Toronto Series Extension

[Marv's Neighbor]

The Packers played games in Milwaukee for 61 years...

That's true but you don't have to cross a bottleneck bridge(s), have a Passport, or go thru Customs to get From Green Bay to Milwaukee!

 

The Toronto deal brought tens of Millions of $$ to the BILLS.

 

IF there is another deal, the BILLS should put a good portion of the "windfall" towards Stadium renovation/relocation (in WNY of course)to enhance the Game experience. If we don't have a first rate product, we won't attract the numbers of fans needed to be a future success and the BILLS need to not only "cash in" on this, but also positively contribute to their product.

[D521646]

If you win, they will come.. Simple really.

 

 

Tim-

[May Day 10]

No, I believe that putting a game in Toronto has put the Bills in the Ontario papers

 

I was up there draft weekend. The paper was delivered to me.

They had a small blurb on the 1st round of the draft. They mentioned Gilmore, but only to say that the Bills drafting him was equivalent of receiving coal in his Christmas stocking. It seems there isnt much interest other than to poop on Buffalo.

[eball]

I was up there draft weekend. The paper was delivered to me.

They had a small blurb on the 1st round of the draft. They mentioned Gilmore, but only to say that the Bills drafting him was equivalent of receiving coal in his Christmas stocking. It seems there isnt much interest other than to poop on Buffalo.

lol! well, maybe when the team is worth a damn...

[Joe W]

Brandon will point to Canadian season ticket sales increasing by 50% (3,000 to 4,500) !! Five years of neutral site games to pick up 1,500 season tickets - some trade-off. There's no $10 million / game windfall coming in the next contract.

 

Time to end this travesty. By the way the Packers haven't played in Milwaukee since 1994.

[Hsp08]

Why can't they move preseason and training camp to Toronto and keep all regular in America where it belongs

 

You won't be so small minded when the Bills have to move out of Buffalo due to lack of revenue. Don't bite the hands that feeds you, even my dogs know that.

 

Bills need to lift the blackout in Ontario, more exposure, more new Bills fans.

[Doc]

I don't understand your criticism of Kraft or at the least your lack of acknowledgement that Kraft has presided over an eminently more accomplished organization than what Wilson has presided over. Over the past dozen years New England has been the most successful franchise in the NFL, with numberous SB appearances and a couple of SB successes, while the Bills ranked near the bottom with no playoff appearances.

 

Ralph Wilson can run the franchise any way he wants to. So can Kraft. The bottom line is performance. There shouldn't be much of a debate on the score. What bothers a lot of people is that posters such as WEO are not afraid to point out the obvious long term failings of a troubled franchise. Some ayatollas on the board consider those accurate observations to be treasonous. I don't. He simply is stating the obvious. Instead of refuting his arguments he is vilified. A cheap and sleazy way of avoiding dealing with facts or persuasive arguments.

 

There isn't a person who casually follows the NFL who wouldn't agree that Kraft is a much more competent owner than Wilson. There is no doubt that RK ranks near the top in investing in his organization so that his team can be consistently good. That's what a good organization does. Over the last dozen years then New England operation is the example to follow; the Buffalo operation is the example of what not to do.

 

You already know my feelings about the owner of the Bills. From a football standpoiont I consider him to be incapable. Despite that harsh assessment of him I am cautiously optimistic about the franchise. The mercurial owner is at a stage in his life where he is less involved. Before fading into the background he made a good football hire in Buddy Nix. He now has in place a competent person who knows what he is doing. That is what I find encouraging.

The Pats currently are like the Bills were from the late 80's to the late 90's, except for the tainted SB wins, the lack of a top market, and the rules protecting QB's and helping them last longer. We'll see where they end up when Brady and Belichick are put to pasture. But the point was that Kraft inherited Parcells and Bledsoe, then went with Pete Carroll error for a few years (kind of Russ Brandon/Dick Jauronish), until they lucked-into Brady.

 

As for the Bills the past 12 years, they had several opportunities to make the playoffs, but faltered. How that's put on Ralph, except that he's the owner, is anyone's guess. He's invested in the team (although understandably he pulled-back while under that POS 2006 CBA), except at coach/GM. Although as we've seen, having "name" ones doesn't guarantee you anything.

