Even if he fires Jauron

[Max997]

I think Ralph's a poor owner in terms of knowing how to be competitive, but to impugn his motives is complete and utter speculation.

 

how so when we've all seen Ralph do this numerous times before

[TheChimp]

Please explain to me how a new owner next year, that keeps Jauron et al. coaching, is all this team needs to be a playoff team?

Sorry, shoulda clarified. Firing Jauron is a given, along with basically every coach on the team aside from, possibly, Bobby April. But if Ralph remains a constant, we will all be here banging our heads against this same wall in two, three years when he hires some no-name or perennial loser because he doesn't want to pay for quality.

[The Dean]

What do you think the answer is? Prove you are "paying attention."

 

 

I doubt you'll get it now, if you haven't gotten it yet...but here goes:

 

The Toronto gambit is meant to improve the Bills' presence in the Toronto market. Obviously, it shows that there are other, previously unexplored, revenue streams that are available to a team in Buffalo. If nothing else, the $$ that Ralph pocketed can be used as evidence of this.

 

The bigger idea is, if the Bills can become more of a brand in TO, then the TO fan base will contribute, in a bigger way, to the Bills future in Buffalo. In particular, if large business can be coaxed to buy suites at the Ralph (and new stadium if and when built) the Bills will not simply be a Buffalo team...or a regional WNY team...but, rather a team whose fan base extends to TO, one of North America's biggest and richest cities. A new owner might be more likely to be able to afford to keep the team in Buffalo, if there is a significant amount of big money coming in, from Canada.

 

The key to keeping a team in Buffalo is not attendance...the Bills already do very well in attendance...t is in selling high-priced suites and club seats. That revenue is NOT shared with the league. While WNY is capable of selling out the games, at the current prices. there isn't the corporate base to sell these suites and club seats...that keeps the team viable and competitive.

 

There are certainly negative aspects to the deal. The Bills losing a home game, is a big one, IMO. But there are risks with any new venture in an attempt to do something non-traditional. Another risk is the Bills building a base in TO, and losing the team to an owner that wants to take the team there (a very small risk, IMO). Ralph pocketing money from the transaction is a big plus from the deal, as it helps show that money can be made in Buffalo.

 

Disagree with the strategy, if you want...many have. But, don't think that this deal was made for any reason other than to keep the Bills viable in Buffalo, in the future.

[TheChimp]

I doubt you'll get it now, if you haven't gotten it yet...but here goes:

 

The Toronto gambit is meant to improve the Bills' presence in the Toronto market. Obviously, it shows that there are other, previously unexplored, revenue streams that are available to a team in Buffalo. If nothing else, the $$ that Ralph pocketed can be used as evidence of this.

 

The bigger idea is, if the Bills can become more of a brand in TO, then the TO fan base will contribute, in a bigger way, to the Bills future in Buffalo. In particular, if large business can be coaxed to buy suites at the Ralph (and new stadium if and when built) the Bills will not simply be a Buffalo team...or a regional WNY team...but, rather a team whose fan base extends to TO, one of North America's biggest and richest cities. A new owner might be more likely to be able to afford to keep the team in Buffalo, if there is a significant amount of big money coming in, from Canada.

 

The key to keeping a team in Buffalo is not attendance...the Bills already do very well in attendance...t is in selling high-priced suites and club seats. That revenue is NOT shared with the league. While WNY is capable of selling out the games, at the current prices. there isn't the corporate base to sell these suites and club seats...that keeps the team viable and competitive.

 

There are certainly negative aspects to the deal. The Bills losing a home game, is a big one, IMO. But there are risks with any new venture in an attempt to do something non-traditional. Another risk is the Bills building a base in TO, and losing the team to an owner that wants to take the team there (a very small risk, IMO). Ralph pocketing money from the transaction is a big plus from the deal, as it helps show that money can be made in Buffalo.

 

Disagree with the strategy, if you want...many have. But, don't think that this deal was made for any reason other than to keep the Bills viable in Buffalo, in the future.

