CodeMonkey Posted December 4, 2013 Posted December 4, 2013 Agreed. Buffalo would lose a piece of its identity if they were to host games inside a Dome Bad weather is a great equalizer for bad teams.
PromoTheRobot Posted December 4, 2013 Posted December 4, 2013 I would like anyone to point out the last game the Bills won over a warm weather team because of the elements or crowd noise. That's all people were talking about with the Falcons game. (Oh, what a tragic loss of home field advantage, yadda yadda.) Rams game Dec 9 2012? Dome team. We lost 15-12. Miami game, Dec 18 2011? 30-23 loss. I don't recall Miami having much trouble with the cold. The only game I can recall the weather having any affect on a Bills win was Dec 1 2002 against Miami. The Dolphins were up 14-3 when a blizzard wit in the 2Q and the Bills roared back to win 38-21. In fact if we are such an awesome bad weather team why did we lose to Cleveland in that blizzard game? PTR
CodeMonkey Posted December 4, 2013 Posted December 4, 2013 In fact if we are such an awesome bad weather team why did we lose to Cleveland in that blizzard game? I'm not saying the Bills are a great bad weather team. But the bad weather tends to equalize teams. For example in that game you mentioned above (and I think I am still thawing out from ), if they had been playing the Pats* for example, it tends to equalize the teams because in that case the Pats best weapon, Marcia, would be reduced to handing off and praying just like the Bills were.
The Big Cat Posted December 4, 2013 Posted December 4, 2013 I would like anyone to point out the last game the Bills won over a warm weather team because of the elements or crowd noise. That's all people were talking about with the Falcons game. (Oh, what a tragic loss of home field advantage, yadda yadda.) Rams game Dec 9 2012? Dome team. We lost 15-12. Miami game, Dec 18 2011? 30-23 loss. I don't recall Miami having much trouble with the cold. The only game I can recall the weather having any affect on a Bills win was Dec 1 2002 against Miami. The Dolphins were up 14-3 when a blizzard wit in the 2Q and the Bills roared back to win 38-21. In fact if we are such an awesome bad weather team why did we lose to Cleveland in that blizzard game? PTR Didn't they beat Jacksonville in the snow last year?
Webster Guy Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 (edited) But wait, according to Russ Brandon "We’ve had great growth in the Southern Ontario marketplace over the last five years back here at Ralph Wilson Stadium." Where are all the Canandian ticket buyers now Russ? We sold out the Miami game 6 years ago before the Toronto mistake, how are we doing now with all the people that became magically aware and interested in the Bills because they played once a year in a lame setting with overpriced tickets? Hilarious. Yeah OK Russ, that whopping 38k tickets sales for the Toronto game really shows your efforts. You did it because Ralph picked up $80M for the deal (minus the lost revenues from hosting the home games). Don't try to make it sound like you made more Canadians want to come and see Bills games because you won ONE game in 5 years in Toronto you schmuck. Who do you think you're fooling? Sorry but he reminds me so much of Tom Donahoe. Arrogant, spinning so much BS they start to believe it themselves. Edited December 5, 2013 by Webster Guy
Meatloaf Sandwich Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 Maybe they should put 2 games in Toronto. Or 1 in London and 1 in Toronto. You don't support your team and soon you won't have a team left in your city.
tito1 Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 Ill be there and driving from columbus ohio unless some blizzard comes thru
bigK14094 Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 (edited) I'm not saying the Bills are a great bad weather team. But the bad weather tends to equalize teams. For example in that game you mentioned above (and I think I am still thawing out from ), if they had been playing the Pats* for example, it tends to equalize the teams because in that case the Pats best weapon, Marcia, would be reduced to handing off and praying just like the Bills were. Actually, those teams that PRACTICE in bad weather conditions like our open Ralph stadium are more ready to play in those conditions, from footing to knowing the air currents. Its called home field advantage. So, bad weather at home, IF you practice in it, is an advantage to the home team. Clearly those advantages disappear in Toronto...footing equally bad and unfamiliar to both teams, and, of course, no winds either. (Jauron never practiced outside...Marrone has been known to practice outside at least some of the time) Edited December 5, 2013 by bigK14094
bobobonators Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 Agreed. Buffalo would lose a piece of its identity if they were to host games inside a Dome I also agree. No need for a dome. Also, I watch CNN - global warming is coming.
PromoTheRobot Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/04/20000-tickets-remain-for-bills-home-finale/ Some folks in Buffalo would point gleefully to the inability of Toronto to sell tickets to Bills games. Some folks in Toronto would point gleefully to the inability of Buffalo to sell tickets to Bills game. Some folks in L.A. would point gleefully to both. Yeah, let's stick it to Ralph and stay home! PTR
QCity Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 I'm not saying the Bills are a great bad weather team. But the bad weather tends to equalize teams. For example in that game you mentioned above (and I think I am still thawing out from ), if they had been playing the Pats* for example, it tends to equalize the teams because in that case the Pats best weapon, Marcia, would be reduced to handing off and praying just like the Bills were. He thinks RWS is no advantage over Toronto, and has been doubling (tripling?) down on that stupidity all week.
