stuckincincy Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 I remember hearing about what a sweetheart deal that the Brown family got. Especially since the team was not winning, attendance was still down and he was not doing anything to improve the team (i.e. they were still well below the salary cap.) The politicians and the extremely wealthy always win. 865726[/snapback] The extremely stupid are the ones that allow that. I say raising the voting age to 30, when the wetness behind the ears that defines youth is a good idea.
ACor58 Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 The extremely stupid are the ones that allow that. I say raising the voting age to 30, when the wetness behind the ears that defines youth is a good idea. 865753[/snapback] You are probably right. Voting rights should also be limited to taxpayers, but unfortunately, that will never happen.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 You are probably right. Voting rights should also be limited to taxpayers, but unfortunately, that will never happen. 865769[/snapback] Actually, voting rights should be restricted to veterans.
dundy249 Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Keep in mind this takes into account average attendance figure not % to capacity. Bills are 8th from the bottom in terms of % full.
The Avenger Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 It's all about winning. If we win we will create new fans from the TV exposure. Some will be bastardized bandwagon jumpers, and some will stay for the long term. I became a fan under those circumstances following the 1989 season. 865734[/snapback] Not sure I completely agree. It seems that some teams just have cache and others don't. Seems like there are Raider fans everywhere, even though they're not that great a team and haven't been a great team for some time. Packers fall into the same boat to some extent. On the other hand, you have teams like the Chargers, Ravens, Bucs and Colts who have been pretty good at times (Ravens and Bucs even won Super Bowls) and they don't seem to have huge nationwide popularity. If you're not one of the popular teams nationwide you can certainly gain some national support by winning, but I don't think you become an "in" team until you win consistently over a pretty long period (example is the Pats - not a popular team but probably one now due to 4 Super Bowls and numerous playoff appearances). For the Bills to be popular nationwide they would have to win multiple Super Bowls within a 5-10 year period - something that's almost impossible to do these days.
Mikie2times Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Not sure I completely agree. It seems that some teams just have cache and others don't. Seems like there are Raider fans everywhere, even though they're not that great a team and haven't been a great team for some time. Packers fall into the same boat to some extent. On the other hand, you have teams like the Chargers, Ravens, Bucs and Colts who have been pretty good at times (Ravens and Bucs even won Super Bowls) and they don't seem to have huge nationwide popularity. If you're not one of the popular teams nationwide you can certainly gain some national support by winning, but I don't think you become an "in" team until you win consistently over a pretty long period (example is the Pats - not a popular team but probably one now due to 4 Super Bowls and numerous playoff appearances). For the Bills to be popular nationwide they would have to win multiple Super Bowls within a 5-10 year period - something that's almost impossible to do these days. 865813[/snapback] We had a whole new national fan base spawn itself from the Super Bowl years. It didn't happen to the degree in which it's happening with the Patriots, or other national types, but it happened.
ganesh Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 The main reason is that new stadiums bring greater revenue -- mostly due to the luxury suites, though. That's where the argument suffers, I think. Buffalo has never been able to sell it's luxury suites easily, whereas it's much easier in larger markets. I 865535[/snapback] I don't buy that argument. New stadiums were built in small markets like Cleveland, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh and they have all been able to sell luxury boxes. If you put a winning product, people will come. Also I think the Bills had tough time selling those club seats, not the luxury boxes.
The Avenger Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 We had a whole new national fan base spawn itself from the Super Bowl years. It didn't happen to the degree in which it's happening with the Patriots, or other national types, but it happened. 865862[/snapback] Yes, but that was a reult of multiple very good years in a row (or as the folks here in Boston like to call it, "A Dynasty" ). I would pose that the Bills would have to have a similar run to the early 90s to gain enough national support to be an "in" team, something I don't see as likely (not just for Buffalo, but for any team). And on the flip side the Raiders can continue to be terrible and they'll still have their "in" status - winning really isn't everything.
krazykat Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 How about building the stadium in Niagara Falls, NY? Closer to RaChaCha and the Canadians as well. 865315[/snapback] Did you fail geography in school? Since when is NF closer to Rochester? I don't think we get as many Canadian fans as we'd like to think. Most come from Western New York so positioning a new stadium more in the middle of that fan base might help.