Andddddd, you've just expertly described how Ralph can make his children richer. What that fails to address is the point of the thread. 1. Ralph has already stated that his interest in selling the team has nothing to do with keeping them in Buffalo, and 2. Ralph making more money never translates into him SPENDING that money on a coaching staff worth a darn.

[The Dean]

1. Ralph has already stated that his interest in selling the team has nothing to do with keeping them in Buffalo

 

 

Link?

[TheChimp]

Link?

What part of "highest bidder" is unclear?

[TheChimp]

Read This

[BuffOrange]

But seriously, all these calls for Jauron's firing. People still don't get it. Ralph's the problem. Not Dumb Dick.

 

Does anyone at this point not think Ralph is a huge problem? Why is that incompatible with wanting the coach gone?

One is feasible without death, the other isn't.

[TheChimp]

Don Esmonde's article from last year about the BILLS' future in B-Lo

[The Dean]

What part of "highest bidder" is unclear?

 

 

It simply doesn't say what you claim it does..."his interest in selling the team has nothing to do with keeping them in Buffalo". In fact, it could be argued that the TO strategy is an attempt to give the highest bidder a reason to keep the team in Buffalo.

 

Show me a quote where Ralph says "I have no interest in whether the team stays in Buffalo after I die" (or something to that effect) and I will concede your point. But, remember, Ralph isn't planning on dying soon. He wants to make the team more valuable in Buffalo for HIM, first. That is the proper strategy if you want to show others it can be valuable there, too.

 

Spending the $$ on a HC wasn't a part of the strategy, that I know of. But, even if it was, this was the FIRST year of the deal...you might want to wait until he makes a coaching decision before accusing him of not spending $$ on a HC. Jauron was under contract, and wasn't about to be replaced before the end of the year, money or no money.

 

And, remember, $$ doesn't guarantee a good coach and success. If he doubled DJ's salary would you be happy?

[The Dean]

Read This

 

 

Read this:

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200811/buffalo-bills

[TheChimp]

It simply doesn't say what you claim it does..."his interest in selling the team has nothing to do with keeping them in Buffalo". In fact, it could be argued that the TO strategy is an attempt to give the highest bidder a reason to keep the team in Buffalo.

 

Show me a quote where Ralph says "I have no interest in whether the team stays in Buffalo after I die" (or something to that effect) and I will concede your point. But, remember, Ralph isn't planning on dying soon. He wants to make the team more valuable in Buffalo for HIM, first. That is the proper strategy if you want to show others it can be valuable there, too.

 

Spending the $$ on a HC wasn't a part of the strategy, that I know of. But, even if it was, this was the FIRST year of the deal...you might want to wait until he makes a coaching decision before accusing him of not spending $$ on a HC. Jauron was under contract, and wasn't about to be replaced before the end of the year, money or no money.

 

And, remember, $$ doesn't guarantee a good coach and success. If he doubled DJ's salary would you be happy?

Do you really believe all this stuff or do you just like playing devil's advocate?

[Sisyphean Bills]

I doubt you'll get it now, if you haven't gotten it yet...but here goes:

I am actually very aware of the marketing angle involved and that this deal was to make the team more regional.

 

Of course, that had nothing at all to do with my point, which was what is Ralph using the millions in "chicken feed" from the deal itself for exactly? As far as I've heard it is not going towards getting better players or coaches. The cash-to-cap is a constraint of the Bills own choosing. The cries of "poverty" are trumped up -- the Bills are in the upper half of profitable NFL teams and have little to no debt. (Edit: The value of the franchise -- read sales price -- has eroded over the past few years according to Forbes and the marketing to a larger fan base, Toronto is 4X larger than Buffalo, is an obvious attempt to stem that slide.) Putting the $78 million in cash in his pocket, under his mattress, or in a trust fund for the grandchildren isn't going to reduce the debt that a new owner will take on to purchase the Bills. Which is all another way of saying their marketing strategy is ass backwards.

[The Dean]

Do you really believe all this stuff or do you just like playing devil's advocate?