NoSaint Posted December 5, 2013 Author Posted December 5, 2013 I'm not saying the Bills are a great bad weather team. But the bad weather tends to equalize teams. For example in that game you mentioned above (and I think I am still thawing out from ), if they had been playing the Pats* for example, it tends to equalize the teams because in that case the Pats best weapon, Marcia, would be reduced to handing off and praying just like the Bills were. somehow, brady seems to be the exception to this rule as well -- last year i saw his stats in snow games and they seemed better than his ones on beautiful days! i will agree that the ralph, if for nothing other than crowd involvement is better... playing in the elements, we have small quick wrs and a shifty back that excels in agility - neither of which screams that it would excel in december, but thats a pretty broad generalization on my part.... its nice that we hopefully have a qb that can play in the elements, but im not sure our team is well designed for a sloppy, windy game when compared to say atlanta that has roddy white and gonzalez, a big back in jackson, matt ryan who has played more cold weather games than our qb, etc....
zow2 Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 The main problem for the Bills is that the stadium is WAY TOO big. It's the 10th largest stadium in the NFL. http://en.wikipedia....ums_by_capacity I would like to see the new stadium be a 62-65K seat dome (the Bears and Steelers #'s, respectively). The dome will attract the fans who stay home due to the cold, can be used year round, and our greatest asset--the 12th man--will be available in all weather conditions. It would be the loudest stadium in the NFL without a doubt. It always bewilders me that the "New" Soldier Field seats 61,500 at capacity while Buffalo has to sell 73K tickets. I realize the avg. ticket price in Chicago is more but it's a metro area of over 9 million people! Where's the fairness in blackout rules concerning this. I guess that's why the owners agreed to the 85% rule that Buffalo decided not to use. That's the only reason Tampa is getting all their games on local TV and probably a few others.
NoSaint Posted December 5, 2013 Author Posted December 5, 2013 It always bewilders me that the "New" Soldier Field seats 61,500 at capacity while Buffalo has to sell 73K tickets. I realize the avg. ticket price in Chicago is more but it's a metro area of over 9 million people! Where's the fairness in blackout rules concerning this. I guess that's why the owners agreed to the 85% rule that Buffalo decided not to use. That's the only reason Tampa is getting all their games on local TV and probably a few others. the fairness is no one said the bills had to go larger than soldier field.
CardinalScotts Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 at the same time we want them to end the Toronto series - why? So we can be given the option of not going- then not go
BillnutinHouston Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 at the same time we want them to end the Toronto series - why? So we can be given the option of not going- then not go Outstanding post.
FLFan Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 It always bewilders me that the "New" Soldier Field seats 61,500 at capacity while Buffalo has to sell 73K tickets. I realize the avg. ticket price in Chicago is more but it's a metro area of over 9 million people! Where's the fairness in blackout rules concerning this. I guess that's why the owners agreed to the 85% rule that Buffalo decided not to use. That's the only reason Tampa is getting all their games on local TV and probably a few others. Perhaps not fair, but look at it this way. If you lived in Chicago, you would likely not be able to afford to see many or perhaps any games live, as there is high demand for very expensive seats. At least in Buffalo you can buy a ticket and go to the game. In Chicago (as in Washington, Baltimore, NE, Dallas, etc) the average fan is priced out of the stadium. Even with the smaller capacity, I would venture to guess that Chicago's average revenue per home game is significantly more than Buffalo's, even double or triple. Buffalo needs the ticket revenue associated with the larger capacity to survive.
billykaykay Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 That's probably a good idea overall, but I personally hate the idea of watching games in a dome. I love the fact that football is played in the elements. Retractable dome.
May Day 10 Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 You know it really pisses me off that Brandon felt he had to point out that only 2 games were true sellouts. So being short 2-3 thousand people in a 70K stadium is some slight to the fans!? 14 years without playoffs and you think this bad attendance Russ? Get a grip you bum, put a winner out there and this topic will never be brought up again. Oh yea - and screw your whole Toronto idea - it killed the playoff dream. I cant stand it when he kicks dirt in our face and each time I consider dropping my seasons. Didnt the New England, Carolina, and Baltimore games all sold out "naturally", right? That is 3. "Manufactured" was the buy-up of the last seats vs Jets, Cincinnati, and KC? Not "4 or 5" like Mr. Slime says. I cant believe Im forced to defend us against this. Outstanding post. applies to the all the other teams who cant sell out? http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance
PromoTheRobot Posted December 5, 2013 Posted December 5, 2013 He thinks RWS is no advantage over Toronto, and has been doubling (tripling?) down on that stupidity all week. So you are saying the Bills are so fragile they fumbled twice because they weren't in their home stadium?
Recommended Posts