krazykat Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 Buffalo, despite being in the bottom half of capacity (90.1) is ranked sixth overall. The metro area size (1.5 million) is second to last, but the Bills are essentially tied with Jacksonville (1.6 million). There are a number of teams more likely to move than the Bills, as this makes clear: the Raiders, the Chargers, the Jaguars, the Vikings, and (to a lesser extent now) the Saints. You need to click through this to see all of the profiles: http://www.bizjournals.com/specials/slideshow/13.html?page=1 My read on all of this: fan enthusiasm is a major factor in the NFL's decision process, and TV ratings are significantly more important than metro area size (my sense is that the Bills are a more popular TV draw nationally when they're fielding a good team than many teams with larger metro areas). From this, I see the current rhetoric as the beginning rumblings of a drive for a new stadium, a drive that will most likely be successful. 865288[/snapback] Who knows. We have heard so many conflicting things about why the team will or won't stick around. Figure though that a mere $10 more per ticket per home game would generate about an additional $6M annually. Since our region doesn't command that kind of ticket price, maybe that's at the core of it. It's a fact though that our TV market isn't as big as the others. Remember that for TV to be appealing you need the attention of the 18-35 year old demographic and that is diminishing in the region.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 One thing that is rarely mentioned in these TV ratings is that so many people have moved from places like Buffalo, Cleveland, Green Bay/Milwaukee, Detroit and other northern cities to the southern and southwestern climates in the last three decades but still watch and root for their hometeams. Don't think for a second that the NFL doesn't know, follow closely and strongly consider this. So just because the Bills have a small television market doesn't mean the Neilson's for Buffalo are the only measure of Bills games being watched. Nearly everyone that I have ever met that moved away from Buffalo are still Bills fans and watch as many games as they can. These are the vast majority of the people that buy the DirecTV package, not the locals in Dallas and New York and Miami and Chicago who follow their own teams. The NFL follows this kind of stuff very closely as they obviously should.
Rubes Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 So just because the Bills have a small television market doesn't mean the Neilson's for Buffalo are the only measure of Bills games being watched. Nearly everyone that I have ever met that moved away from Buffalo are still Bills fans and watch as many games as they can. These are the vast majority of the people that buy the DirecTV package, not the locals in Dallas and New York and Miami and Chicago who follow their own teams. The NFL follows this kind of stuff very closely as they obviously should. 865938[/snapback] Heck, I moved away but I still have my seasons!
dave mcbride Posted December 14, 2006 Author Posted December 14, 2006 One thing that is rarely mentioned in these TV ratings is that so many people have moved from places like Buffalo, Cleveland, Green Bay/Milwaukee, Detroit and other northern cities to the southern and southwestern climates in the last three decades but still watch and root for their hometeams. Don't think for a second that the NFL doesn't know, follow closely and strongly consider this. So just because the Bills have a small television market doesn't mean the Neilson's for Buffalo are the only measure of Bills games being watched. Nearly everyone that I have ever met that moved away from Buffalo are still Bills fans and watch as many games as they can. These are the vast majority of the people that buy the DirecTV package, not the locals in Dallas and New York and Miami and Chicago who follow their own teams. The NFL follows this kind of stuff very closely as they obviously should. 865938[/snapback] Word.
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 One thing that is rarely mentioned in these TV ratings is that so many people have moved from places like Buffalo, Cleveland, Green Bay/Milwaukee, Detroit and other northern cities to the southern and southwestern climates in the last three decades but still watch and root for their hometeams. Don't think for a second that the NFL doesn't know, follow closely and strongly consider this. So just because the Bills have a small television market doesn't mean the Neilson's for Buffalo are the only measure of Bills games being watched. Nearly everyone that I have ever met that moved away from Buffalo are still Bills fans and watch as many games as they can. These are the vast majority of the people that buy the DirecTV package, not the locals in Dallas and New York and Miami and Chicago who follow their own teams. The NFL follows this kind of stuff very closely as they obviously should. 865938[/snapback] Just like my father, who made his family's living down in Jersey...and out came a couple of 2nd generation Bills fans. You better believe he's in front of the TV every Sunday making good use of NFL Sunday Ticket.
Gordio Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Who knows. We have heard so many conflicting things about why the team will or won't stick around. Figure though that a mere $10 more per ticket per home game would generate about an additional $6M annually. Since our region doesn't command that kind of ticket price, maybe that's at the core of it. It's a fact though that our TV market isn't as big as the others. Remember that for TV to be appealing you need the attention of the 18-35 year old demographic and that is diminishing in the region. 865883[/snapback] This arguement is actually a little flawed. You are right in a way if just consider the immediate buffalo market. However, since Toronto I believe gets the buffalo CBS, some argue that after adding in toronto for CBS games, we are like the 3rd or 4th largest tv market. Just another way of looking at it I suppose.
dogbyte Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Sorry, but there is no way that a new stadium will be built with public funds. Private and/or NFL funds maybe. 10 games a year will not make the stadium viable. They will have to re-do the Ralph. Football Stadiums do not work for revitizing areas. You have to have a plan to work with the stadium. Baseball parks work because they have 82 games plus other events.
