SRQ_BillsFan Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 By not announcing his intentions I think the Bills benefit fro extra ticket sales by holding the team hostage. He wants to keep it until he dies. If he said Kelly's group would get it afterwards I think some people would stop buying tickets for this pitiful team until then.
RyanC883 Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 That entire article is total garbage. LA had two teams, wound up being an epic fail. Once one team moves there, it also will fail, then they will not get another team. Also, when you combine Buffalo, Rochester, and Southern Ontario, you have around 8 MILLION people. That's a larger market than most NFL teams have. Perahps in the top 5. When people say "the Buffalo market is small" they are looking only at the City of Buffalo. If the team moved to Niagara Falls, it could more easily tap into the 8 million Canadians (many of whom already attend Bills games, just try crossing into Canada after a Bills game). The Bills market is not "small." Buffalo is small because NYS politicians have taxed most employers out of the region. But the Buffalo area (Rochester, Buffalo, Southern Ontario) is larger than most NFL markets. Sullivan is a hack.
backinwny Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 All the more reason to centralize the team closer to a majority of the fanbase with a new stadium in Niagara Falls, one of the seven wonders of the world. How many other stadiums / teams have one of the 7 in their backyard ?? Love the idea just be carefull with the marketing.....Niagra Falls is not one of the 7 wonders....... Weird I know..... Love the idea just be carefull with the marketing.....Niagra Falls is not one of the 7 wonders....... Weird I know..... Also, I swear I can spell.... With a little help from spell check...."careful" and "Niagara"
Bananahands Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 If "Wilson has no known succession plan" how does Sullivan know "He plans to have the team auctioned to the highest bidder?" Makes no sense to me.
Hplarrm Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Perhaps somebody has already discussed this, but how would the NFL realign itself if a team or two teams moved to LA? I see this issue being the reason that Buffalo stays put. I don't see the majority of NFL owners, especially in the AFC, going along with a vote for a move if it requires massive realignment of the conference. The AFC East and West are the same as they were in 1960. Would the NFL kill those rivalries for the sake of a team in LA? Again, no one also has explained how if the accepted wisdom is true that the NFL always goes for profit and where the money sits, then it has to be relevant that by far the lionshare of the profit and money comes from the TV networks and not the gate sales. Folks keep talking about the Bills having a small market as though the geographic market rules decision-making. This is simply not the case as the real market where the profit and raw dollars come from is the TV market. Yes, the geographic market makes a significant market difference if the base of the TV money is the same for all amd the market question is simply a comparison of whether you add a ton of money on from a large market like LA or a "mere" half ton on money from a smaller market like Buffalo. Actually, what the market case is for decision-making: 1. The small vs. large market differences are washed out a lot now that the salary cap is set based on total revenue of the league teams from any source rather than a designated gross which exempts items such as luxury seats from the cap. 2. It has now been clearly demonstrated that even though the past CBAs were based on a "trust" that the NFL teams would accurately calculate and report their total gross receipts to their partners, the players, (by threatening decertification after the mid-80s lockout the players and the team owners basically formed a partnership embodied in the CBA). However, by deciding to re-open the deal early as the owners had a right to do and then negotiating "lock-out" insurance where the NFL and the players get less money from the deal in exchange for payment to the teams by the networks even if there is no product due to a lockout, the NFL owners are treating the players as traditional employees rather than as partners. The NFLPA has clearly recognized and operated under a 21st century market analysis that judges that the true customers are reflected not in the gate receipts (certainly a necessary but smaller cash stream than what the TV networks deliver, but in the TV payments. Overall, I think Buffalo Bills fans have a clear choice. Root for the owners to "win" their fight with the NFLPA and the result means no football in the immediate term as if the Appeals court overturning of the lower court decision in favor of the NFLPA we are back to lockout mode. If the NFLPA wins then we have football as normal. In the longer term- if the team owners win then the Bills stay in Buffalo until Ralph dies and when he dies something else happens but the Bills may be gone. On the other hand, if the NFLPA wins the suit as they did in the lower court then the likelihood is that football continues as in the past and the Bills stay. it seems odd to me that anyone would be rooting for the owners to "win" because if they do we fans are definitely screwed in the short term and have little recourse if Ralph or circumstance screws us in the long term.
billsfreak Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) I think the succession plan (whatever it is) is bad news for fans.. and would drive away fans and hit the bottom line. A rationale businessman on death's door step would sell now... it's better for his family in the end. Speculating on this could go on for days. I agree, if Ralph gave a rat's ass about the fans in Buffalo, he would sell now or at least publish a succession plan, so the best fans in the NFL knew what to look forward to. Just another knife in the back of the Bills fans by Ralph, who like someone else said, has held Western New York hostage for a couple decades now. You kinda get the sense that his thinking is, "who gives a crap what happens to the fans of the Buffalo Bills after I am gone, I won't be here to listen to them whine." Edited June 20, 2011 by billsfreak
BillsWatch Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 that seems logical for sure, but leads to me thinking about other questions . who determines when ralph is incapable of making decisions? , who decides that?, is he in fact, making decisions now?, these are just things i wonder about. is he mentally competent to decide his position on the new CBA? Certainly not Jerry Sullivan. He has not been mentally competent since he has written opinion pieces for Buffalo News.
dwight in philly Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Certainly not Jerry Sullivan. He has not been mentally competent since he has written opinion pieces for Buffalo News. my point, today, the owners are meeting in chicago, is ralph there?? if not , who is ??, who is deciding how ralph thinks? is ralph thinking at all?.. not trying to be flip, just very curious..
Doc Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 I agree, if Ralph gave a rat's ass about the fans in Buffalo, he would sell now or at least publish a succession plan, so the best fans in the NFL knew what to look forward to. Just another knife in the back of the Bills fans by Ralph, who like someone else said, has held Western New York hostage for a couple decades now. You kinda get the sense that his thinking is, "who gives a crap what happens to the fans of the Buffalo Bills after I am gone, I won't be here to listen to them whine." "Held hostage."
Recommended Posts