"Bills staying put" according to Tags

[Kelly the Dog]

http://www.13wham.com/news/state/story.asp...6B-9993F50042F3

 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Buffalo Bills are staying put. That's the word from N-F-L Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, who met this morning with Buffalo native and Bills fan Tim Russert of N-B-C News and New York Senator Chuck Schumer at Schumer's Washington office.

 

During the hour-long meeting, the commissioner assured the Buffalo Bills and their fans that the team isn't leaving town.

 

Tagliabue also said the Bills would be part of an ownership group that would set rules under the league's new collective bargaining agreement. That new labor agreement has come under fire from Bills owner Ralph Wilson, who says the deal is bad news for small-market teams such as Buffalo.

[C.Biscuit97]

Of course, isn't Tags leaving next year himself???

[Lurker]

Of course, isn't Tags leaving next year himself??? 

666242[/snapback]

 

Yeah, but now he's forced to address the issue rather than just fade away. Good for Ralph.

[Kelly the Dog]

Yeah, but now he's forced to address the issue rather than just fade away.  Good for Ralph.

666244[/snapback]

Exactly. I think Ralph did great. By causing a ruckus, he got himself appointed to the committee where he will have some pull. He probably helped the finalization of the CBA a great deal.

[Lurker]

Exactly. I think Ralph did great. By causing a ruckus, he got himself appointed to the committee where he will have some pull. He probably helped the finalization of the CBA a great deal.

666247[/snapback]

 

Not bad for a senile old man, huh. The silence we'll soon be hearing from the Mort's and Clayton's of the world will be deafening.

[Kelly the Dog]

Not bad for a senile old man, huh.  The silence we'll soon be hearing from the Mort's and Clayton's of the world will be deafening. 

666249[/snapback]

I don't think that's true. I think they were both right, and don't think they are mutually exclusive whatsoever. I think Ralph WAS crying wolf, and that the team wasn't in danger of losing money at all, nor was the collective bargaining agreement designed to kill small market teams because of the greedy new breed of owners. That does not preclude, however, Ralph doing what he did and helping the Bills in the future by getting favorable results when the details are finalized. In effect, what Tagliabue said proves the Claytons and the Morts right more than the Ralphs and the Littmans.

[bills_fan]

Tags says the Bills are staying in Buffalo, Ralph will be on the committee that detrmines how revenue is shared, Schumer, Russert, Pataki etc. will all fight for the Bills to stay and a guy from Jamestown is the leading contender to be the next NFL commish.

 

I think things are pretty rosy in the Bills world right now.

[Lurker]

I don't think that's true. I think they were both right, and don't think they are mutually exclusive whatsoever. I think Ralph WAS crying wolf, and that the team wasn't in danger of losing money at all, nor was the collective bargaining agreement designed to kill small market teams because of the greedy new breed of owners. That does not preclude, however, Ralph doing what he did and helping the Bills in the future by getting favorable results when the details are finalized. In effect, what Tagliabue said proves the Claytons and the Morts right more than the Ralphs and the Littmans.

666253[/snapback]

 

Huh? Ralph's whole agenda was to get on this committee any way he could. If it took raising a ruckus, so be it. And his point was always about competitive balance, not profitability. The ad hominem attacks from the talking heads were off base, IMO.

[Kelly the Dog]

Huh?  Ralph's whole agenda was to get on this committee any way he could.  If it took raising a ruckus, so be it.  And his point was always about competitive balance, not profitability.  The ad hominem attacks from the talking heads were off base, IMO.

666257[/snapback]

Show me anything Mort or Clayton said that was off base? What they said is that Ralph was crying over things in the CBA that weren't true. That Ralph was complaining about qualifiers that weren't designed to kill small market clubs but to maintain the competitive balance. That Ralph was making money and crying wolf about being poor. Seems to me they were right on target. Again, I am glad he did what he did and I have said so repeatedly, even while questioning his ingenuousness. But Clayton and Mort were right and what Tagliabue said and implied today proved it, or at the very least, mirrored it.

