NoSaint Posted March 27, 2014 Posted March 27, 2014 Again I'll state that the Bills should not be the team to move. http://espn.go.com/n...Pct/order/false Average lowest attendance % 2013 # 1 Oak # 2 Miami # 3 Wash # 6 Jax # 9 Buffalo Average lowest attendance % 2012 # 1 Miami # 4 Oak # 6 Wash # 7 Buffalo # 10 Cincy # 16 Jax Average lowest attendance % 2011 # 1 Cincy # 2 Miami # 3 Wash # 4 Oak # 7 Buffalo # 9 Jax its not as simple as saying "not last place!" i would venture. im not arguing the bills SHOULD move, but that they are simply one of the logical candidates.
BigBuff423 Posted March 27, 2014 Posted March 27, 2014 (edited) That is wishful thinking. Any contract can be broken. A new owner can just flat out put WNY on notice and pay the fine. You cant keep a NEW owner from moving the team that made a contract under another owner. Bottom line the Courts will allow the Bills to move and the new owner to pay the 400 million I wish I understood where all this simplicity is coming from...here's something simple, the NFL maintains rights and privileges over any Franchise that bears its insignia and therefore, holds the trump card for IF and WHEN an NFL Franchise relocates...the owner can't just pick up his toys in the sandbox and go build a new sandbox and have the NFL validate such...it requires NFL approval and that ain't happenin any time soon...will it every happen? Who the hell knows...but an owner CANNOT just move the team without NFL approval...Roger on High answered it saying, "They (BILLS) have a lease", saying until that lease is satisfied, nothing is going nowhere...now, after the lease and the all powerful "opt out" clause six years from now is a different story...but one does not dictate the other and they are two different issues altogether...just because a new owner "can" opt out of the lease, doesn't mean the NFL will *approve* a move to a different city...the opt out was so that if the BILLS were to build a new stadium, they could void the lease and begin use of the new stadium...NOT so a team could move, again which is determined BY THE NFL! People thinking an "owner" can just arbitrarily decide to move a team without NFL approval is forgetting that the NFL *approves* ALL owners as in, King Tut could offer the Wilson family 40 trillion dollars and it would still be based on NFL approval, the Wilson family can't just take the money and run for the hills...even though in such a scenario, I'm SURE the NFL owners would approve something like that b/c no doubt there would be cash in it for them....it's just exhausting and infuriating to see people say things like, "an owner can do what he / she / they want"...it's just not true...this isn't simple capitalism in regards to NFL bylaws...so please, can we kill the idea that the BILLS are moving anywhere in the next 6 years, new owner or not?? Edited March 27, 2014 by BigBuff423
SF Bills Fan Posted March 27, 2014 Posted March 27, 2014 The Raiders will pick up and go back to LA. They still consider it "home turf" and lay claim to it. The franchise is valued about where the Bills are. Mark Davis has said he has thought about it. He has even less loyalty to Oakland than Al. By moving to LA. the value of the franchise goes way up. They may not even have to pay the penalty for relocation since they still lay claim to LA. They will not get a new stadium in Oakland next year and they play in a terrible stadium older than the Ralph and they have poor attendance. Now that the Niners have their shiny new stadium,watch and see next year how this picks up steam when they are rejected for a new stadium. Since people are discussing Buffalo as a possible relocation option for LA, Mark Davis will think about getting there sooner than later. I would put money on it. No way he will let another LA team reap the benefits of an area they feel is theirs. Check back with me on this post in 3 years.
TSNBDSC Posted March 27, 2014 Posted March 27, 2014 (edited) Not going nowhere. Bills are staying here. Edited March 27, 2014 by tsnbd
thebandit27 Posted March 27, 2014 Posted March 27, 2014 That is wishful thinking. Any contract can be broken. A new owner can just flat out put WNY on notice and pay the fine. You cant keep a NEW owner from moving the team that made a contract under another owner. Bottom line the Courts will allow the Bills to move and the new owner to pay the 400 million No, he can't. Read the thread; the language is quite clear. The $400M is a liquidated damages penalty in the event that the team found a way to prevent the County from enjoining a potential move--which is nearly impossible given the language of the lease and the laws.
BUFFALOKIE Posted March 27, 2014 Posted March 27, 2014 No, he can't. Read the thread; the language is quite clear. LOL. Clear as mud! I dont even understand your simplified interpretation. But I do Billieve you! No friggin way the Bills move.
The Wiz Posted March 27, 2014 Posted March 27, 2014 No, he can't. Read the thread; the language is quite clear. The $400M is a liquidated damages penalty in the event that the team found a way to prevent the County from enjoining a potential move--which is nearly impossible given the language of the lease and the laws. That and the fact that the NFL would need to agree on the new owner. Then they would need to vote to relocate the team or not. Also fan loyalty plays a part in the trust agreement from what I read in another thread.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 So many threads on the same subject. Are the Bills making $$$, I think the answer is yes. so why the move talk? If the Bills were not in a 14 year playoff drought do you think this would even be an issue? Moving the team is not going to improve their overall record.
Malazan Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 (edited) That is wishful thinking. Any contract can be broken. A new owner can just flat out put WNY on notice and pay the fine. You cant keep a NEW owner from moving the team that made a contract under another owner. Bottom line the Courts will allow the Bills to move and the new owner to pay the 400 million Read. They have to win a court case before they get the privilege to pay the $400 million. The NFL would have to back them (I'm sure they'd love a court case that would drag on for a year or two to move a team from the only city it has been in). They would then have a relocation fee from the NFL. Or wait 7 years and move them with no hassle. Just because your mind conceives something doesn't mean it qualifies as a thought. Are the Bills making $$$, I think the answer is yes. so why the move talk? Keep in mind, Ralph had no loans. A new owner could very well have loan payments. Edited March 28, 2014 by jeremy2020
NoSaint Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 Are the Bills making $$$, I think the answer is yes. so why the move talk? because the obvious question after a billion dollar investment is "how could i be making more money" and the market is a question mark for a new owner. i feel like ive seen you make the argument that they are profitable, and not last place in any of the measurements discussed so you dont think it makes sense -- but i think that too narrowly defines the discussion around the issue.
Beerball Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 because the obvious question after a billion dollar investment is "how could i be making more money" and the market is a question mark for a new owner. i feel like ive seen you make the argument that they are profitable, and not last place in any of the measurements discussed so you dont think it makes sense -- but i think that too narrowly defines the discussion around the issue. Billion dollar investment plus new stadium = debt. Ralph had no team debt, the new guy(s)...not so much.
KGUNBILLS Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 It would never work. Everyone knows Buffalo is a cold weather team. That's my argument to Roger Goodell anyways.
White Linen Posted March 28, 2014 Posted March 28, 2014 I'll bet the Bills, when they do go up for sale, will go for a lot more than the Forbes value of $870 million. I believe this to be true as well, especially when it would be a "bidding war".
Recommended Posts