 

I wish that Buffalo was a top market and there was no talk of the team moving. I also wish they could luck into getting a good QB again. The first isn't going to happen. The second...who knows?

 

Brandon will point to Canadian season ticket sales increasing by 50% (3,000 to 4,500) !! Five years of neutral site games to pick up 1,500 season tickets - some trade-off. There's no $10 million / game windfall coming in the next contract.

 

Time to end this travesty. By the way the Packers haven't played in Milwaukee since 1994.

Are you a season ticket holder?

[Mr. WEO]

But they certainly have in the past, haven't they? The league has a way of cycling and it will again. The networks paid big money to televise the games when the Jets, Giants, Pats*, LA Rams, Bears, etc. were perennial laughing stocks. And they will again.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

The value of the network contracts grew from 142 million in 1970. It took another 8 years to get to a billion dollars. In 1990, it was 3.6 billion---for 4 years. Then in 1994 Fox bought the NFC package for 5 billion over 4 years.

 

Then, in 1998 there is a massive commitment by the networks for the first long term deal---8 years and 17.8 billion. Clearly something had changed. The contract from 2006 to 2013 was at 20.4 billion. But the contract from 2014-22 doubled that to almost 40 billion.

 

Nostalgia is nice, but we are talking about an exponential increase in the value of the NFL as an advertising tool and massive profit source from the networks that has only occurred in the past 20 years. I believe the teams that have dominated the league and the culture in this time frame (NE, Giants, GB, Pittsburgh, Dallas) are responsible for the increase inthe value. That's all I'm saying.

 

 

That's "good stuff?" The $150M (almost half the stadium cost) Kraft got from the NFL was free money (well, he did fund 1/30th of it). And Ralph wasn't asking for a new stadium, just for improvements to the county's stadium. And in turn, he didn't gouge the fans.

 

So what if Brady was luck? What did Kraft have to do with that, or Bledsoe almost dying on the field? Nothing. And who cares what happened to Parcells? His hiring was the turning-around point for the franchise. Almost undone by the hiring of Pete Carroll after he left.

 

Again, the money increased as the popularity increased and there became a scarcity of NFL packages for the networks. The owners have an idea of how much they want and send Kraft to do the dirty work. What's more important for a guy like Ralph isn't the total money, but the salary cap, ensuring he makes a profit.

 

Only you would consider negotiating a network contract double the previous one to the equal benefit of all teams "dirty work". Yes the owners (the sentient ones anyway) knew what they wanted. But they also knew whcih owner was most likely to get it from the networks. And far as "NFL packages", there is mor available to the network than ever. And it has over the years expanded to cable (ESPN, NFLN) and even satellite. Not really scarce compared to, say 1970.

 

As you know, the G3 fund was a loan. It is paid back with revenue from premium seating. It's not free money. And the G4 program is currently available with up to 250 million for stadium renovation, so Ralph is free to utilize it. And it's hard to argue that a seller of a nonessential product (football games tickets) is "gouging" if he has sold out all of his inventory for 18 years and has a waiting list of over 50,000 customers to purchase his product. Sorry, Commrade, but in this country, that's not gouging. And he didn't sell PSL's like Mr. Mara did.

 

 

You leave out a few details regarding Bledsoe, Brady, Parcells, and BB. And calling the hiring of Parcells the turning point is "typical"--how exactly did Kraft prevent it from bing "undone"?--oh yeah, he hired Belichick. Carrol wasn't a great coach, but he never had a losing season there and had 2 playoff seasons out of three.

 

Kraft inherited Parcells and after losing to GB in 1996, Kraft and Parcells had a messy falling out, with the latter wanting to coach the Jets. BB followed Parcells to the Jets. Kraft was interested in BB--he lost a 1st round pick just for talking to him before he left the Jets. And BB was a guy with few people recommending him for another HC job. And as for Bledsoe, not sure what your point is. Yes, he was the starting QB and yes he was injured and went down for the season. They won a SB without him, but Brady was hardly the next league superstar QB even after the SB, as you would agree. The next season, with Bledsoe healthy, Belichick was the one who convinced Kraft to trade him (and get a first round pick) so that Brady could be the starter. Kraft agreed, even though he favored Bledsoe. It was a great decision.

 

"In this game,you better take some risks—or you'll have a nice team, and once every 10 or 20 years you'll be good. That's not what I want to be about."--Not Ralph Wilson.