 

 

You think Ralph is planning to die in the next year or two? He isn't sick, has all his wits about him and doesn't want to sell the team.

 

If you read the article I linked (a far more objective article than those you linked), you will understand that I firmly believe the first portion you made red.

 

As for the doubling of DJ's salary, YOU are the one who seems to assert that how much you pay the head coach = amount of success. I'm just presenting an option that fits your philosophy.

[The Dean]

I am actually very aware of the marketing angle involved and that this deal was to make the team more regional.

 

Of course, that had nothing at all to do with my point, which was what is Ralph using the millions in "chicken feed" from the deal itself for exactly? As far as I've heard it is not going towards getting better players or coaches. The cash-to-cap is a constraint of the Bills own choosing. The cries of "poverty" are trumped up -- the Bills are in the upper half of profitable NFL teams and have little to no debt. Putting the $78 million in cash in his pocket, under his mattress, or in a trust fund for the grandchildren isn't going to reduce the debt that a new owner will take on to purchase the Bills. Which is all another way of saying their marketing strategy is ass backwards.

 

 

This was the FIRST year of the TO agreement. He hasn't had a chance to spend any of the money (on the Bills) yet. He did sign Evans to an extension, this year. You might want to wait until spring, to judge what he does with that money.

[TheChimp]

You think Ralph is planning to die in the next year or two? He isn't sick, has all his wits about him and doesn't want to sell the team.

 

If you read the article I linked (a far more objective article than those you linked), you will understand that I firmly believe the first portion you made red.

 

As for the doubling of DJ's salary, YOU are the one who seems to assert that how much you pay the head coach = amount of success. I'm just presenting an option that fits your philosophy.

Horseshit. What MY assertion is, is that, in order to attract a quality (ie WINNING) existing HC at the end of his contract, or even a retired WINNING Head Coach, you need to spend FAR more than Ralph has been known to spend. I'm done with this conversation.

 

Besides, you call your article "objective" when it is far from it.

[bills_fan_in_raleigh]

I doubt you'll get it now, if you haven't gotten it yet...but here goes:

 

The Toronto gambit is meant to improve the Bills' presence in the Toronto market. Obviously, it shows that there are other, previously unexplored, revenue streams that are available to a team in Buffalo. If nothing else, the $$ that Ralph pocketed can be used as evidence of this.

 

The bigger idea is, if the Bills can become more of a brand in TO, then the TO fan base will contribute, in a bigger way, to the Bills future in Buffalo. In particular, if large business can be coaxed to buy suites at the Ralph (and new stadium if and when built) the Bills will not simply be a Buffalo team...or a regional WNY team...but, rather a team whose fan base extends to TO, one of North America's biggest and richest cities. A new owner might be more likely to be able to afford to keep the team in Buffalo, if there is a significant amount of big money coming in, from Canada.

 

The key to keeping a team in Buffalo is not attendance...the Bills already do very well in attendance...t is in selling high-priced suites and club seats. That revenue is NOT shared with the league. While WNY is capable of selling out the games, at the current prices. there isn't the corporate base to sell these suites and club seats...that keeps the team viable and competitive.

 

There are certainly negative aspects to the deal. The Bills losing a home game, is a big one, IMO. But there are risks with any new venture in an attempt to do something non-traditional. Another risk is the Bills building a base in TO, and losing the team to an owner that wants to take the team there (a very small risk, IMO). Ralph pocketing money from the transaction is a big plus from the deal, as it helps show that money can be made in Buffalo.

 

Disagree with the strategy, if you want...many have. But, don't think that this deal was made for any reason other than to keep the Bills viable in Buffalo, in the future.

We are 25 M under the CAP, having more money with this owner means NOTHING

[The Dean]

Horseshit. What MY assertion is, is that, in order to attract a quality (ie WINNING) existing HC at the end of his contract, or even a retired WINNING Head Coach, you need to spend FAR more than Ralph has been known to spend. I'm done with this conversation.

 

Besides, you call your article "objective" when it is far from it.