[billsfanmiami(oh)]

Great Job Ralphie. Call it whining, bitching, whatever you want. I for one, am glad that Ralph had the forsight to take on this "issue" now and raise a stink about it. If he did nothing, when he passes on, it could have become a serious issue for the next owner and threat to the future of the Bills in Buffalo. Ralph may sound rough at times when actually speaking at press conferences, but I think he's got more upstairs than most give him credit for (he's gotta have some damn good advisors too). For all the people bashing him over the last few weeks, up yours!

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Tags says the Bills are staying in Buffalo, Ralph will be on the committee that detrmines how revenue is shared, Schumer, Russert, Pataki etc. will all fight for the Bills to stay and a guy from Jamestown is the leading contender to be the next NFL commish. 

 

I think things are pretty rosy in the Bills world right now.

666255[/snapback]

 

Provided you believe any of them.

 

Personally...Tags says anything, and my gut reaction is "Yeah...pull the other one."

[Mile High]

Yeah, but now he's forced to address the issue rather than just fade away.  Good for Ralph.

666244[/snapback]

Exactly.. Good for Ralph! F-u Daniel Snyder, Bob Kraft and Jerry Jones!

[Kelly the Dog]

Apr 20, 2006 - The Buffalo Bills future in Western New York is a lot brighter according to U-S Senator Chuck Schumer after a meeting with NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue earlier today in Washington, D.C.

 

Schumer tells 7 NEWS Tagliabue has agreed to let Bills owner Ralph Wilson sit on a committee that will decide how revenue is distributed. Schumer also says other small market owners will also sit on that committee.

 

He did well for other teams, too. Although I always assumed at least some representation of the smaller markets would be on the committee.

[Lurker]

That Ralph was making money and crying wolf about being poor.

666260[/snapback]

 

Did Ralph ever say they weren't making money:

"As I sit here today, this is not a matter of making money for the Buffalo Bills," he told reporters. "It's a matter of survival. We just want to survive. And I think a lot of other clubs are in the same fix."'

 

Clayton's article

 

"Plus, there would have been a lockout in 2008. Ralph, allowing that wouldn't make sense."

 

IMO, Ralph was willing to play hardball with the union--including enduring a strike in 2008--because he doesn't have a big annual debt payment to cover like many of the new owners have. That Clayton thinks he's wrong shows more about how much ESPN needs the NFL than anything else.

 

Until everything is in place and the formula is set, the Bills and Wilson have a right to worry.

 

The only accurate statement in his article, IMO.

[Kelly the Dog]

Did Ralph ever say they weren't making money:

"As I sit here today, this is not a matter of making money for the Buffalo Bills," he told reporters. "It's a matter of survival. We just want to survive. And I think a lot of other clubs are in the same fix."'

 

Clayton's article

 

"Plus, there would have been a lockout in 2008. Ralph, allowing that wouldn't make sense."

 

IMO, Ralph was willing to play hardball with the union--including enduring a strike in 2008--because he doesn't have a big annual debt payment to cover like many of the new owners have.  That Clayton thinks he's wrong shows more about how much ESPN needs the NFL than anything else.

 

Until everything is in place and the formula is set, the Bills and Wilson have a right to worry.

 

The only accurate statement in his article, IMO.

666279[/snapback]

Hell yes he said they weren't making money. He said they were likely to LOSE money this year. An upwards of 10 million dollars. And then made some totally disingenuous quip, IMO, about "don't believe the PR machine of the NFL" about money.

[The Dean]

Wilson, Schumer, Tags and Russert just got great publicity and props for announcing something that was basically never in doubt: The Bills are safe in Buffalo. This has always been a non-issue, IMO. (Nice to hear the announcement, though.)

 

The only thing that really got done, IMO, is the placement of RW on the CBA committee.

