NoSaint Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 If the biggest story, arguably, in this franchise's history is "broken" via a seemingly drunken, grammatically-butchered rant from a message board and NO media member has/had the scoop? Then journalism is really dead. This would be too big of a story to keep a lid on IMO. But precisely the type of story media absolutely does not reply to unless confirmed. It's their job to report occurrences and developments not disprove message board rumors. never said it was. Just seems odd no JW in this. It seems as though he may be working Overtime to get the facts. He's usually on after a game is he not? Or he's writing a season conclusion piece and figuring out what's the story on chan? That would be the simplest answer. Could be your suspicion but given what we've heard I could come up with a lot of reasonable explanations to JW isn't on TBD tonight including "can't put my name in those rumor threads"
SDS Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 No SDS, I haven't been privy to all of those conversations. Please forward them to me do that I can eat crow in front of everyone. You have allowed (enabled) people on this message board to trash Ralph Wilson and wish for his untimely death. It's the truth - you own it SDS. Tell me otherwise. Is 4 years ago in the moderator discussion forum good enough for you? Here is the screenshot. Ah, snap.
NoSaint Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 Is 4 years ago in the moderator discussion forum good enough for you? Here is the screenshot. Ah, snap. I think we all know "Ralph should die" is waaaaay off limits. It's not a new discussion, not sure where he's getting his impression - it's been both peer and moderator policed throughout my time here.
TheFunPolice Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 this all seems bizarre and outlandish But who knows... the part about a video is not necessarily bizarre, but how is Jim Kelly going to own an NFL team? He doesn't have the $$. Why would someone pony up all the $$ and let Kelly run the team? It doesn't make sense to me.
SDS Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 I think we all know "Ralph should die" is waaaaay off limits. It's not a new discussion, not sure where he's getting his impression - it's been both peer and moderator policed throughout my time here. I don't know either. Many people have this horribly mistaken viewpoint that if something is posted and not removed that somehow it is officially sanctioned. My point is no one has the time, nor the energy to do that every single day, with every single post. We do what we can, when we can, and we rely heavily on user reported posts to fill out the rest.
b stein 22 Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 (edited) this all seems bizarre and outlandish But who knows... the part about a video is not necessarily bizarre, but how is Jim Kelly going to own an NFL team? He doesn't have the $$. Why would someone pony up all the $$ and let Kelly run the team? It doesn't make sense to me. Jim Kelly would not make the football decisions of the team. That is for the GM of the team to do. Only stupid owners like Jerry Jones who think they are smarter than everyone else make stupid football decisions that set the team back. Bill Parcells almost created another Super Bowl team before Jerry screwed that up. I guess with my limited knowledge Jim Kelly would be responsible for getting a competent GM and coaching staff in Buffalo Edited December 31, 2012 by b stein 22
first_and_ten Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 this all seems bizarre and outlandish But who knows... the part about a video is not necessarily bizarre, but how is Jim Kelly going to own an NFL team? He doesn't have the $$. Why would someone pony up all the $$ and let Kelly run the team? It doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't make any sense to You BECAUSE IT MAKES NO SENSE.
Boom Jam Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 Let's own this together then - I'm all in. Your post was pinned (ten years too late in my opionion) and Just Jack shut down my response to a closed pinned thread. Fine and whatever. I'm really not up for doing a search on "until he dies" or "estate" or "sells" or "taxes" or really anything else - but a pinned thread is there for a reason and it was your pinned thread SDS. You have provided the arena for these conversations about Ralph Wilson's eventual death - and you and your moderators sit idly by and do nothing but close threads that are duplicates of some other topic. Ralph Wison's death seems to be OK with you and the other moderators. I guess I should have said something ten years ago. I guess I should have called you the hypocrite that you are way back then.
kasper13 Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 Jim Kelly never said he was going to own 50 or 100% of the team. If all or any of this is true and I believe that it is based on all the clues and info that has come out over the last few months, Kelly will own a small percentage of the team. I have said it elsewhere on here, an NFL franchise can have up to 24 owners or investors as long as there is a main owner that has 30%. If Ralph keeps a percentage and sells the rest, it is very conceivable that Kelly & Thomas buy a small percentage. Example: Team sells for $700 million. There is one big main money guy taking 50% for $350 mil. Ralph keeps 30% for himself and his family, that is worth $210 million. That leaves 20% available at a cost of $140 mil with up to 22 available investors to buy/invest in a percentage of the team and they would very much be an owner of the team. If 22 other people said give me 1% of the Bills, it would cost $6.3 mil for each 1%. Are there 22 people in WNY that have $6.3 million for a percent ownership in the Bills? Of course there is. I could name them off the top of my head. People are fixated on the statement "Jim Kelly and Thurman Thomas are going to own the Bills" and the follow up "How could they? They don't have the money". They both have the money for a percent or two.
TheFunPolice Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 Jim Kelly never said he was going to own 50 or 100% of the team. If all or any of this is true and I believe that it is based on all the clues and info that has come out over the last few months, Kelly will own a small percentage of the team. I have said it elsewhere on here, an NFL franchise can have up to 24 owners or investors as long as there is a main owner that has 30%. If Ralph keeps a percentage and sells the rest, it is very conceivable that Kelly & Thomas buy a small percentage. Example: Team sells for $700 million. There is one big main money guy taking 50% for $350 mil. Ralph keeps 30% for himself and his family, that is worth $210 million. That leaves 20% available at a cost of $140 mil with up to 22 available investors to buy/invest in a percentage of the team and they would very much be an owner of the team. If 22 other people said give me 1% of the Bills, it would cost $6.3 mil for each 1%. Are there 22 people in WNY that have $6.3 million for a percent ownership in the Bills? Of course there is. I could name them off the top of my head. People are fixated on the statement "Jim Kelly and Thurman Thomas are going to own the Bills" and the follow up "How could they? They don't have the money". They both have the money for a percent or two. I get that, but what difference would owning 1% (or even 5%) of the team make? How would that give the 5% owner any real say in anything?
kasper13 Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 Kelly or Thomas never said they would have any say in anything. Kelly never said anything other than the Bills are not leaving and he has investors lined up. If they do get 1% or 5% of the team, they are part owners and that is it. Just having their names on it helps. I would think they would just get to go to the games for free and sit in a suite and give interviews and sign autographs.....kind of like they do now AND collect profits on their investment. Bills haven't lost money since 1963. They make money every single year. Sweet deal if you can get in.
JM57 Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 I get that, but what difference would owning 1% (or even 5%) of the team make? How would that give the 5% owner any real say in anything? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_directors
OJ Dingo Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 I get that, but what difference would owning 1% (or even 5%) of the team make? How would that give the 5% owner any real say in anything? Owning 1% or 5% of a business doesn't give you much of a voice in how things are run. But by Jim Kelly owning 1%-5%, he would likely gain the following two things: It's an investment in a business - Owning a small percentage of a publicly traded company doesn't mean you get to decide the day to day operations of how thing run, but you can reap the profits of the organization's work. Jim Kelly is arguably the most famous Buffalo Bill of all time - Given his status with the franchise, he would likely have more of an influence on the decisions made by those who own a larger share of the organization.
ny33 Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 Owning 1% or 5% of a business doesn't give you much of a voice in how things are run. But by Jim Kelly owning 1%-5%, he would likely gain the following two things: It's an investment in a business - Owning a small percentage of a publicly traded company doesn't mean you get to decide the day to day operations of how thing run, but you can reap the profits of the organization's work. Jim Kelly is arguably the most famous Buffalo Bill of all time - Given his status with the franchise, he would likely have more of an influence on the decisions made by those who own a larger share of the organization. Think of Jay-Z and the Nets, or Magic Johnson and the Dodgers.