[JohnC]

The Pats currently are like the Bills were from the late 80's to the late 90's, except for the tainted SB wins, the lack of a top market, and the rules protecting QB's and helping them last longer. We'll see where they end up when Brady and Belichick are put to pasture. But the point was that Kraft inherited Parcells and Bledsoe, then went with Pete Carroll error for a few years (kind of Russ Brandon/Dick Jauronish), until they lucked-into Brady.

 

As for the Bills the past 12 years, they had several opportunities to make the playoffs, but faltered. How that's put on Ralph, except that he's the owner, is anyone's guess. He's invested in the team (although understandably he pulled-back while under that POS 2006 CBA), except at coach/GM. Although as we've seen, having "name" ones doesn't guarantee you anything.

 

I wish that Buffalo was a top market and there was no talk of the team moving. I also wish they could luck into getting a good QB again. The first isn't going to happen. The second...who knows?

 

 

Are you a season ticket holder?

 

I wish you would stop with your lame excuse that the Bills' historical record (a losing record) is due to a great extent to the limitations of its market. That is an absurd position to take, especially in a sport where a lagre portion of the revenue is shared and there is a salary cap. Tell that to Green Bay, Pitts and Baltimore. The Bills' historical record is mainly due to the way its been managed.

 

You never want to make the owner accountable for the record of the team as if he has nothing to do with the operation. If that is the case then who is the person who does the major hiring? Where I have a major difference with you is that I strongly believe that the caliber of ownership does have a meaningful relationship to the success of the franchise.

[Doc]

Only you would consider negotiating a network contract double the previous one to the equal benefit of all teams "dirty work". Yes the owners (the sentient ones anyway) knew what they wanted. But they also knew whcih owner was most likely to get it from the networks. And far as "NFL packages", there is mor available to the network than ever. And it has over the years expanded to cable (ESPN, NFLN) and even satellite. Not really scarce compared to, say 1970.

 

As you know, the G3 fund was a loan. It is paid back with revenue from premium seating. It's not free money. And the G4 program is currently available with up to 250 million for stadium renovation, so Ralph is free to utilize it. And it's hard to argue that a seller of a nonessential product (football games tickets) is "gouging" if he has sold out all of his inventory for 18 years and has a waiting list of over 50,000 customers to purchase his product. Sorry, Commrade, but in this country, that's not gouging. And he didn't sell PSL's like Mr. Mara did.

 

 

You leave out a few details regarding Bledsoe, Brady, Parcells, and BB. And calling the hiring of Parcells the turning point is "typical"--how exactly did Kraft prevent it from bing "undone"?--oh yeah, he hired Belichick. Carrol wasn't a great coach, but he never had a losing season there and had 2 playoff seasons out of three.

 

Kraft inherited Parcells and after losing to GB in 1996, Kraft and Parcells had a messy falling out, with the latter wanting to coach the Jets. BB followed Parcells to the Jets. Kraft was interested in BB--he lost a 1st round pick just for talking to him before he left the Jets. And BB was a guy with few people recommending him for another HC job. And as for Bledsoe, not sure what your point is. Yes, he was the starting QB and yes he was injured and went down for the season. They won a SB without him, but Brady was hardly the next league superstar QB even after the SB, as you would agree. The next season, with Bledsoe healthy, Belichick was the one who convinced Kraft to trade him (and get a first round pick) so that Brady could be the starter. Kraft agreed, even though he favored Bledsoe. It was a great decision.

 

"In this game,you better take some risks—or you'll have a nice team, and once every 10 or 20 years you'll be good. That's not what I want to be about."--Not Ralph Wilson.

You realize what "scarcity" means, right? Before Fox and other cable stations, there was NO scarcity since it was the NFC, AFC, and MNF packages spread-out among the only 3 major networks. When Fox entered, then TBS, etc., it created a scarcity for those 3 packages. The league sold itself once the salary cap was instituted and every city thought they had a chance to win it all, and the NFL owners realized this and played the networks against each other. And Ralph was "sentient" when Kraft was soiling his diapers, doing the dirty work to create the league we know today and which Kraft much later joined. He even saved Kraft's franchise.