 

Ralph did a GREAT job of orchestrating this...pretty sweet for a "senile old man"...no?

[bills_fan]

Wilson, Schumer, Tags and Russert just got great publicity and props for announcing something that was basically never in doubt: The Bills are safe in Buffalo. This has always been a non-issue, IMO. (Nice to hear the announcement, though.)

 

The only thing that really got done, IMO, is the placement of RW on the CBA committee.

 

Ralph did a GREAT job of orchestrating this...pretty sweet for a "senile old man"...no?

 

Thing is, any elected official from WNY or NYS who wouldn't fight this, would lose the WNY vote on that single issue alone.

 

If Goodell gets Tags' job, there is no way on God's green earth that a local WNYer will allow the Bills to move. He knows implicitly how much the team means to the area.

[Taro T]

Tags says the Bills are staying in Buffalo, Ralph will be on the committee that detrmines how revenue is shared, Schumer, Russert, Pataki etc. will all fight for the Bills to stay and a guy from Jamestown is the leading contender to be the next NFL commish. 

 

I think things are pretty rosy in the Bills world right now.

666255[/snapback]

When he is actually named commissioner, I will consider this a good thing for the Bills and the Bills long term future in Buffalo. Until he is chosen, this means absolutely nothing for the Bills.

[Lurker]

Hell yes he said they weren't making money. He said they were likely to LOSE money this year. An upwards of 10 million dollars. And then made some totally disingenuous quip, IMO, about "don't believe the PR machine of the NFL" about money.

666283[/snapback]

 

 

The Buffalo Bills made a profit last year, but less than $10 million, team officials say.

 

This year, under the National Football League's new labor agreement, they expect to lose money, somewhere between $5 million and $10 million. And Bills officials fear their financial situation may only get worse in the coming years.

 

In owner Ralph C. Wilson Jr.'s view, the culprit, besides this region's struggling economy and declining population, remains the NFL's new Collective Bargaining Agreement.

 

That's why Wilson stuck his neck out in two news conferences Friday and Sunday, painting a dark picture about the long-term viability of the franchise. On Sunday, he acknowledged he no longer could guarantee that he wouldn't sell or move the team.

 

"It's a terrible extension [of the labor agreement]," Wilson said Wednesday. "It's really going to impact Buffalo and the small-market teams. It is really going to hurt us." This off-season, Wilson has had more news conferences than the Bills had wins last season. While observers have wondered why he went public, some theorized that he was trying to rally other smaller-revenue owners to push for more favorable terms in the league's revenue-sharing plan.

 

Almost one week later, nobody seems to be jumping aboard Wilson's bandwagon.

 

What kind of response has he gotten from other owners? "Not much," Wilson replied in a phone interview Wednesday. "It's the same way I feel when I go to the [owners'] meetings. Whatever the commissioner wants, they raise their hands - except me."

 

Has he become a maverick owner? "I hate to think what they're calling me," he replied. "But wait until the other owners close their books after this year."

 

There is no independent way to confirm the extent of the Bills' recent profits. Outside observers, after comparing Buffalo's situation to the public financial statements of the Green Bay Packers, have estimated recent Bills profits in the range of $12 million to $18 million.

 

Team treasurer Jeffrey C. Littmann, though, said the team's operating profit last year was in the "mid single digits," referring to millions of dollars.

 

The expected loss in 2006 will be in the "high single digits," he said, even assuming the team sells out most of its games. Littmann wouldn't be more specific or break down the expense and revenue figures.

 

He did explain the basic problem for the Bills under the new labor agreement.

 

While the expenses for NFL teams are tied mostly to the leaguewide market for player, coach and administrative salaries, local revenues vary greatly. Revenue from ticket sales, sponsorships and suite rentals depends largely on the strength of the local economy. Players will get roughly 60 percent of leaguewide gross revenues. But the teams with the largest revenues spend as little as 40 percent on their players, while the lower-revenue teams spend up to 70 percent, or more.