TheFunPolice Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 Owning 1% or 5% of a business doesn't give you much of a voice in how things are run. But by Jim Kelly owning 1%-5%, he would likely gain the following two things: It's an investment in a business - Owning a small percentage of a publicly traded company doesn't mean you get to decide the day to day operations of how thing run, but you can reap the profits of the organization's work. Jim Kelly is arguably the most famous Buffalo Bill of all time - Given his status with the franchise, he would likely have more of an influence on the decisions made by those who own a larger share of the organization. Yeah, that makes sense. Kelly would probably be mostly a PR type role.
sweatpantsjoe Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 I know I'm late to the discussion, I was at work all day but that might be the dumbest post I've ever read in my life. If he's not up for coming to Buffalo for a press conference, he can easily do it via conference call. This whole story of him video taping making a statement of him stepping down or whatever sounds like something out of the WWE and not an NFL owner. This whole thing is absurd and I can't believe this thread has made it to 12 pages and counting now. Just wow.
UConn James Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 I know I'm late to the discussion, I was at work all day but that might be the dumbest post I've ever read in my life. If he's not up for coming to Buffalo for a press conference, he can easily do it via conference call. This whole story of him video taping making a statement of him stepping down or whatever sounds like something out of the WWE and not an NFL owner. This whole thing is absurd and I can't believe this thread has made it to 12 pages and counting now. Just wow. I believe the intention would be for him to control his message and image, without a lot being lost in the disarray that is a real-time speaking event. Even for people far younger, smarter, more tactful, and telegenic than Ralph is, pulling off a good impression and getting out the exact message you want to have heard during a live presser is damned difficult. I make no guff in how Ralph decides to present his message, what format it's delivered in, how it's produced. What matters is its content. If rumors are to be believed, then this would likely be his final appearance where a lot of people are going to be watching. I would want strict control over that as well, if it were going to be the parting impression on a group of people that would in large part be determining my legacy. It's tantamount to how Pres. Reagan bade farewell to the nation on one of his good days.
Kiwi Bills fan Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 For what it's worth... It's almost midnight on New Year's Eve, over here in New Zealand, (in other words, we're in your future) and we still haven't heard any news from ol' Ralph. I guess they won't meet their New Years tax deadline.
Justice Posted December 31, 2012 Posted December 31, 2012 I know I'm late to the discussion, I was at work all day but that might be the dumbest post I've ever read in my life. If he's not up for coming to Buffalo for a press conference, he can easily do it via conference call. This whole story of him video taping making a statement of him stepping down or whatever sounds like something out of the WWE and not an NFL owner. This whole thing is absurd and I can't believe this thread has made it to 12 pages and counting now. Just wow. If you believe what's being said it is easy to see what's going on in Buffalo. Thurman tweets "it's on like a MOFO": He later reveals to John Murphy that it isn't ownership or coach related. He also insinuates we'll know by Monday. Now this doesn't mean Chan is safe, it just means Thurman knows something else about the Bills, other than coaching or ownership. Russ Brandon meets with Jon Gruden: It wasn't Buddy Nix doing the talking, so he might be on the outs. Brandon, on Ralph's orders, is doing his due diligence and trying to find the next guy to run the team. Ralph Wilson prepares a video with a message to Bills nation: This can mean many things, changing of ownership to beat a deadline, IMO, is highly unlikely. Take what we know about Russ' meeting and all signs point to Buddy Nix's removal as GM, but more likely, RW will give up control of the Bills and name a new President or announce that he will be offering the president title as bait for a bigger name to be named later and then that guy can do the dirty work of dumping Chix or possibly even keeping one or both of them, if he so chooses. This is where Thurman's tweet comes into play. It could be he's in the know of a possible RW replacement. Maybe it's Kelly. Maybe it's Polian. Thurman knows these two personally, so he could have some insider info, but I doubt it will be either of them. If anything, Jim Kelly will be handed a job in the front office. In the end, I predict RW will step down as President, retain ownership, and have Russ Brandon/Jim Kelly find the best available/willing guy to be President and run this organization from head to toe. Chan and Buddy will not be fired tomorrow, but will be let go once a new president has been named.
Recommended Posts