The Big Cat Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Kid, you truly don't know sh*t. You obviously aren't a regular at the stadium. People ask the ticket department about this stuff on a regular basis. As in, "Why is it my seat here costs the same as this seat THERE and everybody in my section would give their left nut to sit there instead?". The Bills simply have a general pricing scheme that is FAR from precise. Some of the best seats in the house are cheaper than bad ones. And I'll give you a link, 877BBTICKS. Call them and ask for yourself about their precision pricing. Maybe they will link you to the people who you think are there specifically for that purpose. Haha, okay. Then if that's the case, the Bills organization could safely charge what the Bears charge and not worry about a lack of attendance.
billsfan_34 Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Well, San Jose is about 50 miles from the bay area, take the rest of them out and you've still got more than 30 cities. Doesn't really negate my point. The POINT that you seemed to have missed: despite 50 years of up and down (mostly down) history, the citizens of Buffalo, aren't even REMOTELY deserving of an NFL team. The city is not what it was when it was given a team, and even though they pay for (the cheapest) seats, and sit in the cold (just like a dozen other teams' fans), the team hasn't done jack crap since the 90's, and did very little prior to that. So, when it comes to "deserving" a team, I'm not exactly sure what you folks use in favor of your argument. Well, I do know, but it's not an argument that holds any water outside of Bills Country. Lots of teams have done jack crap! Then detroit and cleveland dont deserev teams. Detroit and clevelands economy is in the dumps to. And their population will begin to decline as well. I did understand your point but you should have all the facts straight. And if hou really looked at numbers between buff and rochester its 2 million people with only 2 major teams. The Bills and the sabres.
The Dean Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Well, San Jose is about 50 miles from the bay area, take the rest of them out and you've still got more than 30 cities. Doesn't really negate my point. The POINT that you seemed to have missed: despite 50 years of up and down (mostly down) history, the citizens of Buffalo, aren't even REMOTELY deserving of an NFL team. What a load of crap. Bills fans support their team better than almost any other team in the league. The fans, most certainly deserve this team. BTW, the team does not simply draw from Buffalo. It draws from WNY and Southern Ontario. The population base is sufficient to support a team...it isn't an issue. The ONLY issue is, if a new owner has to pay major bucks to buy the team, can he/she get enough copoirate money to pay for the suites, and high end seats, that generate revenue for the owner. That last point, is a serious question. But, please, "the citizens of Buffalo don't deserve a team:? Are you fuc#ing drunk? Do the citizens of Jacksonville deserve a team? New Orleans? Phoenix?
The Dean Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Haha, okay. Then if that's the case, the Bills organization could safely charge what the Bears charge and not worry about a lack of attendance. No. Any team that can't charge the prices of the highest priced tickets in the league, shouldn't have a team...PERIOD. That would make it a nice 6-team league. You do understand that SOME team will always have the lowest priced tickets in the league, unless all the teams charge exactly the same price. Your argument BLOWS.
BADOLBILZ Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Well, San Jose is about 50 miles from the bay area, take the rest of them out and you've still got more than 30 cities. Doesn't really negate my point. The POINT that you seemed to have missed: despite 50 years of up and down (mostly down) history, the citizens of Buffalo, aren't even REMOTELY deserving of an NFL team. The city is not what it was when it was given a team, and even though they pay for (the cheapest) seats, and sit in the cold (just like a dozen other teams' fans), the team hasn't done jack crap since the 90's, and did very little prior to that. So, when it comes to "deserving" a team, I'm not exactly sure what you folks use in favor of your argument. Well, I do know, but it's not an argument that holds any water outside of Bills Country. Buffalo the city doesn't have a team. They play in Orchard Park, and represent the region which includes WNY, CNY, NW PA and southern Ontario. They are trying to extend that range to greater Toronto. I've been to many a city on your list, and they are relative outposts to the sprawl that runs from Syracuse to Hamilton and south to Eerie, which is essentially Bills country.
billsfan_34 Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Well, San Jose is about 50 miles from the bay area, take the rest of them out and you've still got more than 30 cities. Doesn't really negate my point. The POINT that you seemed to have missed: despite 50 years of up and down (mostly down) history, the citizens of Buffalo, aren't even REMOTELY deserving of an NFL team. The city is not what it was when it was given a team, and even though they pay for (the cheapest) seats, and sit in the cold (just like a dozen other teams' fans), the team hasn't done jack crap since the 90's, and did very little prior to that. So, when it comes to "deserving" a team, I'm not exactly sure what you folks use in favor of your argument. Well, I do know, but it's not an argument that holds any water outside of Bills Country. Remember when the Rams and the Raiders moved to LAen have a big? They were unsupported and lost money. Going to larger markets isnt always good in the NFL and pro sports in General. Look at the NHL 15 years ago when they started moving teams to large markets...especially in the south. It really damaged the league and overall profit margin. They dont even have a big TV contract.
The Big Cat Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 What a load of crap. Bills fans support their team better than almost any other team in the league. The fans, most certainly deserve this team. BTW, the team does not simply draw from Buffalo. It draws from WNY and Southern Ontario. The population base is sufficient to support a team...it isn't an issue. The ONLY issue is, if a new owner has to pay major bucks to buy the team, can he/she get enough copoirate money to pay for the suites, and high end seats, that generate revenue for the owner. That last point, is a serious question. But, please, "the citizens of Buffalo don't deserve a team:? Are you fuc#ing drunk? Do the citizens of Jacksonville deserve a team? New Orleans? Phoenix? Okay, fine. Do you think the Bills could charge the same amount for tickets as the Bears or the Cowboys and still still sell out?
