JDG Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Given the FACTS that multiple FAs who had locations to choose from such as TKO, Sam Adams, Vincent, Milloy and even most of the middlin talent wooed, brought in for a visit and signed this year (the Skins wanted to resign Royal, Triplett had several suitors) it is simply untrue that this is not a desireable team for FAs. In fact, rather than having to pay a premium to attract players, the Bills have historically been able to sign players at lower payments than other teams offered in some cases such as Sam Adams. Folks pointing to tax rates and other issues seem to reflect more their own personal ideological hobby horses than anything based on a player specifically noting the issue or even a mere statistical correlation of the Bills being unable to reel in FAs. The list above is only a short form of several real world examples of FAs coming here. If someone wants to say my theory that we are not at a significant disadvantage is wrong that is fine but at least back this random thought up with either some specific evidence or statistical correlation, These whiners cannot do so. 638014[/snapback] Actually, NFL Players *should* take full consideration of the fact that with no income tax in Texas, that the same contract from the Dallas Cowboys or Houston Texans is worth quite a bit more than the same contract from the Bills. On the other hand, the Jets and Giants also live in a high income tax area, and it doesn't seem to hurt their ability to attract free agents..... not even for the lower-tier guys who won't be able to make it up in endorsement money.... JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macaroni Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 So you're saying that if you had your pick of several locations around the country to work at location would have nothing to do with your decision? Um, okay. Let's get back to reality. Weather, schools, taxes, entertainment, family, etc. all play a large part in people deciding where they want to work, be they football players or not. To think that these guys are simply going to sign with a team that pays them $1 more per year and that's all that matters is ridiculous. 638140[/snapback] No ......... what I'm saying is that given the choice of playing professional football in toadsuck Arkansas or selling used cars anywhere in the country ........ I'm picking football. For the established player if my choice is playing football in _________ (fill in the blank with your favorite city) or playing in Buffalo ........ then it comes down to money and opportunity to contribute ........... weather, schools, taxes, etc etc etc don't effect me if my family lives anywhere they want, and I'm only spending four or five months (on and off) in my "teams city". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Actually, NFL Players *should* take full consideration of the fact that with no income tax in Texas, that the same contract from the Dallas Cowboys or Houston Texans is worth quite a bit more than the same contract from the Bills. 638143[/snapback] You may not pay taxes in Texas...but you'd live in Texas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BackInDaDay Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I subscribe to the theory that most pro-athletes come into their respective leagues looking for the ring. After that, it's all about the money. At this point Buffalo can offer neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazykat Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Overall I pay around 50% more to live here....When I moved here my salary was adjusted 90% to compesate.637804[/snapback] Is Tom Donahoe your company's relocation manager? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 Wide Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Given the FACTS that multiple FAs who had locations to choose from such as TKO, Sam Adams, Vincent, Milloy and even most of the middlin talent wooed, brought in for a visit and signed this year (the Skins wanted to resign Royal, Triplett had several suitors) it is simply untrue that this is not a desireable team for FAs. In fact, rather than having to pay a premium to attract players, the Bills have historically been able to sign players at lower payments than other teams offered in some cases such as Sam Adams. Folks pointing to tax rates and other issues seem to reflect more their own personal ideological hobby horses than anything based on a player specifically noting the issue or even a mere statistical correlation of the Bills being unable to reel in FAs. The list above is only a short form of several real world examples of FAs coming here. If someone wants to say my theory that we are not at a significant disadvantage is wrong that is fine but at least back this random thought up with either some specific evidence or statistical correlation, These whiners cannot do so. 638014[/snapback] I don't think personal ideological stances have anything to do with the facts of the matter. To say that peripheral details about a given region have little to do with swaying the decision of an athlete presented with similar economic opportunities is off based. Whether you are an established vet with a family to look after....taxes, schools, and the quality of life are legitimate concerns that I'm sure agents look into. If you are a single young budding superstar then you are looking at various aspects such as nightlife and the social atmosphere. Both of these are directly related to the economic health of the city you are looking at.......why do you think McGahee flies back to South Florida throughout the season the second the team is dismissed. Not to mention that the south is taking over as the football factory of the country. These athletes are used to playing in a warmer climate than what Buffalo has to offer. I realize that if Buffalo is offering millions more, then they'd play here if the stadium were floating on an iceberg off the coast of Greenland. I'm just not so sure that the current state of affairs with the team and region don't convey a somewhat less attractive glow than other metropolitan areas swaying our ability to attract these guys. Our main advantage over other cities is cultural...not a tangible statistic that you can easily market to an outsider looking in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Back in the early '90s, the cold was a good thing, because it meant the Bills didn't lose playoff games at Rich Stadium. Today, the Bills have maybe 9 home playoff wins to go with their one loss, and the Packers have something like 12 home playoff wins to go with their one loss. If I'm Marv, I'd sell players on the idea that cold weather=home playoff wins in January. As a fan, I liked the fact that teams from warmer climates would be intimidated by the Buffalo snow. Of course, you have to have a good football team too, which lately hasn't been the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I don't think personal ideological stances have anything to do with the facts of the matter. To say that peripheral details about a given region have little to do with swaying the decision of an athlete presented with similar economic opportunities is off based. Whether you are an established vet with a family to look after....taxes, schools, and the quality of life are legitimate concerns that I'm sure agents look into. If you are a single young budding superstar then you are looking at various aspects such as nightlife and the social atmosphere. Both of these are directly related to the economic health of the city you are looking at.......why do you think McGahee flies back to South Florida throughout the season the second the team is dismissed. Not to mention that the south is taking over as the football factory of the country. These athletes are used to playing in a warmer climate than what Buffalo has to offer. I realize that if Buffalo is offering millions more, then they'd play here if the stadium were floating on an iceberg off the coast of Greenland. I'm just not so sure that the current state of affairs with the team and region don't convey a somewhat less attractive glow than other metropolitan areas swaying our ability to attract these guys. Our main advantage over other cities is cultural...not a tangible statistic that you can easily market to an outsider looking in. 638527[/snapback] I'm not saying that location has NOTHING to do with this decision. I'm just saying that it has so little to do with attractiveness of a town for most players that it is in essence a non-factor. Sure it is a big factor for the odd athlete, but the reasons are that his Mom or Dad are nearby to a town and about to die and sonny wants to be close. In this case an athlete might choose Buffalo over much nicer digs and even a better deal in a town like SF if his dying Mom lives on the east coast. If location were such a big deal then that disadvantage us, it should be quite simple to name a bunch of cases where we had an interest in a player (either expressed in terms of public interest or staff rumor by us, or simply in terms of players repetitively visiting us but choosing other locations. In fact, the occurences of reality show the opposite such as this year when the first three visitors to Buffalo all signed in Buffalo. In fact the only visitor I can remeber losing this year was Fabini. People's sense of us being an unattractive place for players seems conjured up more by the insecurities and ideological biases of posters rather than any clear demonstration of a series (or even a few) actual cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts