BrooklynBills Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 Feel free to add to the list, but here is a Sparks Notes version of why the Bills are staying put (in no particular order): 1. The Lease 2. The tradition of an AFL original 3. Intensely loyal, blue collar, and rabid fans that provide a college atmosphere. 4. The Commish is from WNY and he did admit to Berman that he is a Bills fan. 5. We can debate their worth, but having the politicos (Cuomo, Schumer, etc) on our side doesn't hurt. 6. Multiple options for a new stadium 7. Recent (current) renovations to RSW 8. Guys like Kraft have gone on record saying they want to keep the Bills in WNY 9. The Bills "unofficial" market, stretching east past Rochester to Syracuse, north and west into Ontario, and south to Erie, is Fuccillo huuuge. 10. There are people with Bflo ties who are monied. 11. The Buffalo Fan Alliance can't save the team on its own, but it does send a message about us, doesn't it? 12. ? The Stadium situation is all that matters. Teams only move due to stadium issues. If we can't figure out a new stadium, they are gone. If we can, they'll stay.
Hplarrm Posted May 16, 2014 Author Posted May 16, 2014 The OP has made some good points here. A few thoughts: 1) There is certainly a balance that has to be met between the profitability of the franchise vs. the profitability of the NFL. But, I'm not entirely sure that plays in Buffalo's favor. The league must look at the size of each fan base, as well as how the participation of the team affects the NFL brand. The OP makes the point that the participation of the Bills, an original AFL team, helps maintain the brand and lend weight to the leagues traditional roots. That certainly is true, and a good point, but the overall fan base is small. So, what would present a net benefit to the league? Keeping a small, original franchise, or turning that franchise into a much larger fan base, e.g. Los Angeles? 2) If the sale of the Bills drags on (which, hopefully won't happen), seven years may actually time out perfectly for the Bills to be moved. 3) I'm not convinced that hockey is an apt comparison. The NFL has a much larger market, and having two teams that close together in a far less dense market than NY, could present too much overlap. 4) If the NFL sees a move out of Buffalo as financially beneficial, I don't think it will be hard to get that 75% vote. 5) Nothing against Upstate NY (I was born and raised there!) but, It's cold up there! (...and, kinda boring...) It may not be too hard to convince the players to move! Good points, though from the OP. The answer is follow the money. The Bills have higher value to the NFL as giving them a better product to sell and entertaining story to tell for expanding the NFL to Mexico City, Toronto, Stuggart, Tokyo, and Beijing as new franchises and new eyeballs to sell to advertisers if you are selling these new franchises a connection to original NFL and AFL teams. Even worse, if the Bills move and that creates a 7-10 year long death march story it makes telling a good mythic story harder to do. There is a real numeric value difference between small markets like Buffalo and big markets like LA. However, there is also a big difference between the huge dollars from the TV nets (divided equally between teams)and the 1/31st of the proceeds from a larger marker. This is mostly about the entertainment stories the NFL is selling. Its a far better mythic story to sell with the Bills in Buffalo.
SF Bills Fan Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 If there was a danger that they would move, we would know about it. There are so many people monitoring this that it would be sniffed out and exposed. Shumer and Cuomo would be making threats about suits etc. The fact is, this lease situation scared off the outsiders. Nobody wants to buy the team and sit on it and lose hundreds of millions for 6 years while they wait to move the team to a city. The NFL doesn't want a barren stadium and a hostile fan base. It would be a PR nightmare. Another market may not even be available when the time is right. what would some LA fat cat do if he bought the team and planned to move them there and then the Raiders go back? Too much risk. Even Thurman Thomas said last week that Ralph had a plan in place. I believe the owner is already identified. The process is in motion. I'm 99% sure they stay put. The real unknown here is where does the new stadium go?
