Bylaws define as the Bills "Home Territory." If the Toronto group eventually buys any team other than the Bills, they will have to pay a hefty relocation fee. And that's IF they can get 24 owners to amend the NFL Constitution so that RW can't exercise what amounts to an existing veto. But if they buy the Buffalo franchise, they can make a strong argument that the team in Toronto is still playing its games in the same "Home Territory." They would argue that having the Buffalo Bills play in the Rogers Center is no different (for purposes of a relocation fee) than having the Jets or Giants switch stadiums from NYC to New Jersey. Why should crossing an international border be different than crossing a state border? - - at least that's their argument. The absence of a relocation fee requirement makes the Buffalo franchise more valuable to the Toronto businessmen than any of the other 31 franchises (for the same purchase price). Some may scoff at this notion, but there is a baseball team already known as "The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim." So why not "The Buffalo Bills of Toronto" if it saves the Toronto ownership a multi-million dollar relocation fee? I'd be shocked if the Toronto businessmen did not ask for some sort of option to buy the franchise or right-of-first-refusal to buy the franchise exercisable upon Ralph's death. They would'nt be committed to exercising those rights after RW's death - - if the Bills-In-Toronto Series turns out to be an abysmal failure, they simply walk away and don't exercise the option or right-of-first refusal. 3. At least with respect to a right-of-first-refusal, it doesn't negate the possibility of a post-death bidding war that maximizes the proceeds of selling the franchise for RW's estate. If the next Dan Snyder wants to make some crazy-high purchase offer to Ralph's estate for the Bills, that bidder can still buy the team if he offers a price that the Toronto people can't or won't match. This also preserves the possibility that a local ownership group buys the team - - because if they make a bid that the Toronto people can't or won't match, and nobody else bids higher, then the Buffalo group wins the bidding war. 4. The "Bills-In-Toronto Series" deal expires at essentially the same time as the Bills' current stadium lease. In these circumstances, can you think of any reason why the Toronto entity wouldn't at least ASK for a right-of-first-refusal to buy the team exercisable on RW's death? I can't. What I can't predict is how RW would have responded, and his lack of any public assurance that he has made plans to keep the Bills in Buffalo makes me nervous. I'll grant you that none of this is proof - - but it seems to make a lot of potential business sense. Edited May 16, 2011 by ICanSleepWhenI'mDead
Turbosrrgood Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 (edited) While the Bills leaving Buffalo is unfortunately something that COULD happen. I doubt in any scenario that they go to Toronto. If we've learned anything about the "Bills in Toronto" experiment, it's that Canadiens could care less about them. Most of the people at those games have been from our side of the border, they can't even sell out that tiny baseball stadium. They have had to slash prices and still struggle to fill the place. The Bill's may leave some day depending on what Ralph is scheming, but I doubt Toronto is getting a team anytime soon... Plus, they already have a professional football league in Canada... Edited May 16, 2011 by Turbosrrgood
JinWPB Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 I've heard from unnamed sources that the original signed "option contract" is in a secure hanger somewhere in the Nevada desert.
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted May 16, 2011 Author Posted May 16, 2011 (edited) I've heard from unnamed sources that the original signed "option contract" is in a secure hanger somewhere in the Nevada desert. Good one! But I already stated that I won't be using this as a comedy thread, so all I can do is laugh and not make alternative suggestions about where the contract might be. Edited May 16, 2011 by ICanSleepWhenI'mDead
Fingon Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 Rogers Communications can't own the team. Ted Rogers died, and corporations can't own NFL teams.
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted May 16, 2011 Author Posted May 16, 2011 I got the gist of this "theory" when the OP "revealed" that the "Buffalo NFL franchise is actually owned by Buffalo Bills, Inc.". Shocking!! This was hardly a secret. Ralph Wilson doesn't write the checks from his own checkbook. The company runs the business of the team. Also loved the goofy "dig down" plan by the rube Toronto councilman for expanding seating capacity for the lame Sky Dome. Anyway, any sale of any team must be approved by 2/3 of the current owners. They are not bound by any "right of first refusal" Ralphie may have made. If the offered price is not competitive, they will reject it. See the post immediately above.
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted May 16, 2011 Author Posted May 16, 2011 (edited) Rogers Communications can't own the team. Ted Rogers died, and corporations can't own NFL teams. As promised in my original post: 1. The NFL clubs have recently made representations to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals about the actual legal owners of the teams: http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca8/11-1898/801649983/ 2. The above document mentions Buffalo Bills, Inc. That happens to be a New York State corporation. Ralph Wilson is commonly referred to as the owner of the Bills because he owns the controlling interest in this corporation: http://appext9.dos.state.ny.us/corp_public/CORPSEARCH.ENTITY_INFORMATION?p_nameid=415664&p_corpid=355631&p_entity_name=%42%75%66%66%61%6C%6F%20%42%69%6C%6C%73&p_name_type=%41&p_search_type=%42%45%47%49%4E%53&p_srch_results_page=0 Edited May 16, 2011 by ICanSleepWhenI'mDead
Mr. WEO Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 See the post immediately above. Every team is run by a corporation. No team is owned by a corporation.
Zulu Cthulhu Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 No OP, none of things you cite even remotely suggests such a deal was proposed between RW and "toronto businessmen." What you're doing is called rambling, not providing evidence. Your leaps of logic could span the Grand Canyon. Your "dig down" theory sounds like something you read on a Argo message board. Toronto has no place to put an NFL team, period. Until there are concrete plans to construct a stadium that would meet NFL capacity requirements, there is zero chance the NFL would award them a franchise.
Scrappy Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 The "Toronto Series" payment being a right of first refusal is not plausible for a few reasons. Since you need a majority vote (75% or more) of the owners to move an NFL franchise, Ralph Wilson could not arbitrary enter into that commitment based on not knowing the outcome. This would be considered invalid simply because there is no clear course for this to occur without a owner being verified & clean of issues. I.E. The Pedophile Billionaire that a friend of Prince William becomes involved with the Toronto group that would hold the option, the character clause would automatically kickout the whole premise that RW could sell / option the team to whomever he would like (which encumbers the NFL / would never fly). Options without clear courses are wishes that never come true & nobody pays Tens of Millions for a wish.
Doc Posted May 16, 2011 Posted May 16, 2011 Agreed. IMHO, any deal that would move the Bills (or any NFL team for that matter) to Toronto would include a clause for a new stadium. The Rogers Centre is just too small for the NFL in both overall seating capacity and the number of luxury boxes. It's also over 20 years old. As for the guy who said they would support the team if it was "theirs": the Argos are averaging less than 30K per game. If that's what the NFL can expect, I do not see the NFL being in a big hurry to put a team there. The LA market can put more people in the seats. Holy crap, you're right! The Rogers Center holds 31,074 (expandable to 52,230, ha!), but looking at 2010's attendance figures, I'd eyeball average attendance at ~26,000. That's pathetic! And the Argos are "their team," unlike the Bills, who they also don't support.
Recommended Posts