Dragonborn10 Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 While it may just be talk, Godell said that if LA gets a stadium the league would expand to 34 teams instead of moving an existing franchise. While this does not guarantee the Bills aren't moved to Oklahoma City, San Antonio, or Las Vegas, it is encouraging. http://eye-on-football.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/34676017
DukeyBomb Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Jesus. The Bills weren't going anywhere in the first place. Can we stop beating the dead horse already?
maddenboy Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 i think he's bluffing. Since Minnesota is already giving the vikings a stadium, and the Niners are getting a new one, the only one left who needs leverage is San Diego. The league has hinted, and fans will agree, that adding teams would water down the quality of the rosters. There's already not enuf quarterbacks to go around. Also, with the concussion rules and with possible 18 game schedules, they may need to expand the size of existing rosters anyway. Nope, they arent going to 34 teams. (caveat: Unless they plan to add one in London because zero usa owners want to move, then it might make sense to balance it out with an even number, by adding another usa team. Maybe.)
Geno Smith's Arm Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 From what I understand, the real problem is that many of the owners would like to see the Bills moved to a larger market in order to increase profits for the entire league. Jerry Jones for instance. They want to maximize the shared profits. The owners also must approve any new owner, and might want an owner that wants to move the team.
ryan42790 Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I thin from a business prospective this makes a lot of sense. Granting the bills crowd is not huge, if they were to move, or Minnesota, or st. louis for that matter the nfl will loose out in a ton of money. Especially if they plan to move to LA which is a crapshoot, it can be really successful or fall right on its face. Mind as well keep the fans you have and try to expand them.
zazie Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Jesus. The Bills weren't going anywhere in the first place. Can we stop beating the dead horse already? Naive much?
DukeyBomb Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Nothing naive about it. We support our team just fine. You would be hard pressed to find a time when its fans supported and sold out the stadium for a team that loses ss much as we have in the past decade.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Jesus. The Bills weren't going anywhere in the first place. Can we stop beating the dead horse already? i think he's bluffing. Since Minnesota is already giving the vikings a stadium, and the Niners are getting a new one, the only one left who needs leverage is San Diego. The league has hinted, and fans will agree, that adding teams would water down the quality of the rosters. There's already not enuf quarterbacks to go around. Also, with the concussion rules and with possible 18 game schedules, they may need to expand the size of existing rosters anyway. Nope, they arent going to 34 teams. (caveat: Unless they plan to add one in London because zero usa owners want to move, then it might make sense to balance it out with an even number, by adding another usa team. Maybe.) London, man the jet lag would be brutal. Nothing naive about it. We support our team just fine. You would be hard pressed to find a time when its fans supported and sold out the stadium for a team that loses ss much as we have in the past decade. Maybe Cincy should leave then, their fan support was horrendous this year and Ohio would still have Cleveland and Ohio State . New York only has one team; Da Bills!
UConn James Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 With 17 teams in each conference, where would the extra go division-wise? That would raise all kinds of hell WRT schedule-making, no?
MattM Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Nothing naive about it. We support our team just fine. You would be hard pressed to find a time when its fans supported and sold out the stadium for a team that loses ss much as we have in the past decade. When you combine the lowest ticket prices in the League, probably the fewest corporate sponsors/sponsorship opportunities and the fact that most of the shared revenue comes from TV and unshared revenue (which a new owner would covet) comes from said corporate sponsors/suites, unfortunately the factors you mentioned don't count for much. The team will likely only stay in Buffalo if the new owner has a tie to the region....
Mr. WEO Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 There is no way the league would expand two (or even one) teams into LA. Is there a worse way to bring football back to a city that has struggled to keep a team and fan interest?
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 With 17 teams in each conference, where would the extra go division-wise? That would raise all kinds of hell WRT schedule-making, no? my thoughts exactly. And besides there aren't enough good QB's for the current 32 teams!!!! how much more watered down do they want it to get?
Geno Smith's Arm Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) I think the "diluted talent" argument is weak. I don't think 2 more crappy teams would change the overall appeal of the league. As far as the "LA won't support a team" argument, attendance was more important when the teams left, and it could be argued that they didn't leave because of poor attendance, but for other reasons. What the NFL wants is the TV ratings from Southern California. They think they will get more viewers if they have a team/teams in LA. I don't think the Bills will move, but neither of those arguments are likely to convince other owners to keep them in Buffalo. Edited February 3, 2012 by Matthews' Bag
Danny Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I don't think the arguement that there isnt enough talent out there to expand is accurate. There are plenty of quality players out there who deserve to have more significant roles on a football team. Teams may have more trouble finding great quarterbacks but on the other hand, cornerbacks arent easy to find either. Overall it would probably be fair to say that the level of talent across the board is unlikely to see much of a drop. Dont you guys think?
Geno Smith's Arm Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I don't think the arguement that there isnt enough talent out there to expand is accurate. There are plenty of quality players out there who deserve to have more significant roles on a football team. Teams may have more trouble finding great quarterbacks but on the other hand, cornerbacks arent easy to find either. Overall it would probably be fair to say that the level of talent across the board is unlikely to see much of a drop. Dont you guys think? That's what I think.
zazie Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 When you combine the lowest ticket prices in the League, probably the fewest corporate sponsors/sponsorship opportunities and the fact that most of the shared revenue comes from TV and unshared revenue (which a new owner would covet) comes from said corporate sponsors/suites, unfortunately the factors you mentioned don't count for much. The team will likely only stay in Buffalo if the new owner has a tie to the region.... Hit the nail on the head. Barring Facebook making its new corporate headquarters in the M&T building, the Bills are gone within the decade. Pray that RWs medical staff can keep his living corpse breathing for as long as possible, if you really care about the Bills being in Buffalo. His last breath will coincide with the last breath of pro football in Buffalo. Sabres town from then on!
Homey D. Clown Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Jesus. The Bills weren't going anywhere in the first place. Can we stop beating the dead horse already? If you truly believe this you're completely delusional. Ignoring the fact this team has no real succession of ownership in place that has openly supported keeping the team in Buffalo won't change the fact that this franchise would be literally the easiest to relocate given the current stadium lease situation and the state of it's owner.
Mr. WEO Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I don't think the arguement that there isnt enough talent out there to expand is accurate. There are plenty of quality players out there who deserve to have more significant roles on a football team. Teams may have more trouble finding great quarterbacks but on the other hand, cornerbacks arent easy to find either. Overall it would probably be fair to say that the level of talent across the board is unlikely to see much of a drop. Dont you guys think? No--see MLB and NHL. Anyway, the QB is key. If there was so much NFL caliber talent at the position available, you wouldn't have seen guys like Curtis Painter, Caleb Hanie, Josh Mckown, Tyler Palko, John Beck and Tyler Thigpen as backups.
ieatcrayonz Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I thin from a business prospective this makes a lot of sense. Granting the bills crowd is not huge, if they were to move, or Minnesota, or st. louis for that matter the nfl will loose out in a ton of money. Especially if they plan to move to LA which is a crapshoot, it can be really successful or fall right on its face. Mind as well keep the fans you have and try to expand them. Dirt bag Capri Sun fat Bobby Kraft also wants the Bills to move.
papazoid Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 From what I understand, the real problem is that many of the owners would like to see the Bills moved to a larger market in order to increase profits for the entire league. Jerry Jones for instance. They want to maximize the shared profits. The owners also must approve any new owner, and might want an owner that wants to move the team. the Bills are the 4th largest market in the NFL.....they are not going anywhere.
Recommended Posts