Dr. Who Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 As a New England fan I see no way you guys move. You've got a great fan base that stretches to Toronto to the north and Syracuse to the east. I know Bob Kraft spoke recently saying he wants the Bills as an original afl team to stay in WNY and in the AFC East. I personally go to Buffalo every year when the Patriots come to town and find it refreshing to see a fan base and city like yours. The passion is always there win or lose and its a great gameday experience. The Bills are a huge part of the NFL and moving them to a place like LA doesn't help the league but hurt it. Thank you for your kind words, but I prefer Pats fans that are jerks. That way I can hate them with a good conscience
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 16, 2014 Posted May 16, 2014 Waaay too long. I got bored after the 7th paragraph and quit. not me I got bored after the 2nd paragraph and quit.
Big Gun Posted May 17, 2014 Posted May 17, 2014 I don't think the Bills are going anywhere. Take LA out of the equation and for all the talk, the NFL isn't ever expanding out of the country. Teams outside of the USA would never be able to attract free agents, so this talk of expanding outside of the USA is bunk if you ask me. For the Bills moving, where are they going to go? Just about every city/market bigger or equal to Buffalo/WNY already has a team. If you think about it, there really isn't any cities to go to. Portland? don't really see it, Salt Lake? no way. Columbus? 3 Ohio teams, no, Las Vegas? never, San Antonio? maybe but I doubt it, Anchorage or Honolulu, no again. There isn't anywhere to move them. IMO I don't think they are moving anytime soon.
Mickey Posted May 17, 2014 Posted May 17, 2014 Waaay too long. I got bored after the 7th paragraph and quit. Made it further than I did.
yungmack Posted May 17, 2014 Posted May 17, 2014 (edited) I think you're right; I'm hoping the Rams return to LA and the Chargers and Raider should stay put. If the Rams leave St. Louis, that's when you can start really worrying about the Bills leaving. Edited May 17, 2014 by yungmack
maryland-bills-fan Posted May 17, 2014 Posted May 17, 2014 espn said It's going to cost $800 million just to renovate the Coliseum. Adding in the cost of getting a team and funding it eliminates most of the top businessmen in the country. That's why the group will spend next month talking to business leaders in both cities trying to see if it can work financially. The NFL knows California's ability to use public money is, to say the least, limited. This is extra money needed above the cost of buying a team
machine gun kelly Posted May 17, 2014 Posted May 17, 2014 To the previous comment, your spot on. I've said for quite some time. A new owner to take our Bills to LA would be too costly and risky. What if the Rams move there in two years? This owner is stuck with the Bills in Buffalo for 9-10 years. He also needs 2.5 billion dollars, as they don't have public funds for a stadium. Then there is the fee to move the team. Too much risk to move in 10 years when someone can beat them to LA. I believe we'll be fine. Besides the NFL owners do not want the mess they had in Cleveland. They also do not want to create enemies with Cuomo, and Schumer. I don't agree with Schumer's politics, but he is one of the most powerful Senators in the US Senate.
DPR4444 Posted May 18, 2014 Posted May 18, 2014 for what it's worth.... Mary Wilson accepted UB’s Chancellor Charles P. Norton Medal on behalf of her late husband, Buffalo Bills owner Ralph Wilson Jr. at the UB graduation ceremony today. I saw this as i casually paid attention to the local news. Presenting the Medal was,,,,,, Jeremy Jacobs. Also, in her acceptance speech, obviously, she didn't address the ownership situation, but apparently did reference Ralph's love for the WNY area several times. I'll try to find a link for more info, but i thought it was interesting nonetheless.
DPR4444 Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 as promised http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/amherst/2014/05/18/ralph-wilson-awarded-top-ub-honor/9260163/
Big Turk Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 How bout #1 is they cannot even consider a bid from someone planning on moving the team?