stuckincincy Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 I remember hearing about what a sweetheart deal that the Brown family got. Especially since the team was not winning, attendance was still down and he was not doing anything to improve the team (i.e. they were still well below the salary cap.) The politicians and the extremely wealthy always win. 865726[/snapback] The county commissioner who was the big pusher of the deal was crushed in his re-election bid, and got a high six-figure job with the B'gals as some sort of team adviser. A few more Mike Brown gems... They published a false seating chart before construction. You had to buy a PSL (personal seat license) in order to buy season tix...I don't recall the exact dollars...something like $275 to $600 depending on seat location or some such. Folks forked over the cash, including up-front tix $, and found out their 40 - 50 yard seats ended up on the 10 or in the EZ. He had to be sued for people to get their PSL and high tix cost adjusted. And they sit on the 10 or in the EZ today. Brown hung on to their cash to the bitter end, though. About 3 years ago, a number of folks decided to not renew their tickets for their own personal reasons, and were willing to forfeit the non-refundable PSL. But some time previous, the club sent out a weasely mailing that said upon any cancellation of a PSL, the owner was on the hook for 10 years' worth of season tickets. And they started to file lawsuits against folks who had decided to drop their PSL's, demanding 10 years' worth of ticket price. Once again, the B'gals were hauled into court and a judge ruled that this 10-year tie-in was phony, and not part of the deal that the PSL owners signed on for. Take a look at the B'gals management staff off the field...this VP of personnel is the daughter of that VP of player development who is the aunt of the treasurer who married the brother of the son of this cousin and so forth. A study in incest... Which is why I shake my head when people imply that Ralph is a skinflint...
ACor58 Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 The county commissioner who was the big pusher of the deal was crushed in his re-election bid, and got a high six-figure job with the B'gals as some sort of team adviser.A few more Mike Brown gems... They published a false seating chart before construction. You had to buy a PSL (personal seat license) in order to buy season tix...I don't recall the exact dollars...something like $275 to $600 depending on seat location or some such. Folks forked over the cash, including up-front tix $, and found out their 40 - 50 yard seats ended up on the 10 or in the EZ. He had to be sued for people to get their PSL and high tix cost adjusted. And they sit on the 10 or in the EZ today. Brown hung on to their cash to the bitter end, though. About 3 years ago, a number of folks decided to not renew their tickets for their own personal reasons, and were willing to forfeit the non-refundable PSL. But some time previous, the club sent out a weasely mailing that said upon any cancellation of a PSL, the owner was on the hook for 10 years' worth of season tickets. And they started to file lawsuits against folks who had decided to drop their PSL's, demanding 10 years' worth of ticket price. Once again, the B'gals were hauled into court and a judge ruled that this 10-year tie-in was phony, and not part of the deal that the PSL owners signed on for. Take a look at the B'gals management staff off the field...this VP of personnel is the daughter of that VP of player development who is the aunt of the treasurer who married the brother of the son of this cousin and so forth. A study in incest... Which is why I shake my head when people imply that Ralph is a skinflint... 866733[/snapback] I am suprised that someone hasn't tried to bump him off yet.
dave mcbride Posted December 14, 2006 Author Posted December 14, 2006 The county commissioner who was the big pusher of the deal was crushed in his re-election bid, and got a high six-figure job with the B'gals as some sort of team adviser.A few more Mike Brown gems... They published a false seating chart before construction. You had to buy a PSL (personal seat license) in order to buy season tix...I don't recall the exact dollars...something like $275 to $600 depending on seat location or some such. Folks forked over the cash, including up-front tix $, and found out their 40 - 50 yard seats ended up on the 10 or in the EZ. He had to be sued for people to get their PSL and high tix cost adjusted. And they sit on the 10 or in the EZ today. Brown hung on to their cash to the bitter end, though. About 3 years ago, a number of folks decided to not renew their tickets for their own personal reasons, and were willing to forfeit the non-refundable PSL. But some time previous, the club sent out a weasely mailing that said upon any cancellation of a PSL, the owner was on the hook for 10 years' worth of season tickets. And they started to file lawsuits against folks who had decided to drop their PSL's, demanding 10 years' worth of ticket price. Once again, the B'gals were hauled into court and a judge ruled that this 10-year tie-in was phony, and not part of the deal that the PSL owners signed on for. Take a look at the B'gals management staff off the field...this VP of personnel is the daughter of that VP of player development who is the aunt of the treasurer who married the brother of the son of this cousin and so forth. A study in incest... Which is why I shake my head when people imply that Ralph is a skinflint... 866733[/snapback] Yet look at who the the ownership company Ralph is keeping of late. Yeesh.
JasoninMT Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 I think that the Roch D&C has it right, they should move a bit closer to Rochester... The problem as I see it is abandoning all the work which has been done to RWS... what would become of it? the other Question is how it would affect those Canadian fans, moving it further from them... I did one of those Google searches to see who searches for Buffalo Bills, and the hits are most from Lancaster... Then I think was Rochester...
Recommended Posts