Nostradamus Posted October 10, 2009 Author Posted October 10, 2009 #1: Don't believe attorneys. Use them for what their worth when there's **** on your stick, but remember they are arrogant, over-opinionated, and 9 times out of 10, have less than average sized peepees. Attorneys, are more less the problem with our country. #2: How do you (or the arrogant lawyer) know that it's not California Industries of California Ave, Orchard Park, NY... perhaps it's New york Central Mutual? #3: As long as Jamestown homeboy Roger Goodbar is manning the controls of the NFL, I don't see the team moving. Unless, of course, he still has family in the area that he wants whacked. #4: What to do about Jacksonville? Does anyone else see the irony in this statement??
evilbuffalobob Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Here is my opinion, based on being a Bills fan for over 40 years, growing up in Buffalo and watching and listening to Ralph Wilson all those years: Either you, Mr. Brinkworth and/or your "highly reliable" DWI attoney are full of sh..! Ralph Wilson is not negotiating with Industry of California, Tom Golisano, Jim Kelly or Skooby. The man is 91 freakin' years old. He has told us his plan flat out, and that is to own the Bills until he dies. Then his heirs will sell the team to whoever they want to. End of story. I believe the guy. You can believe whatever you want. It seems insane for the guy to wait until this point in his long life to screw the fans behind their backs and sell the team out of town while he's still breathing. That's my story, and I'm sticking with it until someone proves otherwise. Amen. Ralph is cheap (like an attorney), but he has much more loyalty (than an attorney). He doesn't need the money (like an attorney feeding their ego). He wouldn't do this to the fans (like an attorney would) or the city of Buffalo (like an attorney would).
Keukasmallies Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Yes, Ralph is on record as saying the Bills will be in Buffalo. He is also "on record" [see Bills win - loss record] as being more concerned with the bottom line than the on-field product. I'm not in a position to believe nor disbelieve the court room conversation reported above. I do firmly believe that actions speak louder than words: Ralph's actions regarding coaching, front office administration and on-field personnel are based on fiscal return, not football success.
DCBongo Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 If Ralph Wilson was setting in motion a deal to sell the time after his passing why would he freeze out anyone? Is Golisano's groups money not as good as a California group? Additionally, If Ralph is dead, why would he care where the team is? I kind of think he would hope to keep the team where he had put it?
K-9 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Question: Is Golisano even eligible to own the Bills given his ownership of the Sabres? Anyone? Bueller? GO BILLS!!!
Giaimo25 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Since you're a local, can you tell me how the TV ratings have been for the NFL in the LA area? The NFL used to consistently place 3rd in the ratings for the Sunday time slots when they had teams. Has that changed to your knowledge? GO BILLS!!! I was reading something acouple of hours ago that said that the greater los angeles area had the 3rd highest viewer ratings in markets that dont have a football team, i dont know exact numbers, or what other 2 markets were higher, if i see something ill be sure to post a link
Wacka Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Let me preface this by saying that, admittedly, this information has roughly 4 layers of hearsay to it. Let me also preface this by saying that I am repeating what I heard verbatim, and, based on my knowledge of at least some of the people involved in this communication, I think this narrative has sufficient reliability to be posted on a message board, if not the New York Times. Anyway, I was in court yesterday, where I work, when the conversation turned to Eric Moulds and his pending legal matter. The conversation then segued into the current state of the Bills. A prominent and seemingly very straightforward DWI defense attorney that I know said he had had a conversation with one of the Brinkworths, who I believe are prominent developers in the community. One of the Brinkworths told him (the attorney) that he had spoke with Golisano about the possibility of purchasing the Bills. Golisano said that he HAS approached Wilson about putting a group together, but Wilson completely froze him out. Wilson supposedly said that he was already negotiating with a group called "Industry of California" about the prospective sale, (and presumable relocation) of the franchise. I understand that this post may be met with skepticism. However, it's my opinion that the circumstances of this information ARE reliable, in that every link of the communication is with people who really would have access to this information. In other words, there is no "my cousin has a friend who is a bartender that poured Jim Kelly a drink...)... that kind of thing. I post this knowing that I may open myself up to flaming, but with two objectives. One, I know that as a diehard, I would want one of you to post this info if it was at your disposal, and then it would be up to each individual poster to decide whether or not the post was credible. More importantly, I'm hoping that the Tim Graham's of this board would further investigate to see the validity of this info. Skooby, is that you??
DCBongo Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Question: Is Golisano even eligible to own the Bills given his ownership of the Sabres? Anyone? Bueller? GO BILLS!!! No problem with it, Cablevision owns the Knicks and the Rangers. The rule used to be for media but thats gone too.
Giaimo25 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Question: Is Golisano even eligible to own the Bills given his ownership of the Sabres? Anyone? Bueller? GO BILLS!!! it shouldnt matter if they already own a team, ed rosky is part owner of both the lakers and kings(hockey)
evilbuffalobob Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Yes, Ralph is on record as saying the Bills will be in Buffalo. He is also "on record" [see Bills win - loss record] as being more concerned with the bottom line than the on-field product. I'm not in a position to believe nor disbelieve the court room conversation reported above. I do firmly believe that actions speak louder than words: Ralph's actions regarding coaching, front office administration and on-field personnel are based on fiscal return, not football success. That's funny... Court room conversation... (I get it)... basically like sewer or gutter conversation, as that's where attorneys dwell. As a small market team, you have to contually be concerned with the fiscal bottom line. stands to reason that R.W. wants the venture to take care of itself and not dump extra money into it. Ralph is a prudent businessman (overly), but he has been generous in the past loaning money to a competitor, and had the balls to get into this thing back when he was foolish. Wait, what do I mean 'back when'?