Greg F Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 (edited) How bout #1 is they cannot even consider a bid from someone planning on moving the team? Well they can, they just can't sell to someone who is planning to move the team prior to the expiration of the stadium lease agreement. IOW, anyone who expresses an intent to break the stadium lease agreement is off limits. From the lease agreement: ... sell, assign or otherwise transfer the Team to any Person who, to the Bills’ knowledge, has an intention to relocate, transfer or otherwise move the Team during the Non-Relocation Term to a location other than the Stadium; Edited May 19, 2014 by Greg F
The Frankish Reich Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 Some very good points here (one I'd never heard before, that Goodell's WNY roots give us a behind the scenes advantage), but I'm gonna be honest -- plenty of in in-denial thinking too. My honest assessment is that we're safe for roughly 7 years given the financial hit to moving, which will probably scare off most potential buy-and-move buyers. After that? We're at the mercy of events outside our control. If someone beats the Bills to LA, good. If not, we become the best candidate to move there. I'm guessing the Chargers stake their claim and move out first; if not, I'd watch out for the Raiders (the NFL has seemingly lost the will to fight them) or Rams or Jags. At any rate, someone ought to beat us to LA. It's Toronto I worry about. Sorry but it just makes too much sense for the same reasons San Diego to LA makes too much sense -- a much larger economy just a couple hours up the road, and with Toronto you pick up the entire Canadian market.
Rocky Landing Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 Some very good points here (one I'd never heard before, that Goodell's WNY roots give us a behind the scenes advantage), but I'm gonna be honest -- plenty of in in-denial thinking too. My honest assessment is that we're safe for roughly 7 years given the financial hit to moving, which will probably scare off most potential buy-and-move buyers. After that? We're at the mercy of events outside our control. If someone beats the Bills to LA, good. If not, we become the best candidate to move there. I'm guessing the Chargers stake their claim and move out first; if not, I'd watch out for the Raiders (the NFL has seemingly lost the will to fight them) or Rams or Jags. At any rate, someone ought to beat us to LA. It's Toronto I worry about. Sorry but it just makes too much sense for the same reasons San Diego to LA makes too much sense -- a much larger economy just a couple hours up the road, and with Toronto you pick up the entire Canadian market. I've been living in L.A. for over 20 years, now (born and raised in Rochester), and have been following the LA/NFL situation fairly closely. I think the Chargers are pretty much safe in San Diego. That's a solid market. Apparently, the Jags are off the table for moving anywhere. I would say that the Rams, and the Raiders are the top two candidates, in that order, with the Bills third. But, I think it is a mistake to think there is a race to LA. If someone bought the Bills with the intention of moving them after seven years, they wold have to have a deal already worked out with Los Angeles AND the NFL. That would exclude another team from moving in before them. A Bills move to LA seems unlikely at this moment-- and the sooner a sale takes place, the less likely it is. But, it's not outside the realm of possibility.
SF Bills Fan Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 ^ you are right- the Jags have an even more iron clad lease agreement that makes it extremely hard to move- far more so than the Bills. Sadly, that is the team that SHOULD be moving. I agree, I think the Chargers are completely safe in San Diego and the rumblings from ownership are just an idle threat. San Diego is a great market very wealthy it would be stupid to leave there. I live in the Bay Area and I can tell you the Raiders already have 1 foot out of the door here. They're never going to get a new stadium over in the East Bay and Mark Davis is already jealous of the Niners new stadium down in Santa Clara. They will be in LA in two years- mark my words.
Big Gun Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 Some very good points here (one I'd never heard before, that Goodell's WNY roots give us a behind the scenes advantage), but I'm gonna be honest -- plenty of in in-denial thinking too. My honest assessment is that we're safe for roughly 7 years given the financial hit to moving, which will probably scare off most potential buy-and-move buyers. After that? We're at the mercy of events outside our control. If someone beats the Bills to LA, good. If not, we become the best candidate to move there. I'm guessing the Chargers stake their claim and move out first; if not, I'd watch out for the Raiders (the NFL has seemingly lost the will to fight them) or Rams or Jags. At any rate, someone ought to beat us to LA. It's Toronto I worry about. Sorry but it just makes too much sense for the same reasons San Diego to LA makes too much sense -- a much larger economy just a couple hours up the road, and with Toronto you pick up the entire Canadian market. I do not ever think the NFL is going to expand outside the USA. Sure they can talk all they want about it, but when it comes down to it, I don't ever think it's going to happen. IMO the Bills in Toronto over the past few years proved it would not be a good thing to pursue a franchise there for various reasons.
Recommended Posts