 

 

Remember, a coach has to agree to come to Buffalo and coach. It isn't like the draft. Coaches don't always go where the biggest paycheck is.

 

I understand that, since Easterbrook didn't take a totally anti-Ralph perspective, you don't consider it objective.

[TheChimp]

Remember, a coach has to agree to come to Buffalo and coach. It isn't like the draft. Coaches don't always go where the biggest paycheck is.

 

I understand that, since Easterbrook didn't take a totally anti-Ralph perspective, you don't consider it objective.

 

OK, since you're going to be difficult about it:

 

"A long-term deal by which the Bills play in both Toronto and Buffalo might make economic sense. Television revenue is the same for all NFL teams, meaning there’s no small-city penalty for games in Buffalo; and despite its depressed economics, Buffalo is consistently in the top 10 for NFL attendance. If some games were played in Canada, the cost of season tickets in Buffalo would decline because of a smaller home slate, keeping season tickets affordable and attendance high. And the team would add a fan base in North America’s fifth-largest city, giving itself two sets of supporters—one set quite prosperous, paying for tickets and merchandise with the suddenly valuable Canadian dollar.

 

 

~except 1. This argument is ridiculous. It says basically, the BILLS season tickets would be cheaper because there'd be fewer home games to go to. Duhhhhhhhhh. AND, it asserts that more Bills fans WOULD be created in Canada. That is by far NOT a given, especially when you look at the game that we played there against the Fins. Those people barely knew which team to cheer for. And Rich Stadium (humor me) already caters to Canadian fans. To assume that games at the Rogers Centre would CREATE more is pure speculation and far from objective.

 

The Bills could help forge mutual affection between the cities—even a regional identity. Buffalo’s civic promotion has generally reached southward; in this newly globalized world, it should reach northward, toward a country that is as underappreciated among nations as Buffalo is among cities.

 

~What does that even mean?

 

Connections to cosmopolitan, multi­cultural Toronto might change Buffalo’s image from backward-­focused to wave-of-the-future. Toronto is growing by leaps and bounds, and some portion of the growth may already be spilling over; most of the immigrants to Buffalo in recent years were Canadian. Buffalo offers urban living free of traffic jams and boasts one of the nation’s last under­developed stretches of premium waterfront. During its City of Light heyday, when Buffalo was the first electrified metropolis, Frank Lloyd Wright, Frederick Law Olmsted, and other fabled names designed homes and parks. In the lovely Delaware Park area, magnificent Beaux Arts homes sell at exceedingly low prices compared with homes in elite U.S. cities—or in Toronto.

 

~Not only not objective, but insulting and far too near-sighted. Not to mention, it once again contradicts itself when it mentions how many Canadians ALREADY come down to B-Lo.

 

So long as the Bills keep a foot in the city, they keep alive the dream of a Super Bowl win—a hope that an infusion of Loonies (Canadian dollars) might sustain. And should the Bills win the Super Bowl, Buffalo will return to national prominence. I don’t just think this will happen, I know it will.

 

~Canadian Loonies ALREADY sustain it.

 

 

Look, Dean, I'll concede that neither side of this argument can prove its claims. Let's get back to the real point, shall we? The one that says that Ralph is hoarding cash and will never pay a quality coach to come here, even to entertain them so they could turn US down.

[Sisyphean Bills]

This was the FIRST year of the TO agreement. He hasn't had a chance to spend any of the money (on the Bills) yet. He did sign Evans to an extension, this year. You might want to wait until spring, to judge what he does with that money.

 

In the Sullivan article, it was reported unambiguously that Wilson said he had no plans to use the money from the Toronto deal on players. (I know, Sullivan doesn't know football, so he must be a liar. )

 

FWIW, Ralph is considered a bit of a doddering miser owner by some of the other owners. He has no one to blame but himself for not capitalizing on the success of the team in the 90s (when its success on the field was building a national fan base) and translating that into innovative, new revenue streams. Instead, he looked backwards as evidenced by his refusal to resell the naming rights on the stadium when the Rich deal ended.