 

As for the G-3, the loans are paid out of the visiting team's share of club seat and luxury box revenue. So basically any team who didn't partake of the G-3 loan (like Ralph) funded a stadium from which the owner got millions more in local revenue. So not only did he lose money, it also increased the salary cap. A double-whammy, if you will. And a new stadium would have meant raising prices to levels that most Buffalonians couldn't afford. So instead he demanded money to improve the existing stadium that was owned by the county and this allowed him to keep prices among the lowest in the league. But Kraft was smart to make that deal with Hartford, while what Ralph's doing with Toronto is horrible. Pure comedy.

 

I'd say the season ticket holders have a right to be pissed. But the "sentient" ones realize it's a small price to pay to keep the team viable.

 

Carroll took a team that was still young, had talent, and had just gone to the SB, and was driving it into the ground. Hence the reason he was fired. And yes, when Kraft used hired Belichick, he was laughed-at because of Belichick's failure in Cleveland. Luckily he found Brady (and started videotaping). But it still doesn't erase the fact that Parcells and Bledsoe resurrected that franchise (hence the reason why Gillette is called "the house that Bledsoe built") and they lucked-into finding Brady.

[K-9]

The value of the network contracts grew from 142 million in 1970. It took another 8 years to get to a billion dollars. In 1990, it was 3.6 billion---for 4 years. Then in 1994 Fox bought the NFC package for 5 billion over 4 years.

 

Then, in 1998 there is a massive commitment by the networks for the first long term deal---8 years and 17.8 billion. Clearly something had changed. The contract from 2006 to 2013 was at 20.4 billion. But the contract from 2014-22 doubled that to almost 40 billion.

 

Nostalgia is nice, but we are talking about an exponential increase in the value of the NFL as an advertising tool and massive profit source from the networks that has only occurred in the past 20 years. I believe the teams that have dominated the league and the culture in this time frame (NE, Giants, GB, Pittsburgh, Dallas) are responsible for the increase inthe value. That's all I'm saying.

 

We'll just have to disagree on what dynamics have come into play over the last 20 years that led to the exponential increase in broadcast fees. I'll just say that it has FAR more to do with what I've highlighted above along with other competing media outlets than anything any of the big market teams have accomplished (it's interesting that two of the teams you sight are considered small markets).

 

It ain't about nostalgia at all. If Kraft had been around when RW was being instrumental in establishing the NFL as a television powerhouse in the first place, perhaps I'd give him a bit more credit. He and his ilk inherited the golden goose. RW and his peers bred the golden goose in the first place.

 

The last thing I'll say on the subject. and this isn't necessarily directed towards you alone, is that it is quite possible to extol the virtues of Robert Kraft as an owner without denigrating those of another.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[dwight in philly]

I wish you would stop with your lame excuse that the Bills' historical record (a losing record) is due to a great extent to the limitations of its market. That is an absurd position to take, especially in a sport where a lagre portion of the revenue is shared and there is a salary cap. Tell that to Green Bay, Pitts and Baltimore. The Bills' historical record is mainly due to the way its been managed.

 

You never want to make the owner accountable for the record of the team as if he has nothing to do with the operation. If that is the case then who is the person who does the major hiring? Where I have a major difference with you is that I strongly believe that the caliber of ownership does have a meaningful relationship to the success of the franchise.

i hold ralph wilson totally responsible for the bills overall record. sure, the early nineties were great, im old enough to remember the mid-sixties championships also, but, more often than not, ralph has a tendency to shoot himself in the foot. everyone on here is probably familar with his misteps, so i wont go over them again. he has become a rich man as a result of owning the bills and we in turn should be grateful to him for providing the team, but winning comes in second, bottom line first and foremost.

[Doc]

I wish you would stop with your lame excuse that the Bills' historical record (a losing record) is due to a great extent to the limitations of its market. That is an absurd position to take, especially in a sport where a lagre portion of the revenue is shared and there is a salary cap. Tell that to Green Bay, Pitts and Baltimore. The Bills' historical record is mainly due to the way its been managed.

 

You never want to make the owner accountable for the record of the team as if he has nothing to do with the operation. If that is the case then who is the person who does the major hiring? Where I have a major difference with you is that I strongly believe that the caliber of ownership does have a meaningful relationship to the success of the franchise.

