May Day 10 Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 (edited) I dont see why teams have to be moved if they arent losing money and no owner is willing to absorb the losses. I think a federal law needs to be passed to prevent this. if the nfl wants teams in la and toronto, they can expand. Edited June 11, 2011 by May Day 10
Arkady Renko Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 I dont see why teams have to be moved if they arent losing money and no owner is willing to absorb the losses. I think a federal law needs to be passed to prevent this. if the nfl wants teams in la and toronto, they can expand. Yeah, I don't quite understand why expansion is off the table. People say owners don't want to split up their TV revenue, but that didn't stop them before. Besides, they can make the expansion fee high enough to compensate them for the proportional loss in TV revenue. The other reason I hear is that the NFL doesn't want to disrupt their precious four team divisions. That is such a silly reason. They were able to make 31 teams work before.
May Day 10 Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 yeah. 18 games would disrupt the perfect universe they have with the schedule and divisions anyway. The feeling of almost losing the Sabres was miserable. I dont want to go through that, and I dont think its fair to expose groups of fans like Minnesota and Buffalo to that. Even Jacksonville should stay.
Doc Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 The talk of a team moving to LA should start and end with Jax. No tradition and can't sellout games even with 20K seats tarped-over.
ARTnSocal Posted June 12, 2011 Posted June 12, 2011 The ONLY reason that the Bills were not mentioned in that article is because AIG was contacting teams now about a sale now. The Bills are not for sale at all now because of Ralph. I'm sure they contacted the Bills and were told the Bills are not for sale. That is why they are not a candidate now. Nothing has changed in that regard. That said, I don't expect the Bills to relocate at all after Ralph passes, to LA or Toronto or anywhere else. Let's hope that Ralph uses the same doctor as Prince Philip . .
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted July 17, 2011 Posted July 17, 2011 http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/07/la-downtown-nfl-stadium-city-hall.html New LA stadium is far from being approved, but even if it is: "AEG is aiming to have the stadium ready for the 2016 NFL season ..." When the new CBA gets signed, isn't it about time for the Bills and Erie County to start negotiating another extension of the stadium lease? Sure would be nice if it tied the Bills to Buffalo for a while, and had a bigger "buy-out" clause than the current one.
BillsWatch Posted July 17, 2011 Posted July 17, 2011 yeah. 18 games would disrupt the perfect universe they have with the schedule and divisions anyway. 36 teams would fit very well with 18 games.
Herd of Bills Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 Quit moving teams. LA has failed with 2 franchises in the past. Toronto can't fill the stadium for ONE game a year. If these cities absolutely HAVE to get an NFL team - expand. Agreed!!! Leave the Bills in Buffalo!!!!
Doc Posted July 18, 2011 Posted July 18, 2011 I dont see why teams have to be moved if they arent losing money and no owner is willing to absorb the losses. I think a federal law needs to be passed to prevent this. if the nfl wants teams in la and toronto, they can expand. Toronto is Bills' territory. If the NFL wants a team there, they can forget it. But I agree that if they want teams in LA, expansion makes more sense financially since the owners would put more money in their pockets.
Recommended Posts