The Senator Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Let me preface this by saying that, admittedly, this information has roughly 4 layers of hearsay to it. Let me also preface this by saying that I am repeating what I heard verbatim, and, based on my knowledge of at least some of the people involved in this communication, I think this narrative has sufficient reliability to be posted on a message board, if not the New York Times. Anyway, I was in court yesterday, where I work, when the conversation turned to Eric Moulds and his pending legal matter. The conversation then segued into the current state of the Bills. A prominent and seemingly very straightforward DWI defense attorney that I know said he had had a conversation with one of the Brinkworths, who I believe are prominent developers in the community. One of the Brinkworths told him (the attorney) that he had spoke with Golisano about the possibility of purchasing the Bills. Golisano said that he HAS approached Wilson about putting a group together, but Wilson completely froze him out. Wilson supposedly said that he was already negotiating with a group called "Industry of California" about the prospective sale, (and presumable relocation) of the franchise. I understand that this post may be met with skepticism. However, it's my opinion that the circumstances of this information ARE reliable, in that every link of the communication is with people who really would have access to this information. In other words, there is no "my cousin has a friend who is a bartender that poured Jim Kelly a drink...)... that kind of thing. I post this knowing that I may open myself up to flaming, but with two objectives. One, I know that as a diehard, I would want one of you to post this info if it was at your disposal, and then it would be up to each individual poster to decide whether or not the post was credible. More importantly, I'm hoping that the Tim Graham's of this board would further investigate to see the validity of this info. Three problems with this post: 1) The Brinkworths are no longer prominent - they are practically non-entities; 2) You tried the same bullsh_t about a year ago; 3) If you really wanted "the Tim Grahams of this board" to investigate, why didn't you post it here... Ask Tim Graham ????
Nostradamus Posted October 10, 2009 Author Posted October 10, 2009 Amen. Ralph is cheap (like an attorney), but he has much more loyalty (than an attorney). He doesn't need the money (like an attorney feeding their ego). He wouldn't do this to the fans (like an attorney would) or the city of Buffalo (like an attorney would). Judging from your insightful, well thought out posts, it is clear you are a biochemical engineer (not an attorney).
Nostradamus Posted October 11, 2009 Author Posted October 11, 2009 Three problems with this post: 1) The Brinkworths are no longer prominent - they are practically non-entities; 2) You tried the same bullsh_t about a year ago; 3) If you really wanted "the Tim Grahams of this board" to investigate, why didn't you post it here... Ask Tim Graham ???? 1) I really don't profess to know anything about the Brinkworths. Even if they are non-entities, they could still have a personal relationship with Golisano. If I were going to fabricate a story, I could easily have said Carl Paladino or someone else? 2) Link???? I have been concerned about the Bills moving for a while, like many Bills fans. I have NEVER professed to have any inside knowledge or heard anything that hasn't been said on WGR or other news outlets until now. That is for the simple reason that yesterday was the first time I have come across any information like this. 3) For the simple reason I thought this was worthy of its own thread. If I feel inclined, then I will post it in the Tim Graham thread as well.
downunderbill Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Does anyone else see the irony in this statement?? ha ha. it was good. #2 was just as good.
Whites Bay Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 After reading Wilkepedia, my question is why are they starting to build a stadium in LA unless they know a football team will be coming to play there? Well, dumber things have been attempted and accomplished. The good burghers of St. Petersburg, Florida, built what is now Tropicana Field, which was opened in March 1990. When did they finally get an MLB team? March 1998. Eight years of tractor pulls and KC-&-The-Sunshine-Band. If you Google Tropicana Field, MLB has some sort of clause to allow them to take a leave of absence in 2010. Hope they didn't lose all the business card from the tractor pull teams. So some yahoo wants to build a stadium in Los Angeles? 1) Hope his architect isn't from St. Petersburg. 2) Hope MY tax dollars aren't funding it.
The Senator Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 1) I really don't profess to know anything about the Brinkworths. Even if they are non-entities, they could still have a personal relationship with Golisano. If I were going to fabricate a story, I could easily have said Carl Paladino or someone else?2) Link???? I have been concerned about the Bills moving for a while, like many Bills fans. I have NEVER professed to have any inside knowledge or heard anything that hasn't been said on WGR or other news outlets until now. That is for the simple reason that yesterday was the first time I have come across any information like this. 3) For the simple reason I thought this was worthy of its own thread. If I feel inclined, then I will post it in the Tim Graham thread as well. And the fact that you didn't is further proof that you have no idea who the 'players' are here in WNY. Keep trolling - eventually someone will bite. Good luck.
TheMadKat Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Thanks for sharing... I'm 99% sure he isnt the real Nostradamus.....
Nostradamus Posted October 11, 2009 Author Posted October 11, 2009 And the fact that you didn't is further proof that you have no idea who the 'players' are here in WNY. Keep trolling - eventually someone will bite. Good luck. Right... so I would know who the "non-entities" like the Brinkworths are, but not Paladino who I then reference independently in a post 10 minutes after my original post. Do you even think this stuff through?? But then again, I don't have 20,000 posts to my credit so it's clear that my sole objective is to fabricate a story so that I can get the attention of an internet sage such as yourself and then receive insults from such sages.
K-9 Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 No problem with it, Cablevision owns the Knicks and the Rangers. The rule used to be for media but thats gone too. I appreciate the reply but the NFL has unique ownership rules. For instance, no corporate ownership. Cablevision wouldn't be allowed. I know they have rules about cross-ownership of different pro franchises in other sports. I'll have to research it and get back. GO BILLS!!!
The Senator Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 But then again, I don't have 20,000 posts to my credit Who does?
Recommended Posts