Before the salary cap, he was a cheap owner. Since then, he's spent money on the team. In the 90's, the team was wildly successful (would you say he was a good owner then?). In the 2000's, he hired a GM who was credited with turning around the Steelers in a move that was widely-hailed. He traded for Bledsoe. It didn't work out for whatever reason. We've gone over this. The problem is they haven't lucked-into finding a QB. I think this is well-known by now.

[eball]

The last thing I'll say on the subject. and this isn't necessarily directed towards you alone, is that it is quite possible to extol the virtues of Robert Kraft as an owner without denigrating those of another.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Thank you for this comment. All of us could stand to remember this concept with respect to ANY discussion that goes on here, or in any other forum.

[K-9]

Before the salary cap, he was a cheap owner. Since then, he's spent money on the team. In the 90's, the team was wildly successful (would you say he was a good owner then?). In the 2000's, he hired a GM who was credited with turning around the Steelers in a move that was widely-hailed. He traded for Bledsoe. It didn't work out for whatever reason. We've gone over this. The problem is they haven't lucked-into finding a QB. I think this is well-known by now.

 

That's not entirely true. RW had many of the highest paid players at their respective positions over the years, before the salary cap came into play.

 

It can be said that he skimped on head coaches but that comes with a caveat as well. He skimped on UNPROVEN coaches. At one time or another Rauch, Saban II, Knox, and Levy were all among the highest paid at their positions.

 

RW has been unwise in how he spent more than he was being cheap about things. But the buck simply stops with him (although Littman beat the crap out of it before it got to his desk on too many occasions) and he'd be the first to tell you how stupid he's been about it at times.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Doc]

That's not entirely true. RW had many of the highest paid players at their respective positions over the years, before the salary cap came into play.

 

It can be said that he skimped on head coaches but that comes with a caveat as well. He skimped on UNPROVEN coaches. At one time or another Rauch, Saban II, Knox, and Levy were all among the highest paid at their positions.

 

RW has been unwise in how he spent more than he was being cheap about things. But the buck simply stops with him (although Littman beat the crap out of it before it got to his desk on too many occasions) and he'd be the first to tell you how stupid he's been about it at times.

 

GO BILLS!!!

The main problem with the Bills is that they have lacked a good QB for years now. And since it's a QB-driven league, that's been a big problem.

[K-9]

The main problem with the Bills is that they have lacked a good QB for years now. And since it's a QB-driven league, that's been a big problem.

 

Can't agree more. It all comes down to that first sentence above. Period.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[JohnC]

Before the salary cap, he was a cheap owner. Since then, he's spent money on the team. In the 90's, the team was wildly successful (would you say he was a good owner then?). In the 2000's, he hired a GM who was credited with turning around the Steelers in a move that was widely-hailed. He traded for Bledsoe. It didn't work out for whatever reason. We've gone over this. The problem is they haven't lucked-into finding a QB. I think this is well-known by now.

 

Let me refresh your selective memory: The wildly successful 90s were the handiwork of Bill Polian the GM he fired. That was the worst of his many bad decisions he has ever made. I prefer not going into the details of that fiasco because I'm very aware that some fault can be directed to all the participants involved.

 

The GM he hired from the Steelers was Ton Donahoe. It didn't take too much research to know what type of person he was because he was basically fired by the Steelers for being an arrogant and nasty control freak who couldn't work with others. When he conducted himself in the same imperious way in Buffalo (even towards the owner) he was let go when his contraxt expired. The person who made the hire was Ralph. When you hire a man with intolerable flaws you get a man with intolerable flaws. It is not surprising that Donahoe hasn't been hired to work in a front office job with another team. He does do some freelancing consulting.

 

You can make all the lame excuses you want for the irrascible owner. The bottom line in a bottom line business is that for more than a half-century of ownership his team's winning record is less that 50%. I say to you what I have always said to you: Excuses are for losers. You are what your record is.

 

If the Bills are on a path to success, as I do believe, it will be due to the owner's lack of involvement in the operation.

Edited May 16, 2012 by JohnC

[RyanC883]

If it keeps the franchise in Buffalo, I'm all for it. Sure, the idea sucks, looks like it's about money, but we still have a team, we're not at the top of the "franchises to move to LA" list. And at least we're not like the Rams, playing games in London. THAT can't be about increasing fanbase!

 

 

Good points. And, this will keep us out of the other "international" games.

[A Dog Named Kelso]

I think the NFL should make it an away game for both teams