rockpile Posted May 25, 2005 Posted May 25, 2005 Yeah the old original AFL owners were labeled "The Foolish Club". Ha! look who got the last laugh. 342908[/snapback] That was a high price 45 years ago, and a gamble at that! This is from an article I wrote for TBD around 1997 or 98. I lost the link. The Four AFLs Most Bills fans are aware of the fact that the American Football League (AFL) that was the original home of the Buffalo Bills, who are members of the NFL now. But many fans are not aware of the fact that since the inception of the National Football League in the early 1920’s, there have been actaully been four AFL's. Three of these leagues included teams from Rochester and Buffalo, New York. In 1926, C.C. "Cash" Pyle was the manager for college sensation "Red" Grange, who had signed with the NFL’s Chicago Bears in 1925. Grange attracted tremendous crowds, causing Pyle to speculate that Grange's fame alone was enough to support an entire new nine team American Football League. Neither Rochester or Buffalo registered with this upstart league, since both cities already owned franchises with the NFL at the time. The AFL was not a financial success and folded after just one year. In 1927, Grange and the New York Yankees merged with the NFL. The Yankees disbanded after just one year, and Grange resumed playing for Chicago Bears in 1928. 1936 saw the creation of a second AFL, featuring such teams as the Cincinnati Bengals, Cleveland Rams, and three teams from New York: the Rochester Tigers, New York Yankees, and the Brooklyn Dodgers. The Rochester Tigers were coached by former New York Yankee, New York Giant, Brooklyn Dodger, and future NFL Hall of Famer, Morris "Red" Badgro. Overcoming a dismal 1-6 record that first year, the Tigers managed to finish second to the Los Angeles Bulldogs in their second and final year. Probably the most noteworthy accomplishment of this new short-lived league was the birth of the Cleveland Rams, who were granted a franchise in the NFL and years later moved to Los Angeles, California. This is the same team that now plays in St. Louis. A third American Football League was organized at a meeting in Buffalo, NY and competed for two seasons in 1940 and 1941. This league also featured a team called the Cincinnati Bengals. Buffalo's team called itself the Indians and finished with consecutive losing seasons. A major reason for the immediate failure of this AFL was the loss of players to the service during the second world war. The well established NFL barely survived the war years. The fourth and only successful American Football League was formed under the leadership of Lamar Hunt, a Texas businessman who had been unsuccessful in an attempt to buy the Chicago Cardinals (yes, that is correct - Chicago, then St. Louis, then Phoenix, and currently Arizona Cardinals). Buffalo was not at the initial meeting of six cities, but became a founding member in October of 1959. When Minneapolis was granted an NFL sanction and withdrew from the AFL, they were replaced by the city of Oakland California. The Buffalo Bills we follow today were officially granted an AFL franchise in 1959 under the ownership of Ralph Wilson, a minority owner of the Detroit Lions who had been unsuccessful at gaining his own NFL team. Florida was his first choice to locate this new franchise, but he was not able to lease the Orange Bowl due to conflicts with the college football schedule. Wilson was introduced to Paul Neville, managing editor of the Buffalo Evening News who pledged full community support for the team, which would include an expansion of the War Memorial Stadium from 22,500 seats to 36,500. An added inducement to Wilson was the rabid fanaticism the city had shown their team during the years of the Buffalo Bills with the all America Football Conference in the 1940’s. But that is a story for another day.
zow2 Posted May 25, 2005 Posted May 25, 2005 WTF I can't understand is what was so wrong with the current agreement that they have to go and renegotiate everything... 344349[/snapback] Simply that the players union (Upshaw) wants the next contract to be a salary cap tied to total revenue generated by the league (merchandise sales, Tv contracts, Redskins deal with Fedex, etc..). If Upshaw gets this, all the players he represents will get a much bigger chunk of pie in which to divide up. He and Tagliabue have a good relationship unlike the unions heads of the NHL, NBA and MLB. They will work something out. As for Ralph, we used to speculate how bad it was for Buffalo if his daughters got control of the team. Now we think it's bad if they end up getting sold to the highest bidder. I tend to think that the Bills will get sold eventually to a group that will keep them in WNY.
jad1 Posted May 25, 2005 Posted May 25, 2005 A "portion"? With 32 teams, he would have to give away 31/32, or 97%. That's a lot more than a "portion." That's why they call it "revenue sharing". It ain't no theoretical 80/20 split. And that's why people like Jones and Snyder B word so much, because they believe that other teams aren't doing all that they can to "maximize revenues." 344293[/snapback] The home team would get the majority of the take, with remaining going to revenue sharing. So it would be 80/20, with the 20% being split among the league. So teams would still be motivated to sell naming rights, and the league and it's teams would be compensated for giving value to the naming rights. And if Snyder and Jones don't like it, let them split from revenue sharing and negotiate their own TV and merchandise deals. And when either of their teams go 4-12, and the revenue streams dry up, they can B word about going bankrupt.
Recommended Posts