 

"If you're spending more than 65 percent of your total revenue on your players, chances are you're not making money," Littmann said. "We're north of 65."

 

Based on figures from several sources, the Bills' player salaries and benefits are expected to be roughly $120 million this year, with total revenues presumably in the $180 million to $185 million range. Other expenses then could translate into red ink.

 

Littmann explained the effect of what he called the big-market owners' "passionate pursuit of unshared [local] revenue." Every time an individual NFL team builds new luxury boxes or lands a lucrative sponsorship deal, that revenue drives up the league's salary cap - and thus the Bills' expenses. But that would bring in no new revenue for the Bills.

 

An example provided by Bills officials: A $20 million sponsorship or stadium-naming deal for one team adds to the leaguewide revenue. So 60 percent of that figure, or $12 million, would go to the players. Divided by 32 teams, that adds $375,000 per team to the salary cap. Again, the Bills would get no extra revenue there.

 

That would be fine for the Bills, if they could land their own $20 million sponsorship. But as Wilson and team officials have pointed out, this market lacks the corporate wealth and "pricing power" for such deals.

 

That said, observers note that Wilson's initial $25,000 investment to buy the Bills in 1960 may be worth an estimated $600 million 46 years later.

 

While Wilson has taken a strong stand, two other owners of smaller-revenue teams, Mike Brown in Cincinnati and Zygi Wilf in Minnesota, have come forward to address the challenges facing small-market teams. But Brown spoke before Wilson's latest news conferences, and published reports of Wilf's comments never mentioned Wilson.

 

Before the NFL's new Collective Bargaining Agreement was hammered out last month, the league salary cap already was expected to rise from $85.5 million last year to $94.5 million, based on increases in leaguewide revenue, including the huge national TV money. Under the new agreement, the cap will rise to $102 million. While salary cap figures aren't identical to actual expenses, they're in the same ballpark.

 

Perhaps Wilson's recent hints about selling or moving the team reflect the obstacles the Bills face, especially under a new owner:

 

Projected NFL salary cap increases are expected to be larger than the local revenue-sharing amounts given to teams with less money. So teams treading water now may find themselves under water soon.

 

Selling the team, under the proposed wording of the new revenue-sharing plan, could wipe out the revenue sharing potential for a new owner.

 

The proposed revenue-sharing plan also would penalize teams, like the Bills, that can't generate 80 percent of the average NFL team's ticket revenue.

 

Anyone buying the Bills, for hundreds of millions, likely would face hefty debt-service payments tied to that purchase.

 

While estate taxes virtually rule out Wilson leaving the team to his daughters, he publicly opened the door last week to the possibility of leaving the team to his wife, Mary.

 

Given everything he's said about the challenges facing the Bills in Buffalo, that may not seem so attractive.

 

Wilson has taken some heat nationally, primarily from the well-respected John Clayton, senior writer for ESPN.com. Clayton wrote that he was disturbed how Wilson made light of selling the naming rights to Ralph Wilson Stadium. Last Friday, Wilson joked that the naming rights wouldn't bring enough money to sign a player coming out of college.

 

How much could the stadium naming rights bring here?

 

Three years ago, M&T Bank agreed to pay $75 million over 15 years in a partnership with the Baltimore Ravens that included naming rights to the team's stadium. That's $5 million per year.

 

"Wilson has every right to keep his name on the stadium, but he can't expect to be subsidized by other owners for that amount, whatever it would be," Clayton wrote.

 

Littmann disagreed. "That's a red herring," he said. "You couldn't get remotely close to that [amount] for a single-use stadium not in a metropolitan setting."

[Kelly the Dog]

When he is actually named commissioner, I will consider this a good thing for the Bills and the Bills long term future in Buffalo.  Until he is chosen, this means absolutely nothing for the Bills.

666292[/snapback]

Does anyone know anything about this guy distinctly? Or is just assumed he would support the Bills because he is from Jamestown?