The Dean Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Okay, fine. Do you think the Bills could charge the same amount for tickets as the Bears or the Cowboys and still still sell out? If the Bills go somewhere else, then another team will have the lowest ticket prices. Obviously, by your logic, they won't deserve a team. Then, after they leave, another team will have the lowest ticket prices, and THEY won't deserve a team. Again, your argument is fuc#ing stupid.
The Big Cat Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 No. Any team that can't charge the prices of the highest priced tickets in the league, shouldn't have a team...PERIOD. That would make it a nice 6-team league. You do understand that SOME team will always have the lowest priced tickets in the league, unless all the teams charge exactly the same price. Your argument BLOWS. Okay, well assuming Ralph is NOT a cheap wad, then what's preventing/has been preventing for the last 30 years the Bills organization from paying the money necessary to build a team?
Dibs Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Okay, fine. Do you think the Bills could charge the same amount for tickets as the Bears or the Cowboys and still still sell out? I don't really see the importance to all of this. The Bills(RW) make enough money to justify an extra 4mil a year on a HC as it is.
BADOLBILZ Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Haha, okay. Then if that's the case, the Bills organization could safely charge what the Bears charge and not worry about a lack of attendance. Not hardly, but they haven't maximized revenues either. Just pointing out that you don't know sh*t about how they price tickets. Frankly, your opinion in general is quite fact free. But perhaps you can find the people in charge of precision pricing in the media guide and let us know.
The Big Cat Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 If the Bills go somewhere else, then another team will have the lowest ticket prices. Obviously, by your logic, they won't deserve a team. Then, after they leave, another team will have the lowest ticket prices, and THEY won't deserve a team. Again, your argument is fuc#ing stupid. If the argument is taken at black and white value, which it is here, then yeah, it sounds stupid. Please take an honest evaluation of the city of Buffalo to ANY other city which has an NFL team, then get back to me. If you can name more than 5 cities which are on an economic plane with Buffalo AND have an NFL team, then I'll concede.
billsfan_34 Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Okay, fine. Do you think the Bills could charge the same amount for tickets as the Bears or the Cowboys and still still sell out? No they couldnt! But thats not the point. There are lots of teams in the NFL that couldnt either. Should we move all them because the are undeserving of a team. Heres a few that come to mind that wouldnt paythose prices and be content with college ball if they tried.. Cleveland Detroit Jax pittsburgh cincinatti miami San Diego Kansas City
billsfan_34 Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 If the argument is taken at black and white value, which it is here, then yeah, it sounds stupid. Please taken an honest evaluation of the city of Buffalo to ANY other city which has an NFL team, then get back to me. If you can name more than 5 cities which are on an economic plain with Buffalo AND have an NFL team, then I'll concede. I just did becides Miami. The country is in financial ruins right now.
BillsVet Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Okay, well assuming Ralph is NOT a cheap wad, then what's preventing/has been preventing for the last 30 years the Bills organization from paying the money necessary to build a team? You're brilliant, it's almost as if who went to an Ivy League caliber university or something. I'm sure at times you spoke to janitors you had pity for as well, right? Sorry Bill, this thread was spot-on. But this guy is destroying it. Kinda like what the OC doesn't want to do to his feature RB.
Hazed and Amuzed Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 You're still cool in my book Cat whether we agree or not.
The Big Cat Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 No they couldnt! But thats not the point. There are lots of teams in the NFL that couldnt either. Should we move all them because the are undeserving of a team. Heres a few that come to mind that wouldnt paythose prices and be content with college ball if they tried.. Cleveland Detroit Jax pittsburgh cincinatti miami San Diego Kansas City I just did becides Miami. The country is in financial ruins right now. No, definitely not:
Da Big Man Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 The ball hit him in the hands/arms/chest. What other position do the "coaches" need to put him in? Apparently you haven't been paying attention to the NFL for the last 10-20 years. In fact, it DOES come down to singular plays. Look at the end of the year standings from any year. Play off teams = 8-8 to 10-6. Nonplayoff teams = 5-11 to 7-9. When games come down to one or two plays, and seasons come down to one or two games, then YES, seasons come down to ONE OR TWO PLAYS. The NFL is 2/3 mediocre teams (5-11 to 9-7). Denial ain't a river in Egypt, Kitten.
billsfan_34 Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 No, definitely not: Cleveland Detroit Jax pittsburgh cincinatti miami San Diego Kansas City So Cleveland, Detroit, and Pittsburgh can charge 50,000 like dallas just for rights to seats? The people of those cities cant afford that. Lets move those teams also.
The Dean Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Okay, well assuming Ralph is NOT a cheap wad, then what's preventing/has been preventing for the last 30 years the Bills organization from paying the money necessary to build a team? I think it's clear that Ralph doesn't believe that more $$ in coaching necessarily = better teams. Perhaps he noticed that, although the Redskins hemorrhage money every FA period, and hire guys like Spurrier, and Joe Gibbs 2, yet still don't win Super Bowls. He probably saw that hiring Jimmy Johnson and Nich Saban didn't help Miami, either. Ralph is cheap, in many ways. What I mean is, he is old school, and he doesn't believe in getting ripped off ...which isn't to say that he hasn't overpaid for things, of course everyone has, at one point in time. I think that, when top notch, proven NFL winners have been available, they had no interest in coming to Buffalo, and if the did, probably wanted much more $ to come here, than to go to another team. (And to cut you off, before you get into your "then Buffalo doesn't deserve a team" tirade...I'm sure the same thing is true of Detroit, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Minnesota, etc). As he won with the Bills in the 60's and the 90's, he believes he can win, and still be prudent. I'm not defending all of Ralph's decisions, by any means. But, your logic, that, because Ralph runs a team the way he runs it, Buffalo doesn't deserve a team, is seriously flawed